The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's not what the studies say
Its reality.
Deal with it.
If Omicron is super infectious then we're all going to get our anti-bodies topped up.
If it isn't then its not going to be a threat.
It really isn't. Your output on covid is a series of just so stories which are all very well and lovely and entirely ungrounded in any sort of authority at all. They might be right, but there are all sorts of other possibilities.
The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's not what the studies say
Its reality.
Deal with it.
If Omicron is super infectious then we're all going to get our anti-bodies topped up.
If it isn't then its not going to be a threat.
If we can stop the NHS being overwhelmed and people dying needlessly, we should
The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's not what the studies say
Its reality.
Deal with it.
If Omicron is super infectious then we're all going to get our anti-bodies topped up.
If it isn't then its not going to be a threat.
It really isn't. Your output on covid is a series of just so stories which are all very well and lovely and entirely ungrounded in any sort of authority at all. They might be right, but there are all sorts of other possibilities.
They're grounded in reality.
Being previously infected reduces the risk of future infection and very likely reduces the severity of any future infection.
Coming into contact with a few viral strands boosts your immune system in a similar way a vaccination does.
The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's not what the studies say
Its reality.
Deal with it.
If Omicron is super infectious then we're all going to get our anti-bodies topped up.
If it isn't then its not going to be a threat.
It really isn't. Your output on covid is a series of just so stories which are all very well and lovely and entirely ungrounded in any sort of authority at all. They might be right, but there are all sorts of other possibilities.
They're grounded in reality.
Being previously infected reduces the risk of future infection and very likely reduces the severity of any future infection.
Coming into contact with a few viral strands boosts your immune system in a similar way a vaccination does.
The studies say that without boosters and with waning immunity, Omicron is going to have a similar impact on society as the original strain (which is what it it mutated from), which put us into a lockdown.
It's not as easy as saying "get on with it", we need to make plans now
The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's not what the studies say
Its reality.
Deal with it.
If Omicron is super infectious then we're all going to get our anti-bodies topped up.
If it isn't then its not going to be a threat.
If we can stop the NHS being overwhelmed and people dying needlessly, we should
Even if the current variant can be controlled by condemning the nation to house arrest, what about the one after that? And the one after that? And the one after that?
Once the population has as much protection as it is going to get from vaccination and medical treatments, restrictions are only likely to delay mortality rather than prevent it. The selective pressure on the virus to keep getting more transmissible, which is largely the product of our crude efforts to keep on suppressing it, is too great.
The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's not what the studies say
Its reality.
Deal with it.
If Omicron is super infectious then we're all going to get our anti-bodies topped up.
If it isn't then its not going to be a threat.
If we can stop the NHS being overwhelmed and people dying needlessly, we should
We should and we will.
There will be future vaccinations for us all.
But its madness to lurch into isolating terror when day 90 becomes day 91 and your anti-bodies theoretically reduce 1%.
Instead its better to be 'out and about' when you've been fully vaccinated and let your immune system continually adapt to a covid endemic environment.
The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's not what the studies say
Its reality.
Deal with it.
If Omicron is super infectious then we're all going to get our anti-bodies topped up.
If it isn't then its not going to be a threat.
If we can stop the NHS being overwhelmed and people dying needlessly, we should
Even if the current variant can be controlled by condemning the nation to house arrest, what about the one after that? And the one after that? And the one after that?
Once the population has as much protection as it is going to get from vaccination and medical treatments, restrictions are only likely to delay mortality rather than prevent it. The selective pressure on the virus to keep getting more transmissible, which is largely the product of our crude efforts to keep on suppressing it, is too great.
There is not much evidence a lockdown right now will do that, so for that reason I am against it at the moment.
But if we don't make changes now, we will be in that position in a month or two
The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's not what the studies say
Its reality.
Deal with it.
If Omicron is super infectious then we're all going to get our anti-bodies topped up.
If it isn't then its not going to be a threat.
It really isn't. Your output on covid is a series of just so stories which are all very well and lovely and entirely ungrounded in any sort of authority at all. They might be right, but there are all sorts of other possibilities.
They're grounded in reality.
Being previously infected reduces the risk of future infection and very likely reduces the severity of any future infection.
Coming into contact with a few viral strands boosts your immune system in a similar way a vaccination does.
The studies say that without boosters and with waning immunity, Omicron is going to have a similar impact on society as the original strain (which is what it it mutated from), which put us into a lockdown.
It's not as easy as saying "get on with it", we need to make plans now
And the possibility of waning immunity ** is precisely why people should allow their immune systems to adapt to a covid endemic environment once they've been vaccinated.
** And how much does immunity wane ? Different rates in different people in different environments and with different previous exposure.
The only way I can see a 2022 GE is if Boris Johnson resigns and there is a seamless transition to a Sunak or Truss administration. The new leader gets a polling bounce/honeymoon and decides to cash in later in the year.
Remembering what happened to Theresa May, I imagine that's an unlikely scenario,
Bravemansgame was a great winner, he will win something big in future. Short odds but made me a few quid today.
The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's not what the studies say
Its reality.
Deal with it.
If Omicron is super infectious then we're all going to get our anti-bodies topped up.
If it isn't then its not going to be a threat.
It really isn't. Your output on covid is a series of just so stories which are all very well and lovely and entirely ungrounded in any sort of authority at all. They might be right, but there are all sorts of other possibilities.
They're grounded in reality.
Being previously infected reduces the risk of future infection and very likely reduces the severity of any future infection.
Coming into contact with a few viral strands boosts your immune system in a similar way a vaccination does.
This all seems to be a "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" argument.
Yes, if you have come through a previous infection you are better equipped to deal with Omicron. However, if the previous infection put you in your grave that isn't so good.
Given a choice of first exposure to Alpha with no vaccination, Delta when double jabbed or Omicron when boosted I would choose Omicron.
The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's possibly a bit like saying that Typhoid Mary was a cure for constipation. There will be deaths and Long Covid victims. How many, we're not clear yet (partly because of the health service issues).
Typhoid wasn't endemic thought was it.
Covid will be which means that we will regularly come into contact with it just as we do with flu.
And like flu covid will hit some people hard - very likely the same people flu would have hit.
Typhoid most certainly was endemic in the old days pre-vaccines - lots of local outbreaks where water or food was contaminated.
Edit: you may be thinking of cholera? Interestingly cholera was the old name for bad summer diarrhoeas some of which were fatal in some cases. It took some time (1830s, I think) to realise that this Asiatic cholera stuff was different from the summer diarrhoeas which now had to be called English cholera. So now Asiatic cholera is just called cholera.
There seems to be an awful lot of wishful thinking here.
Omicron is probably a little bit less impacting on the population than the original strain but the idea it's mutated to be the same level as a cold is ridiculous and wrong.
We have not yet seen COVID genuinely mutate to be on the same level as a cold. Now that may still happen but it doesn't mean it will, smallpox hasn't mutated to be less deadly. HIV hasn't either.
So to me, what we need to do is ensure immunity in the population remains high, such that the NHS and hospitals are not overwhelmed. And if we can prevent people dying needlessly we also should.
That means putting into plans now as to how we deal with that over the next months/years. If that means more boosters, then more boosters. If it means something else, then that.
My biggest concern is right now the headlines and the public attitude will go to "it's all gone away now" and the Government will probably go there too. This is the wrong approach.
On topic, I actually think the next couple of months will go well for the government. With the success of the vaccine booster programme, it looks like England might be one of very few places in Western Europe to avoid virus-related restrictions in the new year.
Your judgement on almost everything is so suspect that I take heart from this latest wild prediction. You favour restrictions at any cost and by that criteria of course you may be correct. But for 99% of the population who don't subscribe to the bone-headed beliefs of the far tory right, we'd really rather like the NHS to remain able to function and for avoidable deaths to be, err, avoided.
I first encountered the powers of your soothsaying when you confidently informed us that there was no chance whatsoever of Emma Raducanu being Sports Personality of the Year.
But I do find it amusing that some tories are still clinging on to flotsam, like shipwreck survivors who can't quite believe that the good ship Boris has sunk.
Merry Christmas to you too!
To top it all, you don't even know what day it is!
;-)
It is still Christmastide until 6 January, is it not?
The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's not what the studies say
Its reality.
Deal with it.
If Omicron is super infectious then we're all going to get our anti-bodies topped up.
If it isn't then its not going to be a threat.
It really isn't. Your output on covid is a series of just so stories which are all very well and lovely and entirely ungrounded in any sort of authority at all. They might be right, but there are all sorts of other possibilities.
They're grounded in reality.
Being previously infected reduces the risk of future infection and very likely reduces the severity of any future infection.
Coming into contact with a few viral strands boosts your immune system in a similar way a vaccination does.
This all seems to be a "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" argument.
Yes, if you have come through a previous infection you are better equipped to deal with Omicron. However, if the previous infection put you in your grave that isn't so good.
Given a choice of first exposure to Alpha with no vaccination, Delta when double jabbed or Omicron when boosted I would choose Omicron.
As someone who got the original without any vaccination I can confirm you're right.
And given that everyone can be fully vaccinated and will be offered further vaccinations in future there should be less and less fear of covid.
On the discussion on vehicles, the government needs to come up with a legislative framework for electric scooters. Pronto.
Maybe they should be banned.
Or subjected to the same legislation as motorbikes. Riders must be 16, wearing a helmet and have passed a test. Vehicles must be registered, insured and taxed.
The best legislative framework we have is probably that applied to mobility scooters, which is 4mph on a pavement or (I think) pedestrian zone, even for a Type III mobility scooter which has a higher top speed.
The question as ever is practical and effective enforcement.
When we get a coherent and largely separate cycling infrastructure, scooters will fit in better on that, along with e-bikes. Unravelling the modes of travel will be the key.
I've got a 125 cc motorbike, it is brilliant for getting around as parking is no longer an issue for me. I have taken a CBT test (driving with an L plate on), wear a helmet and have third party insurance. I would happily switch to an e-scooter or some other method of light electric transport, they should be regulated in the same way. It should not be too hard to work this out.
I have both a full motorcycle license, riding motorbikes up from 125 cc to 2.3litres,and an electric scooter. The two are not even remotely comparable. An electric scooter is closer is weight and speed to a bicycle why argue they should be treated the same as a motorbike rather than a bicycle therefore.
Now if you were to argue bicycles should require a test, insurance and be road taxed then I would have some sympathy with your view for how electric scooters should be regulated. Frankly I have felt more in danger from idiot cyclists than I ever have from scooter riders.
In my view the issue comes down to speed. Some of the electric scooters in circulation can go at about 20-30mph. If the speed limit is reduced to 15mph, then I would agree that they should be treated in the same way as bikes (or e-bikes) and there is no need for any tests. But to be an alternative to the car, then they need to be able to reach 30mph for trips around town.
On the discussion on vehicles, the government needs to come up with a legislative framework for electric scooters. Pronto.
Maybe they should be banned.
Or subjected to the same legislation as motorbikes. Riders must be 16, wearing a helmet and have passed a test. Vehicles must be registered, insured and taxed.
The best legislative framework we have is probably that applied to mobility scooters, which is 4mph on a pavement or (I think) pedestrian zone, even for a Type III mobility scooter which has a higher top speed.
The question as ever is practical and effective enforcement.
When we get a coherent and largely separate cycling infrastructure, scooters will fit in better on that, along with e-bikes. Unravelling the modes of travel will be the key.
I've got a 125 cc motorbike, it is brilliant for getting around as parking is no longer an issue for me. I have taken a CBT test (driving with an L plate on), wear a helmet and have third party insurance. I would happily switch to an e-scooter or some other method of light electric transport, they should be regulated in the same way. It should not be too hard to work this out.
I think those are 2 hugely different categories. A 125cc motorbike will run at nearly motorway speeds. An e-scooter can be ridden seamlessly on the pavement, is limited to between 10-15mph, and is a bit of a death trap on major roads due to the small wheel size. When you fall off you may get killed by the close-following tonne of steel with the dosy dope at the wheel ranting at the radio or playing eye-spy with the 4 year old.
Even though the UK has always had pretty much the safest roads in Europe for the last half-century and more, the surfaces of our roads are towards the bottom in quality. It's bad enough for cycles with 700mm wheels or folders with 350mm wheels, but e-scooters normally have 215m wheels.
E-scooters typically replace the upper end of walked journeys (0-5 miles), and the lower of cycle journeys. Cycling is normally half a mile up to say about 12-15 miles.
I think that full blown license, helmet and insurance for a vehicle which does 10mph is a massive overkill. Unless you are banning it by paperwork.
You could argue for 3rd part insurance, maybe, which you get free with membership of something like CyclingUK for people who use bikes. Perhaps you cold also put a case forward for training along the lines of the excellent bikeability, which is free in most places. IMO that's about it.
If I wanted something that did not need parking in the below motorbike category, I would be going for a Brompton or e-Brompton. You can hire one at many places for £5 for 24 hours. I took one to Istanbul on a hairyplane on holiday once. https://bromptonhire.com/
I've gone through various bikes and ebikes. The servicing and parts are the killer. I've got an 8 year old Brompton and I've spent about £300 on it this year.
My trips are sub 10 mile journeys on busy roads. As much as the motorbike is fun I think the answer is a cheap hybrid road bike; will also do good from an exercise point of view.
TBH I don't think £300 in year 8 is that bad, unless it is every year. I pay about £30-40 for decent tyres, for example.
I wouldn't necessarily go for a cheapie, depending on your meaning of cheapie. For about 6 or 7 years I have had a £750 Boardman hybrid bought with various offers for £550, and have a Gruber Assist fitted (Gruber Assist is the e-bike conversion with the long thin motor in the seatpost). That gives me an invisible e-bike with about 25 miles worth of assist for a total weight of 13kg. But kits have really moved on since.
I've done everything from holidays with luggage to normal commuting on it. Holiday example would be Chesterfield to Portsmouth on the train with cycling through London, then a ferry and to Ventnor on the bike. Or the train to Bristol then the bike into Somerset.
The best bike I ever had was a flat bar Pinnacle Borealis bike from evans cycles, about £350. It was very lightweight, lasted a couple of years and long rides, then it just fell apart as the components were so cheap. I think the answer may be to buy a bike like that, blitz it for a year or two then sell it on facebook marketplace.
I am dreading taking the Brompton out again and something going wrong with it, I think it will just stay as a museum piece as I can't bring myself to sell it.
I've got a similar ebike as well, but it isn't much of a joy to ride and needs regular servicing. Its just used for occasional school runs. There are no health benefits from using it as there is so much assist. The motorbike by contrast is incredibly durable, effortless and incredibly cheap.
On topic, I actually think the next couple of months will go well for the government. With the success of the vaccine booster programme, it looks like England might be one of very few places in Western Europe to avoid virus-related restrictions in the new year.
Your judgement on almost everything is so suspect that I take heart from this latest wild prediction. You favour restrictions at any cost and by that criteria of course you may be correct. But for 99% of the population who don't subscribe to the bone-headed beliefs of the far tory right, we'd really rather like the NHS to remain able to function and for avoidable deaths to be, err, avoided.
I first encountered the powers of your soothsaying when you confidently informed us that there was no chance whatsoever of Emma Raducanu being Sports Personality of the Year.
But I do find it amusing that some tories are still clinging on to flotsam, like shipwreck survivors who can't quite believe that the good ship Boris has sunk.
Merry Christmas to you too!
To top it all, you don't even know what day it is!
;-)
It is still Christmastide until 6 January, is it not?
Aren't we on Turtle Doves?
So it's Mock Turtle Soup day (rather than Moon Rabbit soup).
The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's possibly a bit like saying that Typhoid Mary was a cure for constipation. There will be deaths and Long Covid victims. How many, we're not clear yet (partly because of the health service issues).
Typhoid wasn't endemic thought was it.
Covid will be which means that we will regularly come into contact with it just as we do with flu.
And like flu covid will hit some people hard - very likely the same people flu would have hit.
Typhoid most certainly was endemic in the old days pre-vaccines - lots of local outbreaks where water or food was contaminated.
Edit: you may be thinking of cholera? Interestingly cholera was the old name for bad summer diarrhoeas some of which were fatal in some cases. It took some time (1830s, I think) to realise that this Asiatic cholera stuff was different from the summer diarrhoeas which now had to be called English cholera. So now Asiatic cholera is just called cholera.
But how did typhoid deaths compare with covid deaths ?
And wasn't the threat from Typhoid Mary because she was some medical freak who was constantly emitting typhoid and who refused to work in low risk occupations ?
Now if we had a similar case of someone continually emitting high levels of covid I doubt they'd be allowed to work in a hospital for example.
But that's very different to the low levels of covid people will occasionally emit and receive in a covid endemic environment.
The worst thing about self-lockdown is that there's no end to it. No review date, no sunset clause, no press conference announcing an end to restrictions.
Apologies for being such a misery guts. I see that I'm going to have to phone the doctor and talk about changing my medication again.
I wonder how much self imposed restrictions are among those who haven't ** been infected by covid and seem to think they must reduce risk at almost any cost.
Its rather liberating to have had covid and be able to feel free to get on with things with no change other than a vaccination every few months.
** Or those who don't realise they have previously been infected - there must be many millions who have been infected without realising it.
Lots of people seem to getting it more than once.
Everyone will get it more than once.
But its likely to be with milder effects each time.
In the end most people will be getting it without noticing it or thinking they got 'a bit of a cold'.
Quite. And the desperate attempts to stop it going through the population unchecked are also wholly counterproductive.
Suppression was a good idea so long as vaccines and treatments weren't available. Now it's just delaying the inevitable at enormous cost.
If we can manage to stamp on Omicron with a destructive lockdown this Winter then something even more transmissible will come along in short order. The evolutionary pressure being placed upon the virus to do this is huge.
About the best that can be hoped for is that such a future variant would be less virulent and kill fewer people, but if we go down the heavy restriction route yet again then we're gambling on that possibility in the future by inflicting a lot of collateral damage now.
We need boosters otherwise we will be in big trouble
Omicron is a free booster.
If it continues then everyone will be getting their anti-bodies topped up at the supermarkets and pubs.
The vulnerable will be those who don't and let their protection slowly fade.
That's possibly a bit like saying that Typhoid Mary was a cure for constipation. There will be deaths and Long Covid victims. How many, we're not clear yet (partly because of the health service issues).
Typhoid wasn't endemic thought was it.
Covid will be which means that we will regularly come into contact with it just as we do with flu.
And like flu covid will hit some people hard - very likely the same people flu would have hit.
Typhoid most certainly was endemic in the old days pre-vaccines - lots of local outbreaks where water or food was contaminated.
Edit: you may be thinking of cholera? Interestingly cholera was the old name for bad summer diarrhoeas some of which were fatal in some cases. It took some time (1830s, I think) to realise that this Asiatic cholera stuff was different from the summer diarrhoeas which now had to be called English cholera. So now Asiatic cholera is just called cholera.
But how did typhoid deaths compare with covid deaths ?
And wasn't the threat from Typhoid Mary because she was some medical freak who was constantly emitting typhoid and who refused to work in low risk occupations ?
Now if we had a similar case of someone continually emitting high levels of covid I doubt they'd be allowed to work in a hospital for example.
But that's very different to the low levels of covid people will occasionally emit and receive in a covid endemic environment.
Oh, quite, they differ in detail, but typhoid was a significant though not dominant cause of deaths - unless prevented by NPIs such as good water and careful food preparation. There was an outbreak in Aberdeen in living memory caused by bad food.
Typhoid Mary was partly a prolific exreter but also party a problem because of her behaviour and chosen profession of cookery. The secretor problem is quite significant even today.
CFR of typhjoid is about 1% today so quite similar magnitude to covid. Ediyt: ignore that last bit - I think my memory must be wrong.
On topic, I actually think the next couple of months will go well for the government. With the success of the vaccine booster programme, it looks like England might be one of very few places in Western Europe to avoid virus-related restrictions in the new year.
Your judgement on almost everything is so suspect that I take heart from this latest wild prediction. You favour restrictions at any cost and by that criteria of course you may be correct. But for 99% of the population who don't subscribe to the bone-headed beliefs of the far tory right, we'd really rather like the NHS to remain able to function and for avoidable deaths to be, err, avoided.
I first encountered the powers of your soothsaying when you confidently informed us that there was no chance whatsoever of Emma Raducanu being Sports Personality of the Year.
But I do find it amusing that some tories are still clinging on to flotsam, like shipwreck survivors who can't quite believe that the good ship Boris has sunk.
Merry Christmas to you too!
To top it all, you don't even know what day it is!
;-)
It is still Christmastide until 6 January, is it not?
Aren't we on Turtle Doves?
So it's Mock Turtle Soup day (rather than Moon Rabbit soup).
Comments
Being previously infected reduces the risk of future infection and very likely reduces the severity of any future infection.
Coming into contact with a few viral strands boosts your immune system in a similar way a vaccination does.
It's not as easy as saying "get on with it", we need to make plans now
Once the population has as much protection as it is going to get from vaccination and medical treatments, restrictions are only likely to delay mortality rather than prevent it. The selective pressure on the virus to keep getting more transmissible, which is largely the product of our crude efforts to keep on suppressing it, is too great.
There will be future vaccinations for us all.
But its madness to lurch into isolating terror when day 90 becomes day 91 and your anti-bodies theoretically reduce 1%.
Instead its better to be 'out and about' when you've been fully vaccinated and let your immune system continually adapt to a covid endemic environment.
But if we don't make changes now, we will be in that position in a month or two
** And how much does immunity wane ? Different rates in different people in different environments and with different previous exposure.
Yes, if you have come through a previous infection you are better equipped to deal with Omicron. However, if the previous infection put you in your grave that isn't so good.
Given a choice of first exposure to Alpha with no vaccination, Delta when double jabbed or Omicron when boosted I would choose Omicron.
Edit: you may be thinking of cholera? Interestingly cholera was the old name for bad summer diarrhoeas some of which were fatal in some cases. It took some time (1830s, I think) to realise that this Asiatic cholera stuff was different from the summer diarrhoeas which now had to be called English cholera. So now Asiatic cholera is just called cholera.
Omicron is probably a little bit less impacting on the population than the original strain but the idea it's mutated to be the same level as a cold is ridiculous and wrong.
We have not yet seen COVID genuinely mutate to be on the same level as a cold. Now that may still happen but it doesn't mean it will, smallpox hasn't mutated to be less deadly. HIV hasn't either.
So to me, what we need to do is ensure immunity in the population remains high, such that the NHS and hospitals are not overwhelmed. And if we can prevent people dying needlessly we also should.
That means putting into plans now as to how we deal with that over the next months/years. If that means more boosters, then more boosters. If it means something else, then that.
My biggest concern is right now the headlines and the public attitude will go to "it's all gone away now" and the Government will probably go there too. This is the wrong approach.
And given that everyone can be fully vaccinated and will be offered further vaccinations in future there should be less and less fear of covid.
I am dreading taking the Brompton out again and something going wrong with it, I think it will just stay as a museum piece as I can't bring myself to sell it.
I've got a similar ebike as well, but it isn't much of a joy to ride and needs regular servicing. Its just used for occasional school runs. There are no health benefits from using it as there is so much assist. The motorbike by contrast is incredibly durable, effortless and incredibly cheap.
So it's Mock Turtle Soup day (rather than Moon Rabbit soup).
NEW THREAD
And wasn't the threat from Typhoid Mary because she was some medical freak who was constantly emitting typhoid and who refused to work in low risk occupations ?
Now if we had a similar case of someone continually emitting high levels of covid I doubt they'd be allowed to work in a hospital for example.
But that's very different to the low levels of covid people will occasionally emit and receive in a covid endemic environment.
Does this mean I can have a fourth dose? 👍
Typhoid Mary was partly a prolific exreter but also party a problem because of her behaviour and chosen profession of cookery. The secretor problem is quite significant even today.
CFR of typhjoid is about 1% today so quite similar magnitude to covid. Ediyt: ignore that last bit - I think my memory must be wrong.