I think I must be the only person yearning for a return to the tiers. They seemed to really reduce the size of the winter wave, and allowed flexibility. Heck, I went to auctions during the tiers. Worked away from home. And it felt safe to be honest.
The lockdown ruined all of that. Can't wait for a tiered return!
NHS front line staff Pharmacists Care workers Front line school and university workers Dentists
Then go onto the rest of the list of old people etc...
All of these people are in the front line and are most likely to get and spread the virus. Our vaccine deployment starting with old people and not NHS staff makes absolutely no sense, the government are letting "must save all lives at any cost" dictate this policy but risking a much longer term cost of having a higher R.
My fear is there will be a "VIP" of vaccination. That includes, I imagine, the Queen and Prince Philip as well as presumably Charles and Camilla. I can live with that but I wouldn't like to see celebrities and politicians vaccinated before care workers and NHS workers - the notion money or celebrity moves you up the pecking order is reprehensible.
The more criteria you add the more difficult it will be to get to the right people. Age is the easiest thing for the NHS to know about, and the simplest to organise by.
By the time you've worked out who is a 'front line school worker' you could have vaccinated 100k people. It isn't worth the effort trying to work it out.
Besides, as soon as you make a list like that, you generate questions. Do care workers include the hidden army caring for their own relatives? Should bus drivers be on that list because they were badly affected in the first wave? What about supermarket workers?
Just get on with it by age, and do it as fast as possible. Include NHS workers, especially those actually doing the vaccination. They aren't too difficult, because they can organise it amongst themselves.
As for the royals, I should think Prince Philip will be in the top few thousand by age anyway. And Charlie has already had the lurgy.
It's not that difficult, you send vaccination teams to all schools and universities.
The vaccine needs to be deployed offensively not defensively. Vaccinating old people in care homes first is a defensive strategy, it protects those people and only them. Vaccinating teachers protects all of them plus kids, their parents and their own families. Vaccinating pharmacists protects all of the people who need medicine dispensed.
We started off using rapid testing defensively by only using it for care homes, that strategy didn't work and now the government has changed to use it to go out and find the virus. Vaccination is the same it needs to go out and find the virus and super spreaders so everyone benefits immediately.
Don't forget that nobody is entirely sure that being vaccinated stops you spreading it. That wasn't tested for in the trials.
Indeed Max's strategy works if you're seeking a zero COVID strategy.
Vaccinating the vulnerable and workers who work with the vulnerable works if you're seeking to get life back to normal.
The virus will still be circulating in the spring but not many will be getting hospitalised so we can get back to normal. That's in everyone's interests. The young benefit more from grandpa being vaccinated and them getting to live like normal again than they benefit from being vaccinated themselves but still needing to stay at home so that grandpa doesn't get it.
The whole point in vaccinating super spreaders first is that you rapidly bring the R down and the virus burns itself out while you vaccinate the wider population. It actually saves most lives and allows people to get on with life at the same time. If tomorrow we were able to get the R down to 0.3 overnight the whole nation immediately benefits from the vaccine. If we use it to vaccinate a few old people then only those few old people benefit because community transmission is still very high and restrictions can't be eased. It's not just old people that die of this, anyone over 60 has medium risk and anyone who is overweight (40% of the nation) is at medium risk. The restrictions don't disappear because the over 80s are immune.
If you want to hit R, perhaps vaccinating Welsh rugby club members first would be the best strategy? (again, assuming that vaccination actually stops spreading)
Anyway, I really don't think the government will be too keen on categorising people based on occupation. It is too much of a minefield.
We are locked down because too many people are in hospital, not because R is 1.1.
But there are people in hospitals because the R was 1.3 for ages. Bring the R down and the infection rate drops to what we had in the summer and COVID deaths become background noise and by targeting super spreaders for vaccination we can achieve this very quickly. What you want to do is prevent any more old people dying from this. What I'm suggesting makes COVID background noise the same as over the summer.
Stopping the old from dying makes COVID background noise too. Rapidly.
Plus if you get R down and lift restrictions then R will go back up and people will be hospitalised again.
No it doesn't because anyone over 60 is at medium risk and anyone who is overweight is at medium risk. The CFR for both cohorts is pretty high, especially the latter and the hospitalisation rate for the latter is very high. Vaccinating oldies does nothing for them and the restrictions continue until these people are protected as well which is going to take months. With limited supply the strategy needs to be about reducing the R as much as possible not protecting individuals.
Over 60s are scheduled to be vaccinated by February or March already themselves.
No the restrictions won't continue for months. R will be reduced rapidly anyway and hospitalisations will have been slashed. If a few young overweight people are getting the virus that can happen under either scenario but it won't be causing lockdowns as it won't be overloading the NHS.
Yes, they will. There is no way we will leave the tier system any time before the end of March and that's because the vaccine programme is designed to help a few individuals, not the whole nation.
There is not the slightest chance on earth we would leave the tier system before the end of March if we followed your proposal either. But following the existing proposal I would expect almost the entire country to be Tier 2 or below by Valentine's Day and almost all of it to be Tier 1 and thinking of removing Tiers by Mother's Day.
Stopping the vulnerable from filling hospitals is helping the whole nation. Since the whole nation is only under restrictions to stop the individuals from getting it and filling the hospitals!
Finally, I think from a moral standpoint it isn't right to say no to teachers, pharmacists and dentists. All of these people are being asked to take extraordinary health risks on a daily basis, we now have the capability of protecting them while they carry out a hugely important public service. Keeping kids in school, keeping medicines dispensed and dental care available are necessary public services. We shouldn't be asking those who provide them to continue taking these risks when they don't need to, given the vaccine supply.
Do dentists and pharmacists not count as healthcare workers? In which case they will get it early anyway?
Teachers if they're vulnerable will get it as fast as they can already. But vaccinating teachers prematurely won't meaningfully influence R.
Not unless they work in a hospital or doctor's surgery.
You're completely wrong about that. Schools are basically the major source of new infections, teachers are a major component of those new transmissions, they get it in the staff room and then pass it on to their family who then go out into the community and unknowingly pass it to others. Schools and university employees are unfortunately associated with being susperspreaders.
And from a moral standpoint it's simply wrong to ask any of them to take these risks of serious long term health issues when we have the means for them not to need to.
Schools are a main one but that includes pupils. And parents at the school gates. It isn't just the teachers. Since the vaccine isn't tested on children and is going to be approved for adult use first then vaccinating adults won't magically make the virus leave schools.
I think I must be the only person yearning for a return to the tiers. They seemed to really reduce the size of the winter wave, and allowed flexibility. Heck, I went to auctions during the tiers. Worked away from home. And it felt safe to be honest.
The lockdown ruined all of that. Can't wait for a tiered return!
Any evidence for this? Doesn't feel to me like tiers were working at all.
I assume it's because while there won't be a mass outcry, the government suspects people simply won't follow any restrictions across that period. Though that's not simply a reason to give up, if they otherwise would say keep it up.
NHS front line staff Pharmacists Care workers Front line school and university workers Dentists
Then go onto the rest of the list of old people etc...
All of these people are in the front line and are most likely to get and spread the virus. Our vaccine deployment starting with old people and not NHS staff makes absolutely no sense, the government are letting "must save all lives at any cost" dictate this policy but risking a much longer term cost of having a higher R.
My fear is there will be a "VIP" of vaccination. That includes, I imagine, the Queen and Prince Philip as well as presumably Charles and Camilla. I can live with that but I wouldn't like to see celebrities and politicians vaccinated before care workers and NHS workers - the notion money or celebrity moves you up the pecking order is reprehensible.
The more criteria you add the more difficult it will be to get to the right people. Age is the easiest thing for the NHS to know about, and the simplest to organise by.
By the time you've worked out who is a 'front line school worker' you could have vaccinated 100k people. It isn't worth the effort trying to work it out.
Besides, as soon as you make a list like that, you generate questions. Do care workers include the hidden army caring for their own relatives? Should bus drivers be on that list because they were badly affected in the first wave? What about supermarket workers?
Just get on with it by age, and do it as fast as possible. Include NHS workers, especially those actually doing the vaccination. They aren't too difficult, because they can organise it amongst themselves.
As for the royals, I should think Prince Philip will be in the top few thousand by age anyway. And Charlie has already had the lurgy.
It's not that difficult, you send vaccination teams to all schools and universities.
The vaccine needs to be deployed offensively not defensively. Vaccinating old people in care homes first is a defensive strategy, it protects those people and only them. Vaccinating teachers protects all of them plus kids, their parents and their own families. Vaccinating pharmacists protects all of the people who need medicine dispensed.
We started off using rapid testing defensively by only using it for care homes, that strategy didn't work and now the government has changed to use it to go out and find the virus. Vaccination is the same it needs to go out and find the virus and super spreaders so everyone benefits immediately.
Don't forget that nobody is entirely sure that being vaccinated stops you spreading it. That wasn't tested for in the trials.
Indeed Max's strategy works if you're seeking a zero COVID strategy.
Vaccinating the vulnerable and workers who work with the vulnerable works if you're seeking to get life back to normal.
The virus will still be circulating in the spring but not many will be getting hospitalised so we can get back to normal. That's in everyone's interests. The young benefit more from grandpa being vaccinated and them getting to live like normal again than they benefit from being vaccinated themselves but still needing to stay at home so that grandpa doesn't get it.
The whole point in vaccinating super spreaders first is that you rapidly bring the R down and the virus burns itself out while you vaccinate the wider population. It actually saves most lives and allows people to get on with life at the same time. If tomorrow we were able to get the R down to 0.3 overnight the whole nation immediately benefits from the vaccine. If we use it to vaccinate a few old people then only those few old people benefit because community transmission is still very high and restrictions can't be eased. It's not just old people that die of this, anyone over 60 has medium risk and anyone who is overweight (40% of the nation) is at medium risk. The restrictions don't disappear because the over 80s are immune.
If you want to hit R, perhaps vaccinating Welsh rugby club members first would be the best strategy? (again, assuming that vaccination actually stops spreading)
Anyway, I really don't think the government will be too keen on categorising people based on occupation. It is too much of a minefield.
We are locked down because too many people are in hospital, not because R is 1.1.
But there are people in hospitals because the R was 1.3 for ages. Bring the R down and the infection rate drops to what we had in the summer and COVID deaths become background noise and by targeting super spreaders for vaccination we can achieve this very quickly. What you want to do is prevent any more old people dying from this. What I'm suggesting makes COVID background noise the same as over the summer.
Stopping the old from dying makes COVID background noise too. Rapidly.
Plus if you get R down and lift restrictions then R will go back up and people will be hospitalised again.
No it doesn't because anyone over 60 is at medium risk and anyone who is overweight is at medium risk. The CFR for both cohorts is pretty high, especially the latter and the hospitalisation rate for the latter is very high. Vaccinating oldies does nothing for them and the restrictions continue until these people are protected as well which is going to take months. With limited supply the strategy needs to be about reducing the R as much as possible not protecting individuals.
Over 60s are scheduled to be vaccinated by February or March already themselves.
No the restrictions won't continue for months. R will be reduced rapidly anyway and hospitalisations will have been slashed. If a few young overweight people are getting the virus that can happen under either scenario but it won't be causing lockdowns as it won't be overloading the NHS.
Yes, they will. There is no way we will leave the tier system any time before the end of March and that's because the vaccine programme is designed to help a few individuals, not the whole nation.
There is not the slightest chance on earth we would leave the tier system before the end of March if we followed your proposal either. But following the existing proposal I would expect almost the entire country to be Tier 2 or below by Valentine's Day and almost all of it to be Tier 1 and thinking of removing Tiers by Mother's Day.
Stopping the vulnerable from filling hospitals is helping the whole nation. Since the whole nation is only under restrictions to stop the individuals from getting it and filling the hospitals!
You have no idea what you're talking about tbh, the majority of infections come from a very small proportion of people. The key to reducing the R to below 1 is to stop super spreader events. Vaccinating likely super spreaders is a no brainer and super spreader events are associated mostly with those professions and a few others. Vaccinating a few housebound old people isn't going to bring community infection down and while the hospitalisation rate will go down, oldies in care homes also benefit from care workers and NHS workers being vaccinated.
Using the vaccine, while it is limited in supply, for the biggest reduction of R is the best way to do this. Unfortunately we have pygmies and arse covering scientists in charge.
I think I must be the only person yearning for a return to the tiers. They seemed to really reduce the size of the winter wave, and allowed flexibility. Heck, I went to auctions during the tiers. Worked away from home. And it felt safe to be honest.
The lockdown ruined all of that. Can't wait for a tiered return!
Any evidence for this? Doesn't feel to me like tiers were working at all.
Different tiers for different boroughs in London is insanity upon insanity. Have these Tory MPs learned nowt from their colleagues in Greater Manchester? Not surprisingly, no.
I think I must be the only person yearning for a return to the tiers. They seemed to really reduce the size of the winter wave, and allowed flexibility. Heck, I went to auctions during the tiers. Worked away from home. And it felt safe to be honest.
The lockdown ruined all of that. Can't wait for a tiered return!
Any evidence for this? Doesn't feel to me like tiers were working at all.
Lots from north west.
Such as?
You can look on the gov data and look at areas over time. Cases in say Liverpool were coming down before the nov lockdown. Nottingham too.
I think I must be the only person yearning for a return to the tiers. They seemed to really reduce the size of the winter wave, and allowed flexibility. Heck, I went to auctions during the tiers. Worked away from home. And it felt safe to be honest.
The lockdown ruined all of that. Can't wait for a tiered return!
Any evidence for this? Doesn't feel to me like tiers were working at all.
NHS front line staff Pharmacists Care workers Front line school and university workers Dentists
Then go onto the rest of the list of old people etc...
All of these people are in the front line and are most likely to get and spread the virus. Our vaccine deployment starting with old people and not NHS staff makes absolutely no sense, the government are letting "must save all lives at any cost" dictate this policy but risking a much longer term cost of having a higher R.
My fear is there will be a "VIP" of vaccination. That includes, I imagine, the Queen and Prince Philip as well as presumably Charles and Camilla. I can live with that but I wouldn't like to see celebrities and politicians vaccinated before care workers and NHS workers - the notion money or celebrity moves you up the pecking order is reprehensible.
The more criteria you add the more difficult it will be to get to the right people. Age is the easiest thing for the NHS to know about, and the simplest to organise by.
By the time you've worked out who is a 'front line school worker' you could have vaccinated 100k people. It isn't worth the effort trying to work it out.
Besides, as soon as you make a list like that, you generate questions. Do care workers include the hidden army caring for their own relatives? Should bus drivers be on that list because they were badly affected in the first wave? What about supermarket workers?
Just get on with it by age, and do it as fast as possible. Include NHS workers, especially those actually doing the vaccination. They aren't too difficult, because they can organise it amongst themselves.
As for the royals, I should think Prince Philip will be in the top few thousand by age anyway. And Charlie has already had the lurgy.
It's not that difficult, you send vaccination teams to all schools and universities.
The vaccine needs to be deployed offensively not defensively. Vaccinating old people in care homes first is a defensive strategy, it protects those people and only them. Vaccinating teachers protects all of them plus kids, their parents and their own families. Vaccinating pharmacists protects all of the people who need medicine dispensed.
We started off using rapid testing defensively by only using it for care homes, that strategy didn't work and now the government has changed to use it to go out and find the virus. Vaccination is the same it needs to go out and find the virus and super spreaders so everyone benefits immediately.
Don't forget that nobody is entirely sure that being vaccinated stops you spreading it. That wasn't tested for in the trials.
Indeed Max's strategy works if you're seeking a zero COVID strategy.
Vaccinating the vulnerable and workers who work with the vulnerable works if you're seeking to get life back to normal.
The virus will still be circulating in the spring but not many will be getting hospitalised so we can get back to normal. That's in everyone's interests. The young benefit more from grandpa being vaccinated and them getting to live like normal again than they benefit from being vaccinated themselves but still needing to stay at home so that grandpa doesn't get it.
The whole point in vaccinating super spreaders first is that you rapidly bring the R down and the virus burns itself out while you vaccinate the wider population. It actually saves most lives and allows people to get on with life at the same time. If tomorrow we were able to get the R down to 0.3 overnight the whole nation immediately benefits from the vaccine. If we use it to vaccinate a few old people then only those few old people benefit because community transmission is still very high and restrictions can't be eased. It's not just old people that die of this, anyone over 60 has medium risk and anyone who is overweight (40% of the nation) is at medium risk. The restrictions don't disappear because the over 80s are immune.
If you want to hit R, perhaps vaccinating Welsh rugby club members first would be the best strategy? (again, assuming that vaccination actually stops spreading)
Anyway, I really don't think the government will be too keen on categorising people based on occupation. It is too much of a minefield.
We are locked down because too many people are in hospital, not because R is 1.1.
But there are people in hospitals because the R was 1.3 for ages. Bring the R down and the infection rate drops to what we had in the summer and COVID deaths become background noise and by targeting super spreaders for vaccination we can achieve this very quickly. What you want to do is prevent any more old people dying from this. What I'm suggesting makes COVID background noise the same as over the summer.
Stopping the old from dying makes COVID background noise too. Rapidly.
Plus if you get R down and lift restrictions then R will go back up and people will be hospitalised again.
No it doesn't because anyone over 60 is at medium risk and anyone who is overweight is at medium risk. The CFR for both cohorts is pretty high, especially the latter and the hospitalisation rate for the latter is very high. Vaccinating oldies does nothing for them and the restrictions continue until these people are protected as well which is going to take months. With limited supply the strategy needs to be about reducing the R as much as possible not protecting individuals.
Over 60s are scheduled to be vaccinated by February or March already themselves.
No the restrictions won't continue for months. R will be reduced rapidly anyway and hospitalisations will have been slashed. If a few young overweight people are getting the virus that can happen under either scenario but it won't be causing lockdowns as it won't be overloading the NHS.
Yes, they will. There is no way we will leave the tier system any time before the end of March and that's because the vaccine programme is designed to help a few individuals, not the whole nation.
There is not the slightest chance on earth we would leave the tier system before the end of March if we followed your proposal either. But following the existing proposal I would expect almost the entire country to be Tier 2 or below by Valentine's Day and almost all of it to be Tier 1 and thinking of removing Tiers by Mother's Day.
Stopping the vulnerable from filling hospitals is helping the whole nation. Since the whole nation is only under restrictions to stop the individuals from getting it and filling the hospitals!
You have no idea what you're talking about tbh, the majority of infections come from a very small proportion of people. The key to reducing the R to below 1 is to stop super spreader events. Vaccinating likely super spreaders is a no brainer and super spreader events are associated mostly with those professions and a few others. Vaccinating a few housebound old people isn't going to bring community infection down and while the hospitalisation rate will go down, oldies in care homes also benefit from care workers and NHS workers being vaccinated.
Using the vaccine, while it is limited in supply, for the biggest reduction of R is the best way to do this. Unfortunately we have pygmies and arse covering scientists in charge.
Max, not saying you are wrong, but what is the evidence that the majority of infections are from superspreaders? I know cases have been investigated but surely we can’t say that with such confidence? And does it also apply to other respiratory infections (cold/flu)?
Seriously, if it was about taking a stand in refusing to follow restrictions or pay the fines for doing that it'd be one thing, but because she seems to genuinely believe her justification for doing so it really undermines itself as a protest against state power.
I may have overreacted earlier but stuff like this incenses me. There are criminals out there who have got off more lightly. People who have ruined the lives of others.
The tories used to stand up for people like this. Now? nobody does.
I think you'll find the Tories used to be the "law and order" party.
No party that employed Cummings or Patel can be considered to be in favour of law and order.
The Tory party hasn't employed either of them.
Beyond the technicality though Cummings is/was clearly a loose cannon. Patel, despite her clear personal failings, is perhaps a decent Home Secretary.
A short Asian woman is a clear change from the past. Theresa May was a, (tall) rather intimidating, white, Anglo-Saxon, woman.
Patel will clearly be (mostly) judged on how she does her job. I think she's doing quite well, and I think she'll improve. I somewhat vaguely think she may be next PM, but I'm very sure she's doing great things for our perceptions as to prejudices with every minute that she serves.
"I think she's doing quite well"
Aside from being short, female and Asian, which really doesn't add weight to one side of the scales or another, what has she done since becoming Home Secretary? You can skip the bullying part and the not being fired for the bullying, I'm well versed in that.
Mainly stayed in the job.
Home Secretary is a post that has trashed many careers. Some slight evidence that she's got some support within the civil service too I think.
"Some slight evidence that she's got some support within the civil service too I think."
Finally, someone to be spoken of in the same breath as Vespasian, Qin Shi Huang, King Alfred.
I think I must be the only person yearning for a return to the tiers. They seemed to really reduce the size of the winter wave, and allowed flexibility. Heck, I went to auctions during the tiers. Worked away from home. And it felt safe to be honest.
The lockdown ruined all of that. Can't wait for a tiered return!
Any evidence for this? Doesn't feel to me like tiers were working at all.
Lots from north west.
Such as?
You can look on the gov data and look at areas over time. Cases in say Liverpool were coming down before the nov lockdown. Nottingham too.
Alright, but so far that's indistinguishable from saying "tier 3 works", right? What about the tier 1 and 2 areas? Numbers were barrelling out of control there, weren't they?
NHS front line staff Pharmacists Care workers Front line school and university workers Dentists
Then go onto the rest of the list of old people etc...
All of these people are in the front line and are most likely to get and spread the virus. Our vaccine deployment starting with old people and not NHS staff makes absolutely no sense, the government are letting "must save all lives at any cost" dictate this policy but risking a much longer term cost of having a higher R.
My fear is there will be a "VIP" of vaccination. That includes, I imagine, the Queen and Prince Philip as well as presumably Charles and Camilla. I can live with that but I wouldn't like to see celebrities and politicians vaccinated before care workers and NHS workers - the notion money or celebrity moves you up the pecking order is reprehensible.
The more criteria you add the more difficult it will be to get to the right people. Age is the easiest thing for the NHS to know about, and the simplest to organise by.
By the time you've worked out who is a 'front line school worker' you could have vaccinated 100k people. It isn't worth the effort trying to work it out.
Besides, as soon as you make a list like that, you generate questions. Do care workers include the hidden army caring for their own relatives? Should bus drivers be on that list because they were badly affected in the first wave? What about supermarket workers?
Just get on with it by age, and do it as fast as possible. Include NHS workers, especially those actually doing the vaccination. They aren't too difficult, because they can organise it amongst themselves.
As for the royals, I should think Prince Philip will be in the top few thousand by age anyway. And Charlie has already had the lurgy.
It's not that difficult, you send vaccination teams to all schools and universities.
The vaccine needs to be deployed offensively not defensively. Vaccinating old people in care homes first is a defensive strategy, it protects those people and only them. Vaccinating teachers protects all of them plus kids, their parents and their own families. Vaccinating pharmacists protects all of the people who need medicine dispensed.
We started off using rapid testing defensively by only using it for care homes, that strategy didn't work and now the government has changed to use it to go out and find the virus. Vaccination is the same it needs to go out and find the virus and super spreaders so everyone benefits immediately.
Don't forget that nobody is entirely sure that being vaccinated stops you spreading it. That wasn't tested for in the trials.
Indeed Max's strategy works if you're seeking a zero COVID strategy.
Vaccinating the vulnerable and workers who work with the vulnerable works if you're seeking to get life back to normal.
The virus will still be circulating in the spring but not many will be getting hospitalised so we can get back to normal. That's in everyone's interests. The young benefit more from grandpa being vaccinated and them getting to live like normal again than they benefit from being vaccinated themselves but still needing to stay at home so that grandpa doesn't get it.
The whole point in vaccinating super spreaders first is that you rapidly bring the R down and the virus burns itself out while you vaccinate the wider population. It actually saves most lives and allows people to get on with life at the same time. If tomorrow we were able to get the R down to 0.3 overnight the whole nation immediately benefits from the vaccine. If we use it to vaccinate a few old people then only those few old people benefit because community transmission is still very high and restrictions can't be eased. It's not just old people that die of this, anyone over 60 has medium risk and anyone who is overweight (40% of the nation) is at medium risk. The restrictions don't disappear because the over 80s are immune.
If you want to hit R, perhaps vaccinating Welsh rugby club members first would be the best strategy? (again, assuming that vaccination actually stops spreading)
Anyway, I really don't think the government will be too keen on categorising people based on occupation. It is too much of a minefield.
We are locked down because too many people are in hospital, not because R is 1.1.
But there are people in hospitals because the R was 1.3 for ages. Bring the R down and the infection rate drops to what we had in the summer and COVID deaths become background noise and by targeting super spreaders for vaccination we can achieve this very quickly. What you want to do is prevent any more old people dying from this. What I'm suggesting makes COVID background noise the same as over the summer.
Stopping the old from dying makes COVID background noise too. Rapidly.
Plus if you get R down and lift restrictions then R will go back up and people will be hospitalised again.
No it doesn't because anyone over 60 is at medium risk and anyone who is overweight is at medium risk. The CFR for both cohorts is pretty high, especially the latter and the hospitalisation rate for the latter is very high. Vaccinating oldies does nothing for them and the restrictions continue until these people are protected as well which is going to take months. With limited supply the strategy needs to be about reducing the R as much as possible not protecting individuals.
Over 60s are scheduled to be vaccinated by February or March already themselves.
No the restrictions won't continue for months. R will be reduced rapidly anyway and hospitalisations will have been slashed. If a few young overweight people are getting the virus that can happen under either scenario but it won't be causing lockdowns as it won't be overloading the NHS.
Yes, they will. There is no way we will leave the tier system any time before the end of March and that's because the vaccine programme is designed to help a few individuals, not the whole nation.
There is not the slightest chance on earth we would leave the tier system before the end of March if we followed your proposal either. But following the existing proposal I would expect almost the entire country to be Tier 2 or below by Valentine's Day and almost all of it to be Tier 1 and thinking of removing Tiers by Mother's Day.
Stopping the vulnerable from filling hospitals is helping the whole nation. Since the whole nation is only under restrictions to stop the individuals from getting it and filling the hospitals!
You have no idea what you're talking about tbh, the majority of infections come from a very small proportion of people. The key to reducing the R to below 1 is to stop super spreader events. Vaccinating likely super spreaders is a no brainer and super spreader events are associated mostly with those professions and a few others. Vaccinating a few housebound old people isn't going to bring community infection down and while the hospitalisation rate will go down, oldies in care homes also benefit from care workers and NHS workers being vaccinated.
Using the vaccine, while it is limited in supply, for the biggest reduction of R is the best way to do this. Unfortunately we have pygmies and arse covering scientists in charge.
Yes there are superspreader professions and care homes are pretty much firmly top of that list and have been all year long. One case in a care home can become 40 hospitalisations and 20 deaths in a matter of days or weeks.
Vaccinating them has an immediate impact on R and hospitalisations and deaths. There is no reason not to do it.
Seriously, if it was about taking a stand in refusing to follow restrictions or pay the fines for doing that it'd be one thing, but because she seems to genuinely believe her justification for doing so it really undermines itself as a protest against state power.
I may have overreacted earlier but stuff like this incenses me. There are criminals out there who have got off more lightly. People who have ruined the lives of others.
The tories used to stand up for people like this. Now? nobody does.
I think you'll find the Tories used to be the "law and order" party.
No party that employed Cummings or Patel can be considered to be in favour of law and order.
The Tory party hasn't employed either of them.
Beyond the technicality though Cummings is/was clearly a loose cannon. Patel, despite her clear personal failings, is perhaps a decent Home Secretary.
A short Asian woman is a clear change from the past. Theresa May was a, (tall) rather intimidating, white, Anglo-Saxon, woman.
Patel will clearly be (mostly) judged on how she does her job. I think she's doing quite well, and I think she'll improve. I somewhat vaguely think she may be next PM, but I'm very sure she's doing great things for our perceptions as to prejudices with every minute that she serves.
"I think she's doing quite well"
Aside from being short, female and Asian, which really doesn't add weight to one side of the scales or another, what has she done since becoming Home Secretary? You can skip the bullying part and the not being fired for the bullying, I'm well versed in that.
Mainly stayed in the job.
Home Secretary is a post that has trashed many careers. Some slight evidence that she's got some support within the civil service too I think.
"Some slight evidence that she's got some support within the civil service too I think."
Finally, someone to be spoken of in the same breath as Vespasian, Qin Shi Huang, King Alfred.
Grow up.
Grow up?! I'll have you know there is some slight evidence that I act maturely within some some comments, I think.
I think I must be the only person yearning for a return to the tiers. They seemed to really reduce the size of the winter wave, and allowed flexibility. Heck, I went to auctions during the tiers. Worked away from home. And it felt safe to be honest.
The lockdown ruined all of that. Can't wait for a tiered return!
Any evidence for this? Doesn't feel to me like tiers were working at all.
Lots from north west.
Such as?
You can look on the gov data and look at areas over time. Cases in say Liverpool were coming down before the nov lockdown. Nottingham too.
Alright, but so far that's indistinguishable from saying "tier 3 works", right? What about the tier 1 and 2 areas? Numbers were barrelling out of control there, weren't they?
There is a case for saying that the application of the levels was not being done correctly. There should have been set and obvious criteria for which tier an area was and no negotiating. It’s possible that many tier 1 and 2 were a level too low, but I think the tier 3 levels were coming under control. The vaccine has in some ways complicated things. We are now trying to save as many lives as possible to reach vaccination. Two weeks ago we could have been in tiers for a very long haul. Your statement is really that tiers 1 and 2 weren’t working. Probably true in some places, for me in wilts, tier 1 seemed ok.
I think I must be the only person yearning for a return to the tiers. They seemed to really reduce the size of the winter wave, and allowed flexibility. Heck, I went to auctions during the tiers. Worked away from home. And it felt safe to be honest.
The lockdown ruined all of that. Can't wait for a tiered return!
Any evidence for this? Doesn't feel to me like tiers were working at all.
The evidence in cases and hospitalisation looks like it *may* be that the tiers slowed the *increase* considerably.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
Labour shouldn't support it. It needs to be seen as fully and utterly a Tory mess.
Labour should absolutely support it. Say that any deal is better than no deal but they will be wanting to change things in a few years when they get elected but a deal is needed until then.
They will still be able to attack the Tories whenever they want. And the Tory backbenchers will feel freer to split.
Nevada has now certified too. When are Betfair going to frickin’ pay out?
After the electoral college meets is my guess, I'm no lawyer but would have thought that the US courts wouldn't be able to alter the electoral process after that stage.
They could rule that the college is invalid and that congress has to hold a contingent election, but that's excluded in Betfair's rules.
The college meets (remotely) on 14th of December when each state's electors attend their state capitals to cast their votes.
The votes are officially counted by Congress after their new session starts in early January but that's a formality, the details of the vote will already be public knowledge.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
Labour shouldn't support it. It needs to be seen as fully and utterly a Tory mess.
Starmer has folded at the prospect of no deal chaos.
The Tories on here have been very persuasive that rejecting Mrs May's WA deal, and allowing the prospect of no deal Brexit was entirely the fault of Labour.
Seriously, if it was about taking a stand in refusing to follow restrictions or pay the fines for doing that it'd be one thing, but because she seems to genuinely believe her justification for doing so it really undermines itself as a protest against state power.
I may have overreacted earlier but stuff like this incenses me. There are criminals out there who have got off more lightly. People who have ruined the lives of others.
The tories used to stand up for people like this. Now? nobody does.
I think you'll find the Tories used to be the "law and order" party.
No party that employed Cummings or Patel can be considered to be in favour of law and order.
The Tory party hasn't employed either of them.
Beyond the technicality though Cummings is/was clearly a loose cannon. Patel, despite her clear personal failings, is perhaps a decent Home Secretary.
A short Asian woman is a clear change from the past. Theresa May was a, (tall) rather intimidating, white, Anglo-Saxon, woman.
Patel will clearly be (mostly) judged on how she does her job. I think she's doing quite well, and I think she'll improve. I somewhat vaguely think she may be next PM, but I'm very sure she's doing great things for our perceptions as to prejudices with every minute that she serves.
"I think she's doing quite well"
Aside from being short, female and Asian, which really doesn't add weight to one side of the scales or another, what has she done since becoming Home Secretary? You can skip the bullying part and the not being fired for the bullying, I'm well versed in that.
Mainly stayed in the job.
Home Secretary is a post that has trashed many careers. Some slight evidence that she's got some support within the civil service too I think.
"Some slight evidence that she's got some support within the civil service too I think."
Finally, someone to be spoken of in the same breath as Vespasian, Qin Shi Huang, King Alfred.
Grow up.
Grow up?! I'll have you know there is some slight evidence that I act maturely within some some comments, I think.
Some slight evidence you may have hit your target too
I think I must be the only person yearning for a return to the tiers. They seemed to really reduce the size of the winter wave, and allowed flexibility. Heck, I went to auctions during the tiers. Worked away from home. And it felt safe to be honest.
The lockdown ruined all of that. Can't wait for a tiered return!
Any evidence for this? Doesn't feel to me like tiers were working at all.
Lots from north west.
Such as?
You can look on the gov data and look at areas over time. Cases in say Liverpool were coming down before the nov lockdown. Nottingham too.
Alright, but so far that's indistinguishable from saying "tier 3 works", right? What about the tier 1 and 2 areas? Numbers were barrelling out of control there, weren't they?
There is a case for saying that the application of the levels was not being done correctly. There should have been set and obvious criteria for which tier an area was and no negotiating. It’s possible that many tier 1 and 2 were a level too low, but I think the tier 3 levels were coming under control. The vaccine has in some ways complicated things. We are now trying to save as many lives as possible to reach vaccination. Two weeks ago we could have been in tiers for a very long haul. Your statement is really that tiers 1 and 2 weren’t working. Probably true in some places, for me in wilts, tier 1 seemed ok.
It was much more of a question than a statement. I am under the impression that tier 3 areas were seeing a reduction in caseloads, but that tier 1 and 2 were more than making up for that. But I'm happy to be disabused of the notion if I'm wrong.
My worry is that the misapplication of the tiers comes under one of two categories: 1. Tiers 1&2 just don't work and nowhere should be under them, or 2. Tiers 1&2 are applicable but we've nobody in charge who is able or willing to make the right choice.
But what do I know? There are hand-waving arguments for a mutable conclusion. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. If I had any decision to make other than to walk clockwise round the block or anticlockwise, I'd dig into the data and find out what I need to know.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
Labour shouldn't support it. It needs to be seen as fully and utterly a Tory mess.
Labour should absolutely support it. Say that any deal is better than no deal but they will be wanting to change things in a few years when they get elected but a deal is needed until then.
They will still be able to attack the Tories whenever they want. And the Tory backbenchers will feel freer to split.
I do wonder about the 5% of Democrats who think he shouldn't concede ever.....
Problem with the 46% is it might include people who acknowledge the possibility in theory, but never actually reach the point of saying the claims are not backed up, or at least that it's not yet proven that the claims are bogus. Like people who seek to defeat something by saying more consultation is needed, when there's been lots, and their own view is quite clearly to defeat the thing, not seek more info.
NHS front line staff Pharmacists Care workers Front line school and university workers Dentists
Then go onto the rest of the list of old people etc...
All of these people are in the front line and are most likely to get and spread the virus. Our vaccine deployment starting with old people and not NHS staff makes absolutely no sense, the government are letting "must save all lives at any cost" dictate this policy but risking a much longer term cost of having a higher R.
My fear is there will be a "VIP" of vaccination. That includes, I imagine, the Queen and Prince Philip as well as presumably Charles and Camilla. I can live with that but I wouldn't like to see celebrities and politicians vaccinated before care workers and NHS workers - the notion money or celebrity moves you up the pecking order is reprehensible.
The more criteria you add the more difficult it will be to get to the right people. Age is the easiest thing for the NHS to know about, and the simplest to organise by.
By the time you've worked out who is a 'front line school worker' you could have vaccinated 100k people. It isn't worth the effort trying to work it out.
Besides, as soon as you make a list like that, you generate questions. Do care workers include the hidden army caring for their own relatives? Should bus drivers be on that list because they were badly affected in the first wave? What about supermarket workers?
Just get on with it by age, and do it as fast as possible. Include NHS workers, especially those actually doing the vaccination. They aren't too difficult, because they can organise it amongst themselves.
As for the royals, I should think Prince Philip will be in the top few thousand by age anyway. And Charlie has already had the lurgy.
It's not that difficult, you send vaccination teams to all schools and universities.
The vaccine needs to be deployed offensively not defensively. Vaccinating old people in care homes first is a defensive strategy, it protects those people and only them. Vaccinating teachers protects all of them plus kids, their parents and their own families. Vaccinating pharmacists protects all of the people who need medicine dispensed.
We started off using rapid testing defensively by only using it for care homes, that strategy didn't work and now the government has changed to use it to go out and find the virus. Vaccination is the same it needs to go out and find the virus and super spreaders so everyone benefits immediately.
Don't forget that nobody is entirely sure that being vaccinated stops you spreading it. That wasn't tested for in the trials.
Indeed Max's strategy works if you're seeking a zero COVID strategy.
Vaccinating the vulnerable and workers who work with the vulnerable works if you're seeking to get life back to normal.
The virus will still be circulating in the spring but not many will be getting hospitalised so we can get back to normal. That's in everyone's interests. The young benefit more from grandpa being vaccinated and them getting to live like normal again than they benefit from being vaccinated themselves but still needing to stay at home so that grandpa doesn't get it.
The whole point in vaccinating super spreaders first is that you rapidly bring the R down and the virus burns itself out while you vaccinate the wider population. It actually saves most lives and allows people to get on with life at the same time. If tomorrow we were able to get the R down to 0.3 overnight the whole nation immediately benefits from the vaccine. If we use it to vaccinate a few old people then only those few old people benefit because community transmission is still very high and restrictions can't be eased. It's not just old people that die of this, anyone over 60 has medium risk and anyone who is overweight (40% of the nation) is at medium risk. The restrictions don't disappear because the over 80s are immune.
If you want to hit R, perhaps vaccinating Welsh rugby club members first would be the best strategy? (again, assuming that vaccination actually stops spreading)
Anyway, I really don't think the government will be too keen on categorising people based on occupation. It is too much of a minefield.
We are locked down because too many people are in hospital, not because R is 1.1.
But there are people in hospitals because the R was 1.3 for ages. Bring the R down and the infection rate drops to what we had in the summer and COVID deaths become background noise and by targeting super spreaders for vaccination we can achieve this very quickly. What you want to do is prevent any more old people dying from this. What I'm suggesting makes COVID background noise the same as over the summer.
Stopping the old from dying makes COVID background noise too. Rapidly.
Plus if you get R down and lift restrictions then R will go back up and people will be hospitalised again.
No it doesn't because anyone over 60 is at medium risk and anyone who is overweight is at medium risk. The CFR for both cohorts is pretty high, especially the latter and the hospitalisation rate for the latter is very high. Vaccinating oldies does nothing for them and the restrictions continue until these people are protected as well which is going to take months. With limited supply the strategy needs to be about reducing the R as much as possible not protecting individuals.
Over 60s are scheduled to be vaccinated by February or March already themselves.
No the restrictions won't continue for months. R will be reduced rapidly anyway and hospitalisations will have been slashed. If a few young overweight people are getting the virus that can happen under either scenario but it won't be causing lockdowns as it won't be overloading the NHS.
Yes, they will. There is no way we will leave the tier system any time before the end of March and that's because the vaccine programme is designed to help a few individuals, not the whole nation.
There is not the slightest chance on earth we would leave the tier system before the end of March if we followed your proposal either. But following the existing proposal I would expect almost the entire country to be Tier 2 or below by Valentine's Day and almost all of it to be Tier 1 and thinking of removing Tiers by Mother's Day.
Stopping the vulnerable from filling hospitals is helping the whole nation. Since the whole nation is only under restrictions to stop the individuals from getting it and filling the hospitals!
You have no idea what you're talking about tbh, the majority of infections come from a very small proportion of people. The key to reducing the R to below 1 is to stop super spreader events. Vaccinating likely super spreaders is a no brainer and super spreader events are associated mostly with those professions and a few others. Vaccinating a few housebound old people isn't going to bring community infection down and while the hospitalisation rate will go down, oldies in care homes also benefit from care workers and NHS workers being vaccinated.
Using the vaccine, while it is limited in supply, for the biggest reduction of R is the best way to do this. Unfortunately we have pygmies and arse covering scientists in charge.
Max, not saying you are wrong, but what is the evidence that the majority of infections are from superspreaders? I know cases have been investigated but surely we can’t say that with such confidence? And does it also apply to other respiratory infections (cold/flu)?
Furthermore, how does @MaxPB propose we identify potential superspreaders so that they can be vaccinated early?
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
The whole of Brexit is a Falklands moment for Britain. As in, Argentina's Falklands moment.
The Conservatives will see a double digit poll lead on a deal with the EU, irrespective of how inferior it is to our still being members.
We won't be members, we would be an outside country that has a trade deal with the EU and the deal could be amended in the future if both parties agree.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
Labour shouldn't support it. It needs to be seen as fully and utterly a Tory mess.
Labour should absolutely support it. Say that any deal is better than no deal but they will be wanting to change things in a few years when they get elected but a deal is needed until then.
They will still be able to attack the Tories whenever they want. And the Tory backbenchers will feel freer to split.
A Brexiteer Tory writes...
Well yes. I've been very grateful for Labour not endorsing Theresa May's deal. If Boris's deal is a bad deal I'd want it rejecting and going to no deal.
But Labour aren't meant to be no dealers. So will they continue to be our useful idiots or will they rule out no deal and potentially split the right?
NHS front line staff Pharmacists Care workers Front line school and university workers Dentists
Then go onto the rest of the list of old people etc...
All of these people are in the front line and are most likely to get and spread the virus. Our vaccine deployment starting with old people and not NHS staff makes absolutely no sense, the government are letting "must save all lives at any cost" dictate this policy but risking a much longer term cost of having a higher R.
My fear is there will be a "VIP" of vaccination. That includes, I imagine, the Queen and Prince Philip as well as presumably Charles and Camilla. I can live with that but I wouldn't like to see celebrities and politicians vaccinated before care workers and NHS workers - the notion money or celebrity moves you up the pecking order is reprehensible.
The more criteria you add the more difficult it will be to get to the right people. Age is the easiest thing for the NHS to know about, and the simplest to organise by.
By the time you've worked out who is a 'front line school worker' you could have vaccinated 100k people. It isn't worth the effort trying to work it out.
Besides, as soon as you make a list like that, you generate questions. Do care workers include the hidden army caring for their own relatives? Should bus drivers be on that list because they were badly affected in the first wave? What about supermarket workers?
Just get on with it by age, and do it as fast as possible. Include NHS workers, especially those actually doing the vaccination. They aren't too difficult, because they can organise it amongst themselves.
As for the royals, I should think Prince Philip will be in the top few thousand by age anyway. And Charlie has already had the lurgy.
It's not that difficult, you send vaccination teams to all schools and universities.
The vaccine needs to be deployed offensively not defensively. Vaccinating old people in care homes first is a defensive strategy, it protects those people and only them. Vaccinating teachers protects all of them plus kids, their parents and their own families. Vaccinating pharmacists protects all of the people who need medicine dispensed.
We started off using rapid testing defensively by only using it for care homes, that strategy didn't work and now the government has changed to use it to go out and find the virus. Vaccination is the same it needs to go out and find the virus and super spreaders so everyone benefits immediately.
Don't forget that nobody is entirely sure that being vaccinated stops you spreading it. That wasn't tested for in the trials.
Indeed Max's strategy works if you're seeking a zero COVID strategy.
Vaccinating the vulnerable and workers who work with the vulnerable works if you're seeking to get life back to normal.
The virus will still be circulating in the spring but not many will be getting hospitalised so we can get back to normal. That's in everyone's interests. The young benefit more from grandpa being vaccinated and them getting to live like normal again than they benefit from being vaccinated themselves but still needing to stay at home so that grandpa doesn't get it.
The whole point in vaccinating super spreaders first is that you rapidly bring the R down and the virus burns itself out while you vaccinate the wider population. It actually saves most lives and allows people to get on with life at the same time. If tomorrow we were able to get the R down to 0.3 overnight the whole nation immediately benefits from the vaccine. If we use it to vaccinate a few old people then only those few old people benefit because community transmission is still very high and restrictions can't be eased. It's not just old people that die of this, anyone over 60 has medium risk and anyone who is overweight (40% of the nation) is at medium risk. The restrictions don't disappear because the over 80s are immune.
If you want to hit R, perhaps vaccinating Welsh rugby club members first would be the best strategy? (again, assuming that vaccination actually stops spreading)
Anyway, I really don't think the government will be too keen on categorising people based on occupation. It is too much of a minefield.
We are locked down because too many people are in hospital, not because R is 1.1.
But there are people in hospitals because the R was 1.3 for ages. Bring the R down and the infection rate drops to what we had in the summer and COVID deaths become background noise and by targeting super spreaders for vaccination we can achieve this very quickly. What you want to do is prevent any more old people dying from this. What I'm suggesting makes COVID background noise the same as over the summer.
Stopping the old from dying makes COVID background noise too. Rapidly.
Plus if you get R down and lift restrictions then R will go back up and people will be hospitalised again.
No it doesn't because anyone over 60 is at medium risk and anyone who is overweight is at medium risk. The CFR for both cohorts is pretty high, especially the latter and the hospitalisation rate for the latter is very high. Vaccinating oldies does nothing for them and the restrictions continue until these people are protected as well which is going to take months. With limited supply the strategy needs to be about reducing the R as much as possible not protecting individuals.
Over 60s are scheduled to be vaccinated by February or March already themselves.
No the restrictions won't continue for months. R will be reduced rapidly anyway and hospitalisations will have been slashed. If a few young overweight people are getting the virus that can happen under either scenario but it won't be causing lockdowns as it won't be overloading the NHS.
Yes, they will. There is no way we will leave the tier system any time before the end of March and that's because the vaccine programme is designed to help a few individuals, not the whole nation.
There is not the slightest chance on earth we would leave the tier system before the end of March if we followed your proposal either. But following the existing proposal I would expect almost the entire country to be Tier 2 or below by Valentine's Day and almost all of it to be Tier 1 and thinking of removing Tiers by Mother's Day.
Stopping the vulnerable from filling hospitals is helping the whole nation. Since the whole nation is only under restrictions to stop the individuals from getting it and filling the hospitals!
You have no idea what you're talking about tbh, the majority of infections come from a very small proportion of people. The key to reducing the R to below 1 is to stop super spreader events. Vaccinating likely super spreaders is a no brainer and super spreader events are associated mostly with those professions and a few others. Vaccinating a few housebound old people isn't going to bring community infection down and while the hospitalisation rate will go down, oldies in care homes also benefit from care workers and NHS workers being vaccinated.
Using the vaccine, while it is limited in supply, for the biggest reduction of R is the best way to do this. Unfortunately we have pygmies and arse covering scientists in charge.
Max, not saying you are wrong, but what is the evidence that the majority of infections are from superspreaders? I know cases have been investigated but surely we can’t say that with such confidence? And does it also apply to other respiratory infections (cold/flu)?
Furthermore, how does @MaxPB propose we identify potential superspreaders so that they can be vaccinated early?
I was wondering too. Perhaps they can self-identify by demonstrating their prowess in singing, shouting, coughing, sneezing and spitting.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
The whole of Brexit is a Falklands moment for Britain. As in, Argentina's Falklands moment.
The Conservatives will see a double digit poll lead on a deal with the EU, irrespective of how inferior it is to our still being members.
We won't be members, we would be an outside country that has a trade deal with the EU and the deal could be amended in the future if both parties agree.
I think you have missed my point. The relief at getting any deal, rather than no trade deal chaos will bolster Johnson's poll rating in the short term, even if that deal makes the nation significantly poorer than had we voted "remain" in 2016.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
Labour shouldn't support it. It needs to be seen as fully and utterly a Tory mess.
Labour should absolutely support it. Say that any deal is better than no deal but they will be wanting to change things in a few years when they get elected but a deal is needed until then.
They will still be able to attack the Tories whenever they want. And the Tory backbenchers will feel freer to split.
A Brexiteer Tory writes...
Well yes. I've been very grateful for Labour not endorsing Theresa May's deal. If Boris's deal is a bad deal I'd want it rejecting and going to no deal.
But Labour aren't meant to be no dealers. So will they continue to be our useful idiots or will they rule out no deal and potentially split the right?
I would like to say your second paragraph is wrong, but it isnt' Starmer will **** the bed!
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
The whole of Brexit is a Falklands moment for Britain. As in, Argentina's Falklands moment.
The Conservatives will see a double digit poll lead on a deal with the EU, irrespective of how inferior it is to our still being a member of the EU.
Yes, I think that is right - especially when it coincides with a positive plan for vaccine roll-out.
I very much doubt though that that lead will survive many months. A combination of the unavoidable fiscal pain to come, coupled with the ongong general ineptitude of this government is likely to have SKS in a healthy lead by the next GE, imo.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
The whole of Brexit is a Falklands moment for Britain. As in, Argentina's Falklands moment.
The Conservatives will see a double digit poll lead on a deal with the EU, irrespective of how inferior it is to our still being a member of the EU.
Yes, I think that is right - especially when it coincides with a positive plan for vaccine roll-out.
I very much doubt though that that lead will survive many months. A combination of the unavoidable fiscal pain to come, coupled with the ongong general ineptitude of this government is likely to have SKS in a healthy lead by the next GE, imo.
Agreed. When the furlough ends and the house of cards comes crashing down around us, I don't believe the Conservatives will remain ahead. I might be wrong, but I don't think even Johnson survives economic armageddon.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
The whole of Brexit is a Falklands moment for Britain. As in, Argentina's Falklands moment.
The Conservatives will see a double digit poll lead on a deal with the EU, irrespective of how inferior it is to our still being a member of the EU.
Why is that? I don't see intractible remainers holding up their hands and thinking it ok to return to the Tories as a deal was had after all, perhaps they'd gain a few points back from those who had feared incompetence would mean no deal, but against that you have the Faragist element. Will there really be that much of a change?
I do take Benpointer's, er, point, that in conjunction with a positive plan for vaccine rollout perhaps there will be a larger movement, though I'd also agree with him about longer term prospects in terms of Labour leads - though if it will be enough, I am uncertain of.
NHS front line staff Pharmacists Care workers Front line school and university workers Dentists
Then go onto the rest of the list of old people etc...
All of these people are in the front line and are most likely to get and spread the virus. Our vaccine deployment starting with old people and not NHS staff makes absolutely no sense, the government are letting "must save all lives at any cost" dictate this policy but risking a much longer term cost of having a higher R.
My fear is there will be a "VIP" of vaccination. That includes, I imagine, the Queen and Prince Philip as well as presumably Charles and Camilla. I can live with that but I wouldn't like to see celebrities and politicians vaccinated before care workers and NHS workers - the notion money or celebrity moves you up the pecking order is reprehensible.
The more criteria you add the more difficult it will be to get to the right people. Age is the easiest thing for the NHS to know about, and the simplest to organise by.
By the time you've worked out who is a 'front line school worker' you could have vaccinated 100k people. It isn't worth the effort trying to work it out.
Besides, as soon as you make a list like that, you generate questions. Do care workers include the hidden army caring for their own relatives? Should bus drivers be on that list because they were badly affected in the first wave? What about supermarket workers?
Just get on with it by age, and do it as fast as possible. Include NHS workers, especially those actually doing the vaccination. They aren't too difficult, because they can organise it amongst themselves.
As for the royals, I should think Prince Philip will be in the top few thousand by age anyway. And Charlie has already had the lurgy.
It's not that difficult, you send vaccination teams to all schools and universities.
The vaccine needs to be deployed offensively not defensively. Vaccinating old people in care homes first is a defensive strategy, it protects those people and only them. Vaccinating teachers protects all of them plus kids, their parents and their own families. Vaccinating pharmacists protects all of the people who need medicine dispensed.
We started off using rapid testing defensively by only using it for care homes, that strategy didn't work and now the government has changed to use it to go out and find the virus. Vaccination is the same it needs to go out and find the virus and super spreaders so everyone benefits immediately.
Don't forget that nobody is entirely sure that being vaccinated stops you spreading it. That wasn't tested for in the trials.
Indeed Max's strategy works if you're seeking a zero COVID strategy.
Vaccinating the vulnerable and workers who work with the vulnerable works if you're seeking to get life back to normal.
The virus will still be circulating in the spring but not many will be getting hospitalised so we can get back to normal. That's in everyone's interests. The young benefit more from grandpa being vaccinated and them getting to live like normal again than they benefit from being vaccinated themselves but still needing to stay at home so that grandpa doesn't get it.
The whole point in vaccinating super spreaders first is that you rapidly bring the R down and the virus burns itself out while you vaccinate the wider population. It actually saves most lives and allows people to get on with life at the same time. If tomorrow we were able to get the R down to 0.3 overnight the whole nation immediately benefits from the vaccine. If we use it to vaccinate a few old people then only those few old people benefit because community transmission is still very high and restrictions can't be eased. It's not just old people that die of this, anyone over 60 has medium risk and anyone who is overweight (40% of the nation) is at medium risk. The restrictions don't disappear because the over 80s are immune.
If you want to hit R, perhaps vaccinating Welsh rugby club members first would be the best strategy? (again, assuming that vaccination actually stops spreading)
Anyway, I really don't think the government will be too keen on categorising people based on occupation. It is too much of a minefield.
We are locked down because too many people are in hospital, not because R is 1.1.
But there are people in hospitals because the R was 1.3 for ages. Bring the R down and the infection rate drops to what we had in the summer and COVID deaths become background noise and by targeting super spreaders for vaccination we can achieve this very quickly. What you want to do is prevent any more old people dying from this. What I'm suggesting makes COVID background noise the same as over the summer.
Stopping the old from dying makes COVID background noise too. Rapidly.
Plus if you get R down and lift restrictions then R will go back up and people will be hospitalised again.
No it doesn't because anyone over 60 is at medium risk and anyone who is overweight is at medium risk. The CFR for both cohorts is pretty high, especially the latter and the hospitalisation rate for the latter is very high. Vaccinating oldies does nothing for them and the restrictions continue until these people are protected as well which is going to take months. With limited supply the strategy needs to be about reducing the R as much as possible not protecting individuals.
Over 60s are scheduled to be vaccinated by February or March already themselves.
No the restrictions won't continue for months. R will be reduced rapidly anyway and hospitalisations will have been slashed. If a few young overweight people are getting the virus that can happen under either scenario but it won't be causing lockdowns as it won't be overloading the NHS.
Yes, they will. There is no way we will leave the tier system any time before the end of March and that's because the vaccine programme is designed to help a few individuals, not the whole nation.
There is not the slightest chance on earth we would leave the tier system before the end of March if we followed your proposal either. But following the existing proposal I would expect almost the entire country to be Tier 2 or below by Valentine's Day and almost all of it to be Tier 1 and thinking of removing Tiers by Mother's Day.
Stopping the vulnerable from filling hospitals is helping the whole nation. Since the whole nation is only under restrictions to stop the individuals from getting it and filling the hospitals!
You have no idea what you're talking about tbh, the majority of infections come from a very small proportion of people. The key to reducing the R to below 1 is to stop super spreader events. Vaccinating likely super spreaders is a no brainer and super spreader events are associated mostly with those professions and a few others. Vaccinating a few housebound old people isn't going to bring community infection down and while the hospitalisation rate will go down, oldies in care homes also benefit from care workers and NHS workers being vaccinated.
Using the vaccine, while it is limited in supply, for the biggest reduction of R is the best way to do this. Unfortunately we have pygmies and arse covering scientists in charge.
Max, not saying you are wrong, but what is the evidence that the majority of infections are from superspreaders? I know cases have been investigated but surely we can’t say that with such confidence? And does it also apply to other respiratory infections (cold/flu)?
Furthermore, how does @MaxPB propose we identify potential superspreaders so that they can be vaccinated early?
I was wondering too. Perhaps they can self-identify by demonstrating their prowess in singing, shouting, coughing, sneezing and spitting.
In that case I'd be a world-class superspreader...
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
Labour shouldn't support it. It needs to be seen as fully and utterly a Tory mess.
Labour should absolutely support it. Say that any deal is better than no deal but they will be wanting to change things in a few years when they get elected but a deal is needed until then.
They will still be able to attack the Tories whenever they want. And the Tory backbenchers will feel freer to split.
Irrespective of what is agreed (or not agreed) now, this thing will be renegotiated 100 times, with us sometimes getting closer to the EU, and sometimes moving further apart. There will be integration that will stick, and will be infuriating to Farage, and there will be stuff that is tried, is unpopular, and is walked back from.
Basically, the next half century is going to be one round of negotiations after another with our continental neighbours. As, I suspect, is ever thus.
Playing the tier prediction game, here's my guess as to what things will look like when announced.
Let's hope the bolstered tier 2 does a job of work now.
T3: Greater Manchester (still), East Lancashire (as defined before), West Yorkshire, Teesside, ex-Humberside, Lincolnshire (except S.Kesteven & S.Holland), Leicester, Oadby & Blaby, Stoke & Staffordshire (all), S. Derbyshire, W. Mids Metro (except Coventry), Kent (all) T1: Cornwall only T2: Everywhere else
EU says it will ban imports of processed meat into island of Ireland. UK says it will reciprocate on imports from Ireland. Brown trouser time in Dublin.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
The whole of Brexit is a Falklands moment for Britain. As in, Argentina's Falklands moment.
The Conservatives will see a double digit poll lead on a deal with the EU, irrespective of how inferior it is to our still being a member of the EU.
Why is that? I don't see intractible remainers holding up their hands and thinking it ok to return to the Tories as a deal was had after all, perhaps they'd gain a few points back from those who had feared incompetence would mean no deal, but against that you have the Faragist element. Will there really be that much of a change?
I do take Benpointer's, er, point, that in conjunction with a positive plan for vaccine rollout perhaps there will be a larger movement, though I'd also agree with him about longer term prospects in terms of Labour leads - though if it will be enough, I am uncertain of.
I don't think the lead will be long lasting. Relief at a vaccine and a trade deal should boost Johnson, however it will soon subside at the realisation that we are well and truly up the creek.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
Labour shouldn't support it. It needs to be seen as fully and utterly a Tory mess.
Labour should absolutely support it. Say that any deal is better than no deal but they will be wanting to change things in a few years when they get elected but a deal is needed until then.
They will still be able to attack the Tories whenever they want. And the Tory backbenchers will feel freer to split.
Irrespective of what is agreed (or not agreed) now, this thing will be renegotiated 100 times, with us sometimes getting closer to the EU, and sometimes moving further apart. There will be integration that will stick, and will be infuriating to Farage, and there will be stuff that is tried, is unpopular, and is walked back from.
Basically, the next half century is going to be one round of negotiations after another with our continental neighbours. As, I suspect, is ever thus.
Not only with our continental neighbours, but with our celtic neighbours too.
Playing the tier prediction game, here's my guess as to what things will look like when announced.
Let's hope the bolstered tier 2 does a job of work now.
T3: Greater Manchester (still), East Lancashire (as defined before), West Yorkshire, Teesside, ex-Humberside, Lincolnshire (except S.Kesteven & S.Holland), Leicester, Oadby & Blaby, Stoke & Staffordshire (all), S. Derbyshire, W. Mids Metro (except Coventry), Kent (all) T1: Cornwall only T2: Everywhere else
All plausible.
Possibly a few other Tier 1s maybe Isle of Wight, possibly Norfolk
Lincolnshire maybe treated as Tier 3 in aggregate although this would be harsh on S Holland
Agree London Tier 2: 80% likely, position in E/SE London not brilliant and being affected by North Kent but overall position is of reasonable improvement in London
Playing the tier prediction game, here's my guess as to what things will look like when announced.
Let's hope the bolstered tier 2 does a job of work now.
T3: Greater Manchester (still), East Lancashire (as defined before), West Yorkshire, Teesside, ex-Humberside, Lincolnshire (except S.Kesteven & S.Holland), Leicester, Oadby & Blaby, Stoke & Staffordshire (all), S. Derbyshire, W. Mids Metro (except Coventry), Kent (all) T1: Cornwall only T2: Everywhere else
Liverpool T2?
Quite possible. The combination of T3 plus mass testing seems like it works so the idea of having mass testing available with T3 areas should help squish this.
Warrington and other parts of the NW might still be T3.
Playing the tier prediction game, here's my guess as to what things will look like when announced.
Let's hope the bolstered tier 2 does a job of work now.
T3: Greater Manchester (still), East Lancashire (as defined before), West Yorkshire, Teesside, ex-Humberside, Lincolnshire (except S.Kesteven & S.Holland), Leicester, Oadby & Blaby, Stoke & Staffordshire (all), S. Derbyshire, W. Mids Metro (except Coventry), Kent (all) T1: Cornwall only T2: Everywhere else
An awful lot of "red wall" in Tier 3 plus then. Chuck in Notts, N. Derbyshire, S. Yorkshire, Tyneside, Wearside and Durham and we have a full house.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
The whole of Brexit is a Falklands moment for Britain. As in, Argentina's Falklands moment.
The Conservatives will see a double digit poll lead on a deal with the EU, irrespective of how inferior it is to our still being a member of the EU.
Why is that? I don't see intractible remainers holding up their hands and thinking it ok to return to the Tories as a deal was had after all, perhaps they'd gain a few points back from those who had feared incompetence would mean no deal, but against that you have the Faragist element. Will there really be that much of a change?
I do take Benpointer's, er, point, that in conjunction with a positive plan for vaccine rollout perhaps there will be a larger movement, though I'd also agree with him about longer term prospects in terms of Labour leads - though if it will be enough, I am uncertain of.
I don't think the lead will be long lasting. Relief at a vaccine and a trade deal should boost Johnson, however it will soon subside at the realisation that we are well and truly up the creek.
I'm quite optimistic for next summer onwards.
I think we could have a Roaring Twenties coming up.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
That’s polite. Go off and... something.
Are you cunningly repositioning yourself as a centrist HY?
I voted Remain, I respected the Leave vote but have never been a No Dealer
When the last remaining remainers in a Tory cabinet, gauke, Hammond, about 30 gents and ladies were trussed up in dimly lit corridor, their shirts ripped to expose their nipples, and Cummings allowed to work on them with his portable soldering iron, I’m sure you said it was all perfectly necessary. Was it not you? Apologies if you didn’t support their expulsion for just the one rebellion of their careers.
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
Labour shouldn't support it. It needs to be seen as fully and utterly a Tory mess.
Labour should absolutely support it. Say that any deal is better than no deal but they will be wanting to change things in a few years when they get elected but a deal is needed until then.
They will still be able to attack the Tories whenever they want. And the Tory backbenchers will feel freer to split.
Irrespective of what is agreed (or not agreed) now, this thing will be renegotiated 100 times, with us sometimes getting closer to the EU, and sometimes moving further apart. There will be integration that will stick, and will be infuriating to Farage, and there will be stuff that is tried, is unpopular, and is walked back from.
Basically, the next half century is going to be one round of negotiations after another with our continental neighbours. As, I suspect, is ever thus.
Not only with our continental neighbours, but with our celtic neighbours too.
Out celtic neighbours, bar the Republic, will remain firmly part of the UK, devolution only goes so far
He has a majority of 80 and can get it through regardless, the diehards can go off and join Farage
The blue collar Tories I rub shoulders with will see the trade deal as Johnson's second Falklands moment in a week (after the vaccine).
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
Labour shouldn't support it. It needs to be seen as fully and utterly a Tory mess.
Labour should absolutely support it. Say that any deal is better than no deal but they will be wanting to change things in a few years when they get elected but a deal is needed until then.
They will still be able to attack the Tories whenever they want. And the Tory backbenchers will feel freer to split.
Irrespective of what is agreed (or not agreed) now, this thing will be renegotiated 100 times, with us sometimes getting closer to the EU, and sometimes moving further apart. There will be integration that will stick, and will be infuriating to Farage, and there will be stuff that is tried, is unpopular, and is walked back from.
Basically, the next half century is going to be one round of negotiations after another with our continental neighbours. As, I suspect, is ever thus.
Not only with our continental neighbours, but with our celtic neighbours too.
All will be covered by our negotiations with the EU.
"In August the EU’s executive Commission, which co-leads talks with vaccine makers on behalf of member states, said it had held preliminary talks with Moderna over a deal for 80 million doses and an option for 80 million more."
Comments
Stopping the vulnerable from filling hospitals is helping the whole nation. Since the whole nation is only under restrictions to stop the individuals from getting it and filling the hospitals!
https://twitter.com/libmeyer/status/1331317946954739718?s=19
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1331344369996214275?s=20
Using the vaccine, while it is limited in supply, for the biggest reduction of R is the best way to do this. Unfortunately we have pygmies and arse covering scientists in charge.
Biden has been matched at 1.02 that's 50/1on in old money. Turnover is approaching £1Billion.
Have these Tory MPs learned nowt from their colleagues in Greater Manchester?
Not surprisingly, no.
It was unfortunately a case of indistinguished idiot from Wales demonstrates ignorance of Twitter.
Beyond ridiculous now.
I wonder if I can get a refund for all that "no deal" bog roll?
What about the tier 1 and 2 areas? Numbers were barrelling out of control there, weren't they?
Vaccinating them has an immediate impact on R and hospitalisations and deaths. There is no reason not to do it.
Are you cunningly repositioning yourself as a centrist HY?
I'll have you know there is some slight evidence that I act maturely within some some comments, I think.
As in, Argentina's Falklands moment.
https://twitter.com/MorningConsult/status/1331349374178385922?s=20
I do wonder about the 5% of Democrats who think he shouldn't concede ever.....
"markets will be settled on the official result of the relevant governing body"
They will still be able to attack the Tories whenever they want. And the Tory backbenchers will feel freer to split.
They could rule that the college is invalid and that congress has to hold a contingent election, but that's excluded in Betfair's rules.
The college meets (remotely) on 14th of December when each state's electors attend their state capitals to cast their votes.
The votes are officially counted by Congress after their new session starts in early January but that's a formality, the details of the vote will already be public knowledge.
The Tories on here have been very persuasive that rejecting Mrs May's WA deal, and allowing the prospect of no deal Brexit was entirely the fault of Labour.
(I was trying to be reasonably objective)
My worry is that the misapplication of the tiers comes under one of two categories:
1. Tiers 1&2 just don't work and nowhere should be under them, or
2. Tiers 1&2 are applicable but we've nobody in charge who is able or willing to make the right choice.
But what do I know? There are hand-waving arguments for a mutable conclusion. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. If I had any decision to make other than to walk clockwise round the block or anticlockwise, I'd dig into the data and find out what I need to know.
But Labour aren't meant to be no dealers. So will they continue to be our useful idiots or will they rule out no deal and potentially split the right?
New Tier 3 is more like Scotland Tier 4, is it not? Hopefully sufficient to prevent an undoing of the good work over lockdown.
But then the big undoing turns up in a naff jumper and a Santa hat.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1331353629991768071?s=19
I very much doubt though that that lead will survive many months. A combination of the unavoidable fiscal pain to come, coupled with the ongong general ineptitude of this government is likely to have SKS in a healthy lead by the next GE, imo.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/11/24/rishi-sunak-unveil-43-billion-package-get-one-million-back-work/
A full deck of fifty-two.
And each one, a knave.
I do take Benpointer's, er, point, that in conjunction with a positive plan for vaccine rollout perhaps there will be a larger movement, though I'd also agree with him about longer term prospects in terms of Labour leads - though if it will be enough, I am uncertain of.
--AS
Basically, the next half century is going to be one round of negotiations after another with our continental neighbours. As, I suspect, is ever thus.
Let's hope the bolstered tier 2 does a job of work now.
T3: Greater Manchester (still), East Lancashire (as defined before), West Yorkshire, Teesside, ex-Humberside, Lincolnshire (except S.Kesteven & S.Holland), Leicester, Oadby & Blaby, Stoke & Staffordshire (all), S. Derbyshire, W. Mids Metro (except Coventry), Kent (all)
T1: Cornwall only
T2: Everywhere else
https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1123/1180052-connelly-brexit-latest/
Interesting.
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1331261330859438080?s=20
Possibly a few other Tier 1s maybe Isle of Wight, possibly Norfolk
Lincolnshire maybe treated as Tier 3 in aggregate although this would be harsh on S Holland
Agree London Tier 2: 80% likely, position in E/SE London not brilliant and being affected by North Kent but overall position is of reasonable improvement in London
Quite possible. The combination of T3 plus mass testing seems like it works so the idea of having mass testing available with T3 areas should help squish this.
Warrington and other parts of the NW might still be T3.
https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1331205786031300610?s=20
Never mind that: A chancellor in a hoodie... wtf?
* Just realised that somebody could infer that as racist in some way. Hope i don't get cancelled.
I think we could have a Roaring Twenties coming up.