Forum menu
I'd have been quite happy with largely optional measures as adopted in Sweden, I'm not calling for folk to be banned from riding the Pyrenees either.
Pretty depressing reading a lot of this as a 73 year old. Just wait until some of you are a bit older.
Just for a bit of balance, I have a low BMI, ride my turbo regularly, knock around 5,000miles a year on my bike on average. Started mtbing a year or so back and don’t just ride fire roads. Rode the Tourmalet on my 70th birthday, Luz Ardiden the next day, Hautacam the following year.
My wife does pilates and walks and was an international 400 metre runner.
Please don’t class as all as ready to give up and keel over yet.
The fact you're both physically active and healthy means you're less likely to die.
It's the obese, type II diabetic who drinks three points after his round of golf (getting around using a buggy) who is more at risk.
Probably not much consolation.
Well, it doesn’t always work that way. I know fit people in their 70s who have passed away. And golf players who like a beer will also soon have the help of vaccines, treatments and hospitals not operating at or beyond capacity… and I’m glad they’re made it through the worst of the pandemic, and don’t want them to die of Covid just before we’re at the point where they would be unlikely to if they caught the virus.
It’s the forgotten industry, hit not just by restrictions here, but restrictions on travel as well.
I was chatting with one of our event partners and hes been doing what ad hoc work he can find, TV mainly.
My partner works in culinary events, that's still ****** obviously. Not getting 20000 people in Regents Park eating out of pop up restaurants anytime soon.
On the other side, I was also chatting to one of our support services nurses about the support groups she works with. Circa 5000 people I've spent the last 6 years dedicated to helping who are all extremely vulnerable to Covid.
What a ****ing shit show.
The vast majority of people in their 70s don’t ever need to go out
U wot?
In terms of Aus/NZ, how sustainable are their measures long-term? Will they have closed borders for the next decade?
They are not completely closed and cut off you know. They've applied strict controls, and have proper track and trace and lockdowns in place when it goes wrong. When rates in the rest of the world decline, and faster more accurate tests are available, they'll be able to relax that.
But I'm stepping away from this for the night. The tone of this great thread is being lowered and I'm trying not to go down that rabbit hole
The vast majority of people in their 70s don’t ever need to go out
I've read some tripe on here but that is up there with the worst of it. There's a worrying undercurrent on this thread from a minority of posters implying that only the young have lives worth living. Shocking.
Zero COVID will not be a thing. Said it many times. Humans now have a fifth endemic coronavirus. The way out out is generation of protection from morbidity by vaccination. Whether that helps with transmission is moot. The challenge for international travel is countries that have lower protection. So until all are protected, I cannot see mass relaxation across all borders. Squabbling over vaccine distribution won't get you on that sailing holiday or trip to Australia any faster, I am afraid.
It's interesting that discussions of how low to go should follow now we have confidence of the decline in contagion. There is still no firm evidence of a vaccinal effect on mortality. Have been looking at all-cause mortality and I can't see it (yet). There WILL be, I am in no doubt. And then in admissions, but remember my comment on blockbuster timeframe and real timeframe. Sadly things take time. It is, however interesting that the half-life is presently only two weeks - shorter than the first lockdown. Something is amiss, perhaps the generation time of the UK strain is shorter.
So many unknowns.
We aren’t in lockdown because of deaths – the government really don’t care how many die. We’re in lockdown to ‘ease the strain on the NHS’ ie to prevent a massively incompetent government being chucked out of power when the news shows how the NHS can’t cope
They do care about deaths, or at least the damage they can do to their electability. If the priority was to minimise the strain on the NHS then we should have been vaccinating the 55-70 age group first as they spend the most time requiring care as they don't die or recover quickly once admitted to hospital.
We also seem to be disregarding the fact that grandparents provide an estimated £22billion worth of 'free' childcare every year.
They won't get back to doing that if they are dead, so let's factor that into whatever recovery you are hoping for.
Sorry, what I meant is some practices such as Robster’s are using the flu jab eligibility criteria as eligibility for group 6, others aren’t. If I was registered with robster I’d be placed in group 6 by sounds of things. Hence a bit of pot luck involved.
No they aren't, that's not how it works. Individual GP surgeries don't get to choose. We are given searches for our systems, they're centrally written and the codes aren't selected by us, we run the search, it spits out a list, we send that to another system that sends texts to pts. We don't have any input into who is in and who is out. so if you're GP has coded you for Severe Asthma, you'll get a call, if you've been coded as Asthma you won't. The flu jab criteria on the other hand are much looser, and individual GP surgeries can influence who gets a call.
We also seem to be disregarding the fact that grandparents provide an estimated £22billion worth of ‘free’ childcare every year.
They won’t get back to doing that if they are dead, so let’s factor that into whatever recovery you are hoping for.
That childcare could instead be done by someone getting paid to do it. Their pension, other costs and benefits would no longer have to be paid. They may pass on inheritance to their children that will be a benefit to the economy, or go into government coffers. Housing will be freed up. Old people dying isn't generally desirable to those around them, but from a purely economic perspective it's generally good for society as a whole.
The mere fact that a 100-year old war veteran raising funds for the NHS is celebrated
He was raising funds for NHS charities, not the actual NHS.
What’s shocking about an 80 year old dying? Sorry, I’m not being obtuse on purpose. I really can’t see anything ‘wrong’ with it.
What, not even if they are perfectly healthy and leading normal lives? What age do you think people should be allowed to live to?
Old people dying isn’t generally desirable to those around them, but from a purely economic perspective it’s generally good for society as a whole.
If you are reducing people's value to a "purely enconomic perspective", what's your view of the enconomic value of those with with severe disabilities, debilitating mental or physical health conditions? Would their dying also be a benefit to society as a whole? I'm trying very hard not to invoke Godwin's law here, but Christ it's hard.
I've known more people who have committed suicide (4 people) since lockdown started than people who have caught it (not died from, just been infected [3 people]). Though I am a guy in my 30s, so my social circle is in the suicide demographic. And, to be honest, they could well have killed themselves anyway without pandemic/lockdown... Just like the older folks who might have died this year anyway, without covid helping them along the way early.
Wot blokeuptheroad said
Hard to believe what I'm reading tbh
Hard to believe what I’m reading tbh
innit, the self-centered attitudes always come as a shock. Carefully expressed as "we" or "people are" or "the country needs" of course but replace those pretences with "I want" and you get closer to the truth.
Threads taken a bit of a dark turn I see.
I'll nip back in, in a couple of days.
Not pleasant to read some of the comments.
You can Celebrate what Capt Tom did, AND decry successive governments for their strategy on the NHS.
Likewise with the young v old. Most of us are part of a 3+ generation family system. I can worry about my mums health AND my kids wellbeing and education.
So far I’m aware I’ve been exceptionally lucky. Whilst my industry has been decimated, I still have a job, my kids have been brilliant, and all my older relatives have survived so far.
There never was a simple solution.
Whilst I would love to get away sailing this summer, I’m fully aware where this sits in the overall priority list.
As a family we have lots of deep conversations over equality, privilege etc. My kids are fully aware that the pandemic isn’t the cause of these problems, merely shining a light on existing issues we bury under the carpet.
Some good news science - study of a combination of antibodies against COVID reduces hospitalisations by 70%. This is akin to expected findings with vaccination - build some form of immunity and expect it to fight infection. This is in patients who already have symptoms and are at risk of serious disease.
With regards to vaccines, they induce a polyclonal response against multiple sites on the virus (mainly the spike protein). A few of these are gems, and Pharma has harvested some of them. Lilly results are for two such gems. I view these results as translating to vaccines. There are also multiple studies of possible effects on other strains of interest and likely resistance.
Despite the gloom, so little is actually known. I believe that a vaccine response will provide protection against morbidity - even the SA strain, based on that recent study. Just don't expect jab-and-gone. That happens in chickens because they are culled for other reasons a few weeks later!
@Nickc, I don't know how it works fella so will take your word for it. All I know is that docrobster indicated that his practice would be vaccinating based on their 'flu eligibility list' (unless I misunderstood what he was saying), whereas myself and others have been told by our GP's they aren't taking that approach and are strictly following the jcvi guidance.
Assuming you are a gp it sounds very much like your practice is in line with mine
Wanders is to see what's new.
Cripes, what happened?
Wanders back out...
AA - it’s turned into the rugby thread!😣
Hard to believe what I’m reading tbh
I'm not, based on some comments from a few in the forum over the past few years. Old people being self-centred, screwing the young, would die anyway, etc. Well I got my first dose of Pfizer today so hopefully here's one OAP who will be pissing on their collective chips for a few years to come.
My parents generation (now 80) will no doubt do better in some ways than my generation (now 50) and have done a fair amount to make life harder for my kids (teenagers). And I'm a bit angry and bitter about it sometimes.
But I'm not wanting them to die in order to somehow make up for it.
What are you doing right now to make life better for your great grandchildren?
So to turn this back to something sensible, it sounds increasingly like a winter/summer/vaccine strategy is the picture of the next few years, with restrictions during flu season and or variant increases being applied?
What are you doing right now to make life better for your great grandchildren?
Don’t have any. Or children, for that matter.
However, to my utter amazement, I had a text message from my doctors surgery earlier today, giving me a choice of times to turn up on Saturday for my first vaccination!
I’m in group 5, I honestly wasn’t expecting to hear anything until around April, so I’m surprised to say the least, and rather chuffed.
Zero COVID will not be a thing.
And I'm not suggesting it will be. I don't for a second think Australia and NZ will never have covid (unless they intend to isolate themselves from the rest of the world indefinitely which isn't going to happen). 'Zero covid' is a bad phrase, and one I use only because it at least indicates some ambition above 'tolerable covid'. What I really mean is that in the short term it should be possible through proper lockdowns and border controls to reduce it so that we can open up and get back to something that looks like normal, and sustain that until vaccinatiion takes effect. Without that hope people will start to think the restrictions they're currently enduring are pointless, and as we're now seeing on this thread, they'll start forming some pretty horrible opinions and conclusions.
If you are reducing people’s value to a “purely enconomic perspective”, what’s your view of the enconomic value of those with with severe disabilities, debilitating mental or physical health conditions? Would their dying also be a benefit to society as a whole? I’m trying very hard not to invoke Godwin’s law here, but Christ it’s hard.
They clearly as a whole tend to be an economic drain but as a society we thankfully don't reduce it to a purely economic perspective. I do disagree with keeping people alive for the sake of it and support assisted dying. I was just pointing it out in response to a post regarding the child care value of grandparents.
Can we ease of with the young versus old argument please and keep this civilised or breaks away from the forum will be handed out.
Back to tireds post on the antibody efficacy.
That really is good news. Having a treatment that isn't reliant on self induced immunity will help a lot of people, plus we wouldn't need as many doses as a vaccine for different variants, it could be targeted to new variants and with polyclonal sets it could be a multi strain effective drug.
Challenge is to scale up manufacture and pair it with a good testing strategy
We are obviously making great progress on the vaccinations, but surely around April time, ie just as the first 9 groups are finishing getting the first jab, we'll need to start all over again giving them the second dose.
Seems to be an expectation set that it'll be first 9 groups, then everyone else straight after. In Scotland they are saying everyone else will be vaccinated over the summer which seems optimistic to say the least. Unless we double capacity, how is that possible?
Question: if the virus is still transmissble for those who are vaccinated, what is the purpose of vaccinating age groups 18-39, given their risk of death is neglible? Would these doses be more effective either as boosters/second doeses for vulnerable groups, or distributed to vulnverable groups in other countries?
Question: if the virus is still transmissible for those who are vaccinated, what is the purpose of vaccinating age groups 18-39, given their risk of death is negligible?
As someone in that bracket if it limits the impact the virus can have on you (ie not ending up in hospital) I would very much like to have it no matter how negligible the impact of Covid maybe on me. I know a few friends that have had it and I would rather get a jab to stop me going through what they did. Plus I fancy going back to work at some point / living a "normal" life so the idea of some protection sounds good.
what is the purpose of vaccinating age groups 18-39, given their risk of death is neglible?
Because the vaccine will reduce their viral load, so any disease they transmit will be less likely to be able to infect another vaccinated person. The more people you vaccinate the more the population as a whole is able to resist.
The younger age groups are those with a stronger immune response. It will reduce the incidence of cytokine storm and the need for aggressive medical care needed to try keep them alive.
Unless we double capacity, how is that possible?
Well there's 17 million doses of the Moderna vaccine commencing delivery in the spring which will help a bit.
Because the vaccine will reduce their viral load, so any disease they transmit will be less likely to be able to infect another vaccinated person.
Any evidence for this please? Thanks.
The younger age groups are those with a stronger immune response. It will reduce the incidence of cytokine storm and the need for aggressive medical care needed to try keep them alive.
But this is extremely rare while vulnerable people in poorer countries have a much higher chance of dying?
P.S. so if my parents are vaccinated, but I am not, can I infect them?
P.S. so if my parents are vaccinated, but I am not, can I infect them?
Of course you can, but hopefully the impact on them will be reduced due to them being vaccinated. Then again, this is of course the point of social distancing, even after vaccination.
Asthma inhaler appears to reduce severe covid
If this is widely proven it could be incredibly important, as the inhalers are way cheaper than an antibody cocktail. A whole load easier to administer too
Well there’s 17 million doses of the Moderna vaccine commencing delivery in the spring which will help a bit.
I was referring more to the capacity of the vaccination teams. They can only get through so many people!
I know a few friends that have had it and I would rather get a jab to stop me going through what they did.
Exactly. I've seen the figure of one in 10 get long covid. Whether thats true or not, my mate, a 38 year old nurse, no underlying issues and she ended up in hospital and is still off work over a month later. For young people the 'death rate' is not the figure we need to be concerned about.
Plus I thought the evidence was beginning to point to fact it lowered transmission as well?
Didn't we do the 'old folks are expendable so I can do what I want' thing a couple of weeks ago?