Going abroad from Britain will soon be illegal. Illegal. Against the law. Like in North Korea presumably.
Wow.
But hey. You have a vaccine that protects you from a disease you almost certainly wouldn't die from.
So that's alright then.
I assume you didn't see the risk of deafness in people who survive Covid then?
What point are you making? We all know that Covid kills and Covid can have myriad long-term effects when it doesn't kill. Vaccines are (were?) the silver bullet to restore civil liberties. We have the vaccines - they never were never going to be 100% effective - and some people were always going to refuse them/unable to have them - now give us our liberties back - and allow individuals to take responsibility for one's own health.
Its worth doing some fairly basic mathematical modelling on what would happen if we ended restrictions today.
We've 44% of the population jabbed at a level which gives them a ~70% reduction in their chances of being able to spread the virus. Given R0 was probably about 3, R would jump to around (1-(0.44*0.7))*3, or about 2. The doubling time with R=3 was about 7 days, so we'd expect a doubling time with R=2 of about 10days.
Cases currently are at about 5k daily, to get to the December peak of about 60k daily cases is 3.5 doublings, so about 35 days, so we'd expect to be seeing 60k cases a day the end of April.
At 60k cases a day, we got a peak of about 4k daily hospital admissions. Now we've vaccinated ~90% of those likely to be admitted with a vaccine about 85% likely to prevent hospitalisation, so we should actually see 4k * (1-(.9*.85) admissions, or 900 admissions a day.
It's another 3 doublings to that 4k admission point that would represent the NHS, being overrun. At that point we're at 500k infections a day.
This is all presuming no seasonal effects, no attempts by anyone to reduce any risk, and that we cease vaccination entirely tomorrow.
In reality, by mid May we'll have jabbed about another 18 million (15% of the population, so another 12% off R), some of the more timid population will still be in hiding, and the weather would be with us. Add in some WFH (probably baked in anyway) and maybe some very minor social distancing (say masks in supermarkets and on public transport) and its very unlikely that the caseload would ever top out the NHS's capacity.
Given all this, we should massively accelerate opening up - maybe not ditch everything tomorrow, but say shops next Monday, pubs at Easter, and all restrictions gone* mid May.
*Except foreign travel. You should be free to go wherever you like, but 2 weeks hotel isolation on entering the country, no exceptions, until most of the rest of the world is jabbed - importing a vaccine resistant variant is the only big risk, and we should manage things accordingly.
I like your posts. I was with up until the last bit. Importing a vaccine resistant variant - or indeed a different virus entirely - is a risk that we live with always. That has always been and will always be. We will be hit again. That is almost certain, we will not stop encroaching into rainforests, for example. When it does happen again we cannot react like we have this time. For one thing the extraordinary debt that we have incurred cannot be repeated.
There is an order of magnitude different level of risk of picking up a new virus unexpectedly from the rainforest, and picking up a new variant from Magaluf during a pandemic while cases are rampant there.
Going abroad from Britain will soon be illegal. Illegal. Against the law. Like in North Korea presumably.
Wow.
But hey. You have a vaccine that protects you from a disease you almost certainly wouldn't die from.
So that's alright then.
I assume you didn't see the risk of deafness in people who survive Covid then?
What point are you making? We all know that Covid kills and Covid can have myriad long-term effects when it doesn't kill. Vaccines are (were?) the silver bullet to restore civil liberties. We have the vaccines - they never were never going to be 100% effective - and some people were always going to refuse them/unable to have them - now give us our liberties back - and allow individuals to take responsibility for one's own health.
Its worth doing some fairly basic mathematical modelling on what would happen if we ended restrictions today.
We've 44% of the population jabbed at a level which gives them a ~70% reduction in their chances of being able to spread the virus. Given R0 was probably about 3, R would jump to around (1-(0.44*0.7))*3, or about 2. The doubling time with R=3 was about 7 days, so we'd expect a doubling time with R=2 of about 10days.
Cases currently are at about 5k daily, to get to the December peak of about 60k daily cases is 3.5 doublings, so about 35 days, so we'd expect to be seeing 60k cases a day the end of April.
At 60k cases a day, we got a peak of about 4k daily hospital admissions. Now we've vaccinated ~90% of those likely to be admitted with a vaccine about 85% likely to prevent hospitalisation, so we should actually see 4k * (1-(.9*.85) admissions, or 900 admissions a day.
It's another 3 doublings to that 4k admission point that would represent the NHS, being overrun. At that point we're at 500k infections a day.
This is all presuming no seasonal effects, no attempts by anyone to reduce any risk, and that we cease vaccination entirely tomorrow.
In reality, by mid May we'll have jabbed about another 18 million (15% of the population, so another 12% off R), some of the more timid population will still be in hiding, and the weather would be with us. Add in some WFH (probably baked in anyway) and maybe some very minor social distancing (say masks in supermarkets and on public transport) and its very unlikely that the caseload would ever top out the NHS's capacity.
Given all this, we should massively accelerate opening up - maybe not ditch everything tomorrow, but say shops next Monday, pubs at Easter, and all restrictions gone* mid May.
*Except foreign travel. You should be free to go wherever you like, but 2 weeks hotel isolation on entering the country, no exceptions, until most of the rest of the world is jabbed - importing a vaccine resistant variant is the only big risk, and we should manage things accordingly.
I like your posts. I was with up until the last bit. Importing a vaccine resistant variant - or indeed a different virus entirely - is a risk that we live with always. That has always been and will always be. We will be hit again. That is almost certain, we will not stop encroaching into rainforests, for example. When it does happen again we cannot react like we have this time. For one thing the extraordinary debt that we have incurred cannot be repeated.
There is an order of magnitude different level of risk of picking up a new virus unexpectedly from the rainforest, and picking up a new variant from Magaluf during a pandemic while cases are rampant there.
It still amounts to curtailing civil liberties based on what might be rather than what is. And in any case the silver bullet is not the silver bullet then eh?
Should have been 3 down....now about that essy run rate required.
Kohli missing that run out is worse than him dropping the chance. Even though the catch was spilled the batsman knew nothing about that and wasn't attempting to get back to the crease until long after Kohli threw at the stumps. A second more to take aim and get it on target and he'd have been well out.
Going abroad from Britain will soon be illegal. Illegal. Against the law. Like in North Korea presumably.
Wow.
But hey. You have a vaccine that protects you from a disease you almost certainly wouldn't die from.
So that's alright then.
I assume you didn't see the risk of deafness in people who survive Covid then?
What point are you making? We all know that Covid kills and Covid can have myriad long-term effects when it doesn't kill. Vaccines are (were?) the silver bullet to restore civil liberties. We have the vaccines - they never were never going to be 100% effective - and some people were always going to refuse them/unable to have them - now give us our liberties back - and allow individuals to take responsibility for one's own health.
Its worth doing some fairly basic mathematical modelling on what would happen if we ended restrictions today.
We've 44% of the population jabbed at a level which gives them a ~70% reduction in their chances of being able to spread the virus. Given R0 was probably about 3, R would jump to around (1-(0.44*0.7))*3, or about 2. The doubling time with R=3 was about 7 days, so we'd expect a doubling time with R=2 of about 10days.
Cases currently are at about 5k daily, to get to the December peak of about 60k daily cases is 3.5 doublings, so about 35 days, so we'd expect to be seeing 60k cases a day the end of April.
At 60k cases a day, we got a peak of about 4k daily hospital admissions. Now we've vaccinated ~90% of those likely to be admitted with a vaccine about 85% likely to prevent hospitalisation, so we should actually see 4k * (1-(.9*.85) admissions, or 900 admissions a day.
It's another 3 doublings to that 4k admission point that would represent the NHS, being overrun. At that point we're at 500k infections a day.
This is all presuming no seasonal effects, no attempts by anyone to reduce any risk, and that we cease vaccination entirely tomorrow.
In reality, by mid May we'll have jabbed about another 18 million (15% of the population, so another 12% off R), some of the more timid population will still be in hiding, and the weather would be with us. Add in some WFH (probably baked in anyway) and maybe some very minor social distancing (say masks in supermarkets and on public transport) and its very unlikely that the caseload would ever top out the NHS's capacity.
Given all this, we should massively accelerate opening up - maybe not ditch everything tomorrow, but say shops next Monday, pubs at Easter, and all restrictions gone* mid May.
*Except foreign travel. You should be free to go wherever you like, but 2 weeks hotel isolation on entering the country, no exceptions, until most of the rest of the world is jabbed - importing a vaccine resistant variant is the only big risk, and we should manage things accordingly.
I like your posts. I was with up until the last bit. Importing a vaccine resistant variant - or indeed a different virus entirely - is a risk that we live with always. That has always been and will always be. We will be hit again. That is almost certain, we will not stop encroaching into rainforests, for example. When it does happen again we cannot react like we have this time. For one thing the extraordinary debt that we have incurred cannot be repeated.
There is an order of magnitude different level of risk of picking up a new virus unexpectedly from the rainforest, and picking up a new variant from Magaluf during a pandemic while cases are rampant there.
It still amounts to curtailing civil liberties based on what might be rather than what is. And in any case the silver bullet is not the silver bullet then eh?
No, its about what is. The pandemic is raging right now, that is what is happening not what might be happening.
Going abroad from Britain will soon be illegal. Illegal. Against the law. Like in North Korea presumably.
Wow.
But hey. You have a vaccine that protects you from a disease you almost certainly wouldn't die from.
So that's alright then.
I assume you didn't see the risk of deafness in people who survive Covid then?
What point are you making? We all know that Covid kills and Covid can have myriad long-term effects when it doesn't kill. Vaccines are (were?) the silver bullet to restore civil liberties. We have the vaccines - they never were never going to be 100% effective - and some people were always going to refuse them/unable to have them - now give us our liberties back - and allow individuals to take responsibility for one's own health.
Its worth doing some fairly basic mathematical modelling on what would happen if we ended restrictions today.
We've 44% of the population jabbed at a level which gives them a ~70% reduction in their chances of being able to spread the virus. Given R0 was probably about 3, R would jump to around (1-(0.44*0.7))*3, or about 2. The doubling time with R=3 was about 7 days, so we'd expect a doubling time with R=2 of about 10days.
Cases currently are at about 5k daily, to get to the December peak of about 60k daily cases is 3.5 doublings, so about 35 days, so we'd expect to be seeing 60k cases a day the end of April.
At 60k cases a day, we got a peak of about 4k daily hospital admissions. Now we've vaccinated ~90% of those likely to be admitted with a vaccine about 85% likely to prevent hospitalisation, so we should actually see 4k * (1-(.9*.85) admissions, or 900 admissions a day.
It's another 3 doublings to that 4k admission point that would represent the NHS, being overrun. At that point we're at 500k infections a day.
This is all presuming no seasonal effects, no attempts by anyone to reduce any risk, and that we cease vaccination entirely tomorrow.
In reality, by mid May we'll have jabbed about another 18 million (15% of the population, so another 12% off R), some of the more timid population will still be in hiding, and the weather would be with us. Add in some WFH (probably baked in anyway) and maybe some very minor social distancing (say masks in supermarkets and on public transport) and its very unlikely that the caseload would ever top out the NHS's capacity.
Given all this, we should massively accelerate opening up - maybe not ditch everything tomorrow, but say shops next Monday, pubs at Easter, and all restrictions gone* mid May.
*Except foreign travel. You should be free to go wherever you like, but 2 weeks hotel isolation on entering the country, no exceptions, until most of the rest of the world is jabbed - importing a vaccine resistant variant is the only big risk, and we should manage things accordingly.
I like your posts. I was with up until the last bit. Importing a vaccine resistant variant - or indeed a different virus entirely - is a risk that we live with always. That has always been and will always be. We will be hit again. That is almost certain, we will not stop encroaching into rainforests, for example. When it does happen again we cannot react like we have this time. For one thing the extraordinary debt that we have incurred cannot be repeated.
There is an order of magnitude different level of risk of picking up a new virus unexpectedly from the rainforest, and picking up a new variant from Magaluf during a pandemic while cases are rampant there.
It still amounts to curtailing civil liberties based on what might be rather than what is. And in any case the silver bullet is not the silver bullet then eh?
No, its about what is. The pandemic is raging right now, that is what is happening not what might be happening.
Well we're not going to agree on this - but we agree on most other things so I guess that's ok.
Muppet would be more apposite. Whose puppet is he supposed to be?
There is a clear negative correlation between things that have gone well and things with which the clown has had direct hands on involvement.
Critics blame people they dislike for mistakes and don’t credit them for things they get right. But I’d say the public tend to over blame for mistakes and over credit positives
Going abroad from Britain will soon be illegal. Illegal. Against the law. Like in North Korea presumably.
Wow.
But hey. You have a vaccine that protects you from a disease you almost certainly wouldn't die from.
So that's alright then.
It won't be if you have a reasonable excuse.
You shouldn't really need one to leave a country. To come back in, perhaps. Just as you shouldn't really need one to go to Wales, or to see your parents.
We all decide how far state extension of powers is too far, and to what extent current circumstances justify this changing. Contrarian just draws his line slightly further along the scale.
I agree with you about criminalising leaving the country. I guess the thinking is that if you are a British citizen and/or resident then you can't be stopped from coming back in, but I do think it's a bad law.
To me, as a small c conservative libertarian, the ultimate test of authoritarianism is when a country bans its citizens from leaving the country. This is the ultimate no no as far as I am concerned and it appalls me that the UK is pursuing it, regardless of exigency.
Would you prefer the Australian method of banning them from returning to the country?
Short answer, yes. But I'd prefer the option of mandatory and enforced quarantine upon return at the traveller's expense.
Agree. I'm very uncomfortable with banning people from leaving a country. Making mandatory enforced quarantine a condition of entry or re-entry would be far better and more proportionate. The intent is to avoid importing new variants; I get that. So entry is the point where the focus needs to be. If people want to bugger off to Brazil, they can go, for all I care. It's their life and their free choice.
It's just their re-entry that needs the controls applied.
We have a Red List of countries, ten days quarantine for other returnees, negative PCR test before arrival - and still that's not enough to quench the thirst of what is looking to me like a vendetta against travellers fueled by irrational fears, bitterness and envy.
I am quite surprised how often I have had to gently remind several of those who I love dearly to give others a break, rather than rail about 'groups of teenagers milling about', 'two families clearly having a walk at the beach' or 'lots of cars gone for Mother's day'. My other-half is a lovely, rational, logical, none-interfering being, but can't stop criticising people for wearing their mask wrongly.
I find it all rather sinister, and totally contradicts what my Balliol history Tutor said to me ('don't worry, it wouldn't happen here) when we were talking about the rise of Fascism and I said I was utterly depressed about humanity.
Despite our self delusions there’s no reason to believe the experience of occupation would have been any different here from the rest of Europe. For example the handful of Germans occupying the Channel Islands received more denunciations than they could deal with.
The channel islands was an interesting study. Madeleine something called it 'The Model Occupation', as in a model for what could have happened if the mainland had been invaded. Her contention was that we'd have been much as the Europeans were a mix of reactions. She also pointed out a lack of serious resistance on the islands, although others have suggested that the relatively small size of the islands and relatively high number of german troops made it a much more difficult place to mount resistance campaigns, and this is surely correct. Much of occupied France was not that heavily garrisoned. At the end of the day we'll never know...
Madeleine Bunting. An interesting analysis, but not without it's flaws, as you point out. In addition the Channel Islands had been ordered not to resist - much good did it do them - the German bombing of St Peter Port Harbour after demilitarisation was proportionately a much worse event than 9/11 (tomato lorries mistaken for military trucks) - the British had not told the Germans they were demilitarised. While polite society nowadays refers to "the Nazi occupation" here it's "the German occupation". And for much of it it was reasonably civilised - but after the Normandy landings the Channel Islands were cut off from mainland Europe and left to starve. There's an apartment block in St Peter Port named after the Red Cross ship that delivered food parcels.
Prince Harry has been given a job by a $1bn (£730m) Silicon Valley startup which provides professional coaching, mental health advice and “immersive learning” as its chief impact officer.
The Duke of Sussex said he hoped to be able to “create impact in people’s lives” by working with BetterUp to provide “proactive coaching” for personal development, increased awareness and “an all-round better life”.
It is the Duke’s first formal position at a private company since he stepped down from being a working member of the royal family a year ago
Prince Harry has been given a job by a $1bn (£730m) Silicon Valley startup which provides professional coaching, mental health advice and “immersive learning” as its chief impact officer.
The Duke of Sussex said he hoped to be able to “create impact in people’s lives” by working with BetterUp to provide “proactive coaching” for personal development, increased awareness and “an all-round better life”.
It is the Duke’s first formal position at a private company since he stepped down from being a working member of the royal family a year ago
Prince Harry has been given a job by a $1bn (£730m) Silicon Valley startup which provides professional coaching, mental health advice and “immersive learning” as its chief impact officer.
The Duke of Sussex said he hoped to be able to “create impact in people’s lives” by working with BetterUp to provide “proactive coaching” for personal development, increased awareness and “an all-round better life”.
It is the Duke’s first formal position at a private company since he stepped down from being a working member of the royal family a year ago
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
Prince Harry has been given a job by a $1bn (£730m) Silicon Valley startup which provides professional coaching, mental health advice and “immersive learning” as its chief impact officer.
The Duke of Sussex said he hoped to be able to “create impact in people’s lives” by working with BetterUp to provide “proactive coaching” for personal development, increased awareness and “an all-round better life”.
It is the Duke’s first formal position at a private company since he stepped down from being a working member of the royal family a year ago
He need not worry - the great and good on here have declared that Boris is a clown and a muppet. So there!
People don’t get sacked from cushy public sector jobs for being rubbish, so Sir Keir is safe. In the real world he’d get binned so they can get someone half good in before the next GE
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
Going abroad from Britain will soon be illegal. Illegal. Against the law. Like in North Korea presumably.
Wow.
But hey. You have a vaccine that protects you from a disease you almost certainly wouldn't die from.
So that's alright then.
I assume you didn't see the risk of deafness in people who survive Covid then?
What point are you making? We all know that Covid kills and Covid can have myriad long-term effects when it doesn't kill. Vaccines are (were?) the silver bullet to restore civil liberties. We have the vaccines - they never were never going to be 100% effective - and some people were always going to refuse them/unable to have them - now give us our liberties back - and allow individuals to take responsibility for one's own health.
Its worth doing some fairly basic mathematical modelling on what would happen if we ended restrictions today.
We've 44% of the population jabbed at a level which gives them a ~70% reduction in their chances of being able to spread the virus. Given R0 was probably about 3, R would jump to around (1-(0.44*0.7))*3, or about 2. The doubling time with R=3 was about 7 days, so we'd expect a doubling time with R=2 of about 10days.
Cases currently are at about 5k daily, to get to the December peak of about 60k daily cases is 3.5 doublings, so about 35 days, so we'd expect to be seeing 60k cases a day the end of April.
At 60k cases a day, we got a peak of about 4k daily hospital admissions. Now we've vaccinated ~90% of those likely to be admitted with a vaccine about 85% likely to prevent hospitalisation, so we should actually see 4k * (1-(.9*.85) admissions, or 900 admissions a day.
It's another 3 doublings to that 4k admission point that would represent the NHS, being overrun. At that point we're at 500k infections a day.
This is all presuming no seasonal effects, no attempts by anyone to reduce any risk, and that we cease vaccination entirely tomorrow.
In reality, by mid May we'll have jabbed about another 18 million (15% of the population, so another 12% off R), some of the more timid population will still be in hiding, and the weather would be with us. Add in some WFH (probably baked in anyway) and maybe some very minor social distancing (say masks in supermarkets and on public transport) and its very unlikely that the caseload would ever top out the NHS's capacity.
Given all this, we should massively accelerate opening up - maybe not ditch everything tomorrow, but say shops next Monday, pubs at Easter, and all restrictions gone* mid May.
*Except foreign travel. You should be free to go wherever you like, but 2 weeks hotel isolation on entering the country, no exceptions, until most of the rest of the world is jabbed - importing a vaccine resistant variant is the only big risk, and we should manage things accordingly.
I think ICU admissions will be the main thing to watch.
From the ICNARC report, around 24% were Groups 1-4, 60% Groups 5-9, and 16% the rest. Right now, Groups 1-4 should have that 85% protection and about a third of Groups 5-9. (About two thirds of the latter have been jabbed, but the second third haven't had the time since dose).
Unlocking now would leave 63% of the ICU group vulnerable. Unlocking in three weeks would leave 45% of them vulnerable Unlocking in five weeks would leave 29% of them vulnerable
(Call it 60%, 45%, 30%)
We'll also need to have the R-decrease by immunity ramp up to 44% of the population over time (as 3 weeks ago, it was 30%, ramping up quite quickly, so the R decrease would be lower as of now. However, partly balancing that we have the immunity from acquired infection, which is probably at least 25% of the population with similar R decrease. Depending on how high the transmissibility of B1.1.1.7 is, R would be between 2.1 and 2.5.
It would be decreasing steadily over the next three weeks, though.
So opening up now would have a doubling rate of around 4 days. (The period for R=2 seems to be c. 5 days) Peak weekly admissions to ICU were about 2500 per day.
At 5500 cases per day, we're 3.5 doublings away from the 60,000 cases per day peak; that's 14 days, although in that time, R would drop by about a further 0.2. That might slow it to 16 days. That's not quite enough time to get the currently-jabbed up to strong protection; call it around the 55% reduction level. One further doubling (4 days; call it 5 by now) would get to the point of exceeding the peak on ICU admissions.
Or, to put it another way, if we dropped all restrictions today and everyone went back immediately to normal life (I'd expect it to be a bit tentative from some), we could expect the ICUs to have a greater influx of critically ill patients than at the peak within 3 weeks.
It's all coming down to Halix supplies being redirected to the EU so they can claim victory. It will trash their reputation amongst pharma and slow us down a little (But not disastrously so). That's the endgame here, convinced of it.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
Going abroad from Britain will soon be illegal. Illegal. Against the law. Like in North Korea presumably.
Wow.
But hey. You have a vaccine that protects you from a disease you almost certainly wouldn't die from.
So that's alright then.
I assume you didn't see the risk of deafness in people who survive Covid then?
What point are you making? We all know that Covid kills and Covid can have myriad long-term effects when it doesn't kill. Vaccines are (were?) the silver bullet to restore civil liberties. We have the vaccines - they never were never going to be 100% effective - and some people were always going to refuse them/unable to have them - now give us our liberties back - and allow individuals to take responsibility for one's own health.
Its worth doing some fairly basic mathematical modelling on what would happen if we ended restrictions today.
We've 44% of the population jabbed at a level which gives them a ~70% reduction in their chances of being able to spread the virus. Given R0 was probably about 3, R would jump to around (1-(0.44*0.7))*3, or about 2. The doubling time with R=3 was about 7 days, so we'd expect a doubling time with R=2 of about 10days.
Cases currently are at about 5k daily, to get to the December peak of about 60k daily cases is 3.5 doublings, so about 35 days, so we'd expect to be seeing 60k cases a day the end of April.
At 60k cases a day, we got a peak of about 4k daily hospital admissions. Now we've vaccinated ~90% of those likely to be admitted with a vaccine about 85% likely to prevent hospitalisation, so we should actually see 4k * (1-(.9*.85) admissions, or 900 admissions a day.
It's another 3 doublings to that 4k admission point that would represent the NHS, being overrun. At that point we're at 500k infections a day.
This is all presuming no seasonal effects, no attempts by anyone to reduce any risk, and that we cease vaccination entirely tomorrow.
In reality, by mid May we'll have jabbed about another 18 million (15% of the population, so another 12% off R), some of the more timid population will still be in hiding, and the weather would be with us. Add in some WFH (probably baked in anyway) and maybe some very minor social distancing (say masks in supermarkets and on public transport) and its very unlikely that the caseload would ever top out the NHS's capacity.
Given all this, we should massively accelerate opening up - maybe not ditch everything tomorrow, but say shops next Monday, pubs at Easter, and all restrictions gone* mid May.
*Except foreign travel. You should be free to go wherever you like, but 2 weeks hotel isolation on entering the country, no exceptions, until most of the rest of the world is jabbed - importing a vaccine resistant variant is the only big risk, and we should manage things accordingly.
Have you also taken into account immunity from prior infections - which must be, what, 30% of the unvaccinated population?
No, mostly because I didn't want a post pages long trying to account for everything. We've not got perfect data, but there have been about 4.3 million positive tests in the UK, or about 6.5% of the population. If you said that's only half of actual cases (optimistic, it's probably more than half), that's 13%. About half of those cases will be in people who have now been vaccinated, so take them out to avoid double counting, and you're back to 6.5% at best.
That's good for reducing R, but it's hardly a game changer - it takes our 10 day doubling time, and moves it out to about 10.5 days.
Journalists who responded to every piece of state authoritarianism with 'why don't you go further?' suddenly wonder why government is acting in a high handed manner.
Journalists who responded to every piece of state authoritarianism with 'why don't you go further?' suddenly wonder why government is acting in a high handed manner.
People scream on here: "but lockdowns work. Go Government". As if that is the most important aspect to all this legislation.
And before they know it they are faced with some measure or other which breeches their own red lines and then they say "well they can't do that". But they already have. And then they look around frantically for Steve Baker of all people to come and rescue them/us all.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
People have already sacrificed a a year to this virus, and now they are being told they must forgo any chance of an escape abroad over the summer because of the nebulous threat of vaccine resistant variants (all vaccines prevent serious disease in all variants, any new variant could just as easily spring up in the UK). People are well within their rights to want a foreign trip this summer (and of course its not exactly affordable for many to holiday in the UK anyway)
In any case, Foreign travel isn't just "holibobs". The UK has a large number of citizens abroad or citizens with family living abroad. I've got a 6 month old who was lucky enough to see my family once just before Xmas. Many other families havent even had that. If the borders to the UK remain closed through summer or there are extortionate quarantine hotels then my daughters grandparents will have basically missed the entirety of her first year. Now of course there may be situations where it really is necessary to shut the borders entirely, but there is a real human cost to every restriction that becomes harder to justify as more and more of the population are vaccinated. It should not be such an easy choice.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
So Cameron's LOTO ratings fell during the height of the New Labour boom when all was milk and honey, whereas Starmer's ratings have fallen during a national crisis in which every household has suffered and the government has been assailed from all sides...
And that comparison is supposed to be good news for Starmer? OK...
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
So Cameron's LOTO ratings fell during the height of the New Labour boom when all was milk and honey, whereas Starmer's ratings have fallen during a national crisis in which every household has suffered and the government has been assailed from all sides...
And that comparison is supposed to be good news for Starmer? OK...
I did think that! Maybe Sir Keir just needs a good financial crisis before people start to warm to him! Death & House Arrest are nothing
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
A wise and thoughtful analysis. I think this Redfield Wilton poll is an accurate reflection of current party support. However political party supporters seem to be very fickle at present, so I expect volatility over the next months.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
So Cameron's LOTO ratings fell during the height of the New Labour boom when all was milk and honey, whereas Starmer's ratings have fallen during a national crisis in which every household has suffered and the government has been assailed from all sides...
And that comparison is supposed to be good news for Starmer? OK...
I did think that! Maybe Sir Keir just needs a good financial crisis before people start to warm to him! Death & House Arrest are nothing
Actually that's not true, Dave's Tories led by 28% with some pollsters just before RBS went mammary glands up to behind Labour within a few months.
That no time for a novice line did resonate for a bit.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
So Cameron's LOTO ratings fell during the height of the New Labour boom when all was milk and honey, whereas Starmer's ratings have fallen during a national crisis in which every household has suffered and the government has been assailed from all sides...
And that comparison is supposed to be good news for Starmer? OK...
I did think that! Maybe Sir Keir just needs a good financial crisis before people start to warm to him! Death & House Arrest are nothing
Actually that's not true, Dave's Tories led by 28% with some pollsters just before RBS went mammary glands up to behind Labour within a few months.
That no time for a novice line did resonate for a bit.
But DC's personal ratings didn't suffer, they improved from Sep 2007 onwards
Meanwhile, for Net lovers, Boris approval is -3, and Sir Keir -13 (45-32 GP)
One theory doing the rounds is that the EU thought there would be no vaccines (well not this quickly) so they didn't want to spend money like we did building the infrastructure and covering the R&D and liability which would have been a great idea but for the fact that several vaccines appeared.
Or that if there was a vaccine Sanofi would be at the forefront.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
Going abroad from Britain will soon be illegal. Illegal. Against the law. Like in North Korea presumably.
Wow.
But hey. You have a vaccine that protects you from a disease you almost certainly wouldn't die from.
So that's alright then.
I assume you didn't see the risk of deafness in people who survive Covid then?
What point are you making? We all know that Covid kills and Covid can have myriad long-term effects when it doesn't kill. Vaccines are (were?) the silver bullet to restore civil liberties. We have the vaccines - they never were never going to be 100% effective - and some people were always going to refuse them/unable to have them - now give us our liberties back - and allow individuals to take responsibility for one's own health.
Its worth doing some fairly basic mathematical modelling on what would happen if we ended restrictions today.
We've 44% of the population jabbed at a level which gives them a ~70% reduction in their chances of being able to spread the virus. Given R0 was probably about 3, R would jump to around (1-(0.44*0.7))*3, or about 2. The doubling time with R=3 was about 7 days, so we'd expect a doubling time with R=2 of about 10days.
Cases currently are at about 5k daily, to get to the December peak of about 60k daily cases is 3.5 doublings, so about 35 days, so we'd expect to be seeing 60k cases a day the end of April.
At 60k cases a day, we got a peak of about 4k daily hospital admissions. Now we've vaccinated ~90% of those likely to be admitted with a vaccine about 85% likely to prevent hospitalisation, so we should actually see 4k * (1-(.9*.85) admissions, or 900 admissions a day.
It's another 3 doublings to that 4k admission point that would represent the NHS, being overrun. At that point we're at 500k infections a day.
This is all presuming no seasonal effects, no attempts by anyone to reduce any risk, and that we cease vaccination entirely tomorrow.
In reality, by mid May we'll have jabbed about another 18 million (15% of the population, so another 12% off R), some of the more timid population will still be in hiding, and the weather would be with us. Add in some WFH (probably baked in anyway) and maybe some very minor social distancing (say masks in supermarkets and on public transport) and its very unlikely that the caseload would ever top out the NHS's capacity.
Given all this, we should massively accelerate opening up - maybe not ditch everything tomorrow, but say shops next Monday, pubs at Easter, and all restrictions gone* mid May.
*Except foreign travel. You should be free to go wherever you like, but 2 weeks hotel isolation on entering the country, no exceptions, until most of the rest of the world is jabbed - importing a vaccine resistant variant is the only big risk, and we should manage things accordingly.
I think ICU admissions will be the main thing to watch.
From the ICNARC report, around 24% were Groups 1-4, 60% Groups 5-9, and 16% the rest. Right now, Groups 1-4 should have that 85% protection and about a third of Groups 5-9. (About two thirds of the latter have been jabbed, but the second third haven't had the time since dose).
Unlocking now would leave 63% of the ICU group vulnerable. Unlocking in three weeks would leave 45% of them vulnerable Unlocking in five weeks would leave 29% of them vulnerable
(Call it 60%, 45%, 30%)
We'll also need to have the R-decrease by immunity ramp up to 44% of the population over time (as 3 weeks ago, it was 30%, ramping up quite quickly, so the R decrease would be lower as of now. However, partly balancing that we have the immunity from acquired infection, which is probably at least 25% of the population with similar R decrease. Depending on how high the transmissibility of B1.1.1.7 is, R would be between 2.1 and 2.5.
It would be decreasing steadily over the next three weeks, though.
So opening up now would have a doubling rate of around 4 days. (The period for R=2 seems to be c. 5 days) Peak weekly admissions to ICU were about 2500 per day.
At 5500 cases per day, we're 3.5 doublings away from the 60,000 cases per day peak; that's 14 days, although in that time, R would drop by about a further 0.2. That might slow it to 16 days. That's not quite enough time to get the currently-jabbed up to strong protection; call it around the 55% reduction level. One further doubling (4 days; call it 5 by now) would get to the point of exceeding the peak on ICU admissions.
Or, to put it another way, if we dropped all restrictions today and everyone went back immediately to normal life (I'd expect it to be a bit tentative from some), we could expect the ICUs to have a greater influx of critically ill patients than at the peak within 3 weeks.
However, assuming we wait until Mid-May:
- We'll have had all Groups 1-9 with 3 weeks+ and most of Groups 1-4 with 2 doses - Assume c. 55% of population has had at least one dose by then and 25% (at least) of remaining population has antibodies from infection; this gives c. 67% with c. 70% R-reduction each (I strongly suspect that the reduction in R would be greater than 70%, however). - An R of 4 drops to c. 2.0 - Banning gatherings larger than 100 drops R by a third on its own; down to about 1.3-1.4. Doubling period becomes c. 2 weeks. - Realistically, we can't afford to reach the same ICU peak as the second wave; the ICU staff are still shell-shocked. However, with only 30% vulnerable, it's just short of two doublings (from the same case numbers) to reach that same peak. Say we could sustain one doubling instead; that means that cases of 120,000 per day would be the absolute peak sustainable.
That equates to 4.4 doublings, with c. 14 days as the doubling period. Call it two months.
Within 2 months from Mid-May, we should have hit all adults with first doses and all of Groups 1-9 with 2 doses, surely? Then assume that hospitalisation reduction increases following second doses, and it should be doable.
But that's not quite releasing all restrictions by mid May; it still precludes gatherings greater than 100 people.
Skyr has had a terrible lockdown. We'd better hope the Govt. don't think there's a causal link - or we're never getting out!
If you look at the Gross Positives for Sir Keir in those YouGov's they are not much different now than when he took over - the DK's that have come to a judgement on him have just not liked what they've seen
Doubt this is right. Ministers and PHE officials will still be urging caution this time next year.
Hodges is absolutely right about this. It is getting ridiculous now. The vaccine works. Confirm the roadmap dates, lockdown borders to risky countries if you have to, but end the earnest, sanctimonious "words of caution" schtick. I offer the same advice to the PB Lockdownistas – we see it daily on here. It's depressing in the extreme.
The road map is working. However -
The opening of schools caused a massive slowdown in the decline of cases in the unvaccinated groups. No, this is not "tests" - the adults will have received PCR tests.
That opening the schools would increase R was expected and debated. What I did not expect, and am rather glad to see, is that the increase in R has not resulted in a net rise in cases.
If we open up further, cases will rise. Until we are vaccinating down to 50 (and preferably below) that means an increase in hospitalisations.
Impressive how school openings managed to slow down the fall in cases observed 3 days before schools opened, meaning based on tests taken 5 days before schools opened, and infections received 10 days before school opened. Time travelling virus.
I don't know how other schools did it, but here we tested all pupils twice before they came back, so yes, the number of cases observed would be affected a few days before the schools opened.
It seems Astrazeneca published efficacy data based on interim and partial data and then passed it off as official results. And did so without consulting NIAID, whose trial this actually is. NIAID aren't at all amused....
I'm not sure I'd characterise it quite like that. The 'official results' are the ones which will get submitted to the FDA is a few weeks' time. What they did was present already analysed data from the pre-arranged interim analysis (which is fine), without labelling it as such, and without adding that further data is still to be fully analysed - which was indeed stupid.
The NIAID got pissed as they'd issued their own release based on the AZN one.
I really don't understand the point of issuing an overly bullish PR, as at the end of the day you still have to submit all the fully analysed data to the regulator.
Nowhere in Astrazeneca's original press release was it stated that the data was interim and partial and the stats were widely reported by "subject matter expert" commentators as official data. A further twist this morning is Dr Fauci implying AZ did know, or should have known, this data was inaccurate and presumably slightly more flattering than the up-to-date data now available. His line basically was that it might be a shitshow of a company but worried Americans and people elsewhere can take confidence in the FDA doing their job. The vaccine's a good one.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
So Cameron's LOTO ratings fell during the height of the New Labour boom when all was milk and honey, whereas Starmer's ratings have fallen during a national crisis in which every household has suffered and the government has been assailed from all sides...
And that comparison is supposed to be good news for Starmer? OK...
I did think that! Maybe Sir Keir just needs a good financial crisis before people start to warm to him! Death & House Arrest are nothing
Actually that's not true, Dave's Tories led by 28% with some pollsters just before RBS went mammary glands up to behind Labour within a few months.
That no time for a novice line did resonate for a bit.
But DC's personal ratings didn't suffer, they improved from Sep 2007 onwards
Meanwhile, for Net lovers, Boris approval is -3, and Sir Keir -13 (45-32 GP)
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
It's all coming down to Halix supplies being redirected to the EU so they can claim victory. It will trash their reputation amongst pharma and slow us down a little (But not disastrously so). That's the endgame here, convinced of it.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
Skyr has had a terrible lockdown. We'd better hope the Govt. don't think there's a causal link - or we're never getting out!
If you look at the Gross Positives for Sir Keir in those YouGov's they are not much different now than when he took over - the DK's that have come to a judgement on him have just not liked what they've seen
To know, know, know him Is to - hang on - is to loathe him?
Journalists who responded to every piece of state authoritarianism with 'why don't you go further?' suddenly wonder why government is acting in a high handed manner.
People scream on here: "but lockdowns work. Go Government". As if that is the most important aspect to all this legislation.
And before they know it they are faced with some measure or other which breeches their own red lines and then they say "well they can't do that". But they already have. And then they look around frantically for Steve Baker of all people to come and rescue them/us all.
Its also striking how even people with strong red lines defend the government right up to point at which the line is breached, and defend it ferociously until that point.
Just the other day I got accused of 'moaning like a whore' for criticising the pace at which lockdown is being rolled back.
Doubt this is right. Ministers and PHE officials will still be urging caution this time next year.
Hodges is absolutely right about this. It is getting ridiculous now. The vaccine works. Confirm the roadmap dates, lockdown borders to risky countries if you have to, but end the earnest, sanctimonious "words of caution" schtick. I offer the same advice to the PB Lockdownistas – we see it daily on here. It's depressing in the extreme.
The road map is working. However -
The opening of schools caused a massive slowdown in the decline of cases in the unvaccinated groups. No, this is not "tests" - the adults will have received PCR tests.
That opening the schools would increase R was expected and debated. What I did not expect, and am rather glad to see, is that the increase in R has not resulted in a net rise in cases.
If we open up further, cases will rise. Until we are vaccinating down to 50 (and preferably below) that means an increase in hospitalisations.
Impressive how school openings managed to slow down the fall in cases observed 3 days before schools opened, meaning based on tests taken 5 days before schools opened, and infections received 10 days before school opened. Time travelling virus.
I don't know how other schools did it, but here we tested all pupils twice before they came back, so yes, the number of cases observed would be affected a few days before the schools opened.
"It is getting ridiculous now."
Indeed. I wasn't arguing otherwise. Only that this time next year and all thru next winter we will have scientists, PHE people and ministers warning the public about surges, variants, social distancing - the works.
I suspect it will take a long time for this not to be an automatic tic.
I hope I am wrong and we don't hear a word about covid in UK other than the economic fall out again after all adults done in late summer.
I said the other day that I wasn't sure if VI polling is useful during a pandemic, but I'm writing a thread looking at a few numbers in similar periods for LOTOs and in a lot of them Starmer's pattern is very reflective of David Cameron between 2006 and the summer of 2007.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
So Cameron's LOTO ratings fell during the height of the New Labour boom when all was milk and honey, whereas Starmer's ratings have fallen during a national crisis in which every household has suffered and the government has been assailed from all sides...
And that comparison is supposed to be good news for Starmer? OK...
I did think that! Maybe Sir Keir just needs a good financial crisis before people start to warm to him! Death & House Arrest are nothing
Actually that's not true, Dave's Tories led by 28% with some pollsters just before RBS went mammary glands up to behind Labour within a few months.
That no time for a novice line did resonate for a bit.
But DC's personal ratings didn't suffer, they improved from Sep 2007 onwards
Meanwhile, for Net lovers, Boris approval is -3, and Sir Keir -13 (45-32 GP)
if they ban the exports they sit there in storage - still doesn't get them to an EU country - unless they steal them. The going forward AZ can simply say the EU have made it impossible to perform the contract and repudiate it. Would all end up in a Belgian court and be decided at some future date when the EU is swimming in vaccines
Comments
https://twitter.com/JaneyGodley/status/1374359021411520515
https://twitter.com/kakape/status/1374337151568072709?s=20
IT’S ‘A PUPPET’!!!!
Prince Harry has been given a job by a $1bn (£730m) Silicon Valley startup which provides professional coaching, mental health advice and “immersive learning” as its chief impact officer.
The Duke of Sussex said he hoped to be able to “create impact in people’s lives” by working with BetterUp to provide “proactive coaching” for personal development, increased awareness and “an all-round better life”.
It is the Duke’s first formal position at a private company since he stepped down from being a working member of the royal family a year ago
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/23/prince-harry-joins-1bn-silicon-valley-start-up-as-senior-executive?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_b-gdnnews&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1616508236
I assume the latter job was publicly advertised and they picked the best candidate from an excellent talent pool?
No doubt they'll soon be quoted as net figures instead of the gross ones.
I've even managed to segue in a reference to this piece, one that is seldom shared on PB.
https://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/conference/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
Just imagine if PB was a teenage boy looking forward to celebrating his 16th birthday on the 23rd of March 2020.
So are we expecting Dodds to do the same this year? 😂
https://twitter.com/DarrenEuronews/status/1374368066935558144?s=20
Why Shakespeare Could Never Have Been French
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUnGvH8fUUc
Elitism, murder and the other MCC: the complex story of cricket in Mexico
Mexico was one of the first countries outside England to embrace the game – so why is it not a Test-playing nation?
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/mar/23/elitism-and-the-other-mcc-the-complex-story-of-cricket-in-mexico-the-spin
From the ICNARC report, around 24% were Groups 1-4, 60% Groups 5-9, and 16% the rest.
Right now, Groups 1-4 should have that 85% protection and about a third of Groups 5-9. (About two thirds of the latter have been jabbed, but the second third haven't had the time since dose).
Unlocking now would leave 63% of the ICU group vulnerable.
Unlocking in three weeks would leave 45% of them vulnerable
Unlocking in five weeks would leave 29% of them vulnerable
(Call it 60%, 45%, 30%)
We'll also need to have the R-decrease by immunity ramp up to 44% of the population over time (as 3 weeks ago, it was 30%, ramping up quite quickly, so the R decrease would be lower as of now.
However, partly balancing that we have the immunity from acquired infection, which is probably at least 25% of the population with similar R decrease. Depending on how high the transmissibility of B1.1.1.7 is, R would be between 2.1 and 2.5.
It would be decreasing steadily over the next three weeks, though.
So opening up now would have a doubling rate of around 4 days. (The period for R=2 seems to be c. 5 days)
Peak weekly admissions to ICU were about 2500 per day.
At 5500 cases per day, we're 3.5 doublings away from the 60,000 cases per day peak; that's 14 days, although in that time, R would drop by about a further 0.2. That might slow it to 16 days.
That's not quite enough time to get the currently-jabbed up to strong protection; call it around the 55% reduction level.
One further doubling (4 days; call it 5 by now) would get to the point of exceeding the peak on ICU admissions.
Or, to put it another way, if we dropped all restrictions today and everyone went back immediately to normal life (I'd expect it to be a bit tentative from some), we could expect the ICUs to have a greater influx of critically ill patients than at the peak within 3 weeks.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1374367946827390976
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1374367955287375872
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1374367957955002368
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1374051190569320454?s=20
YouGOV:
Things aren't looking good for Keir Starmer, with opinion of the Labour leader taking a turn for the worse across all attributes
Competent 35% (-7 since 24-25 Jan)
Likeable 29% (-7)
Trustworthy 26% (-3)
Decisive 25% (-8)
Strong 22% (-8)
http://www.brin.ac.uk/religious-affiliation-and-party-choice-at-the-2017-general-election/https://www.royal.uk/queens-relationship-churches-england-and-scotland-and-other-faiths
A muppet is far more credible.
About half of those cases will be in people who have now been vaccinated, so take them out to avoid double counting, and you're back to 6.5% at best.
That's good for reducing R, but it's hardly a game changer - it takes our 10 day doubling time, and moves it out to about 10.5 days.
And before they know it they are faced with some measure or other which breeches their own red lines and then they say "well they can't do that". But they already have. And then they look around frantically for Steve Baker of all people to come and rescue them/us all.
Looks like DC started getting better ratings once he was up against Gordon Brown in the Commons rather than TB
In any case, Foreign travel isn't just "holibobs". The UK has a large number of citizens abroad or citizens with family living abroad. I've got a 6 month old who was lucky enough to see my family once just before Xmas. Many other families havent even had that. If the borders to the UK remain closed through summer or there are extortionate quarantine hotels then my daughters grandparents will have basically missed the entirety of her first year. Now of course there may be situations where it really is necessary to shut the borders entirely, but there is a real human cost to every restriction that becomes harder to justify as more and more of the population are vaccinated. It should not be such an easy choice.
And that comparison is supposed to be good news for Starmer? OK...
50 + by country Vaccination 1st doses
England 21,043,663 24,137,423
Scotland 2,183,051 2,214,672
N Ireland 677,166 687,528
Wales 1,293,189 1,288,250
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1374371227872030723?s=20
A big boy made me do it, then he ran away.....
That no time for a novice line did resonate for a bit.
Till the next time. 💪
Meanwhile, for Net lovers, Boris approval is -3, and Sir Keir -13 (45-32 GP)
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/boris-johnson-approval-rating
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/keir-starmer-approval-rating
Or that if there was a vaccine Sanofi would be at the forefront.
- We'll have had all Groups 1-9 with 3 weeks+ and most of Groups 1-4 with 2 doses
- Assume c. 55% of population has had at least one dose by then and 25% (at least) of remaining population has antibodies from infection; this gives c. 67% with c. 70% R-reduction each (I strongly suspect that the reduction in R would be greater than 70%, however).
- An R of 4 drops to c. 2.0
- Banning gatherings larger than 100 drops R by a third on its own; down to about 1.3-1.4. Doubling period becomes c. 2 weeks.
- Realistically, we can't afford to reach the same ICU peak as the second wave; the ICU staff are still shell-shocked. However, with only 30% vulnerable, it's just short of two doublings (from the same case numbers) to reach that same peak. Say we could sustain one doubling instead; that means that cases of 120,000 per day would be the absolute peak sustainable.
That equates to 4.4 doublings, with c. 14 days as the doubling period. Call it two months.
Within 2 months from Mid-May, we should have hit all adults with first doses and all of Groups 1-9 with 2 doses, surely?
Then assume that hospitalisation reduction increases following second doses, and it should be doable.
But that's not quite releasing all restrictions by mid May; it still precludes gatherings greater than 100 people.
I'm staggered we've been able up survive without it.
Dave's ratings went down a bit but Brown's went up a lot.
May be due to the additional campaigning being undertaken for the May elections.
A worse one than Boris at that. To replace a Blair with a Brown.
Can anyone see a problem with that?
https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/1374360044746244098?s=20
https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/1374360071904321539?s=20
Is to - hang on - is to loathe him?
Just the other day I got accused of 'moaning like a whore' for criticising the pace at which lockdown is being rolled back.
Suddenly its, Steve, save us!
Indeed. I wasn't arguing otherwise. Only that this time next year and all thru next winter we will have scientists, PHE people and ministers warning the public about surges, variants, social distancing - the works.
I suspect it will take a long time for this not to be an automatic tic.
I hope I am wrong and we don't hear a word about covid in UK other than the economic fall out again after all adults done in late summer.