Interesting to see the perspective of our nearest neighbour.
Personally I find flag battles, on either side, to be tiresomely juvenile. Yes, we have a flag. So does everyone else - after these sorts of shenanigans https://youtu.be/_9W1zTEuKLY - so what?
I did see this on twitter and it made me laugh...
We should have the ghost of Graham Chapman say ‘I banner flag waving contest. It’s silly.’
Are people not confusing the effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of stopping illness with the effectiveness of cutting transmission when talking herd immunity here ?
Mathematician on TV the other day was suggesting with a R0 of about 3.5 for the Kent variant, an effectiveness of stopping transmission of 66% (seen as optimistic by the people on TV) then you are going to need a lot more than 95% take up to provide herd immunity.
Plus, there is no point in having overall herd immunity if that is an average over a very large area as you'll have large parts of society hidden away with no herd immunity and the virus could easily run rampantly through those parts of the country, re-filling hospitals etc.
Keep an eye on Germany. Cases have gone up there (over three weeks ago, but so far deaths haven’t followed.
As for COVID going through the unvaccinated, that’s something we’ll have to live with (even if some of them won’t). There’s not enough anti vaxxers to cause too much trouble for the NHS.
But that is not what was originally being claimed.
We do not know, yet, how many will not take the jab, if 10% don't take it that will lead to thousands more deaths and the NHS being overwhelmed.
My wife is already on a 12+month waiting list for an operation to stop her being in continual pain, all her life, that has already been delayed nearly a year.
Allowing the NHS to for ever be overwhelmed does not just harm those who chose not to take the vaccine, but also those who have taken the vaccine but need medical treatment for other reasons.
The only was the NHS could be overwhelmed in that scenario would be if the 10% were all infected at the same time.
Which is certainly not going to happen if 90% have been vaccinated and with many of the 10% having already acquired immunity from previous infection.
Also, if 90% are vaccinated it will be much harder for the virus to spread. It wasn’t just the imminent threat of the health service being overwhelmed, but the exponential growth that caused the lockdowns.
Exactly.
But to lockdown nutters the number required for herd immunity is always higher than you will have.
If herd immunity is not reached, how do you stop the virus levels rising exponentially through the non vaccinated without some level of control to stop that from happening ?
Imagine a household with lots of unvaccinated people in it. One of them catches COVID, let’s say at work. They then infect all the people in their household. The R rate for that household is awful.
But who the fuck cares? It’s one household.
and that is where we differ.
I care because my wife, who is in continual pain may have her op to fix that further delayed as the NHS have to deal with that family and all the others who have done the same thing.
There ae tens if not hundreds of thousands of people like my wife, suffering through no fault of their own.
For me any negatives of having a vaccination certificate are far far outweighed by the greater likelihood of the NHS being able to return to normal to be able to serve people like my wife again.
I totally understand your position, I just value the return to normal of the NHS very very highly and think the risk of allowing the virus to run wild through the unvaccinated causing more strain on the NHS as not acceptable given the impact it is having on so many people.
Everyone knows that Flavahans is the best porridge, also a product of the EU, being Irish.
Every day is a learning day on PB. People other than Quakers make porridge. Who knew?
Can't beat Lidl's very own finest. I will still buy it is they put a German flag on it, but some strange sensibility stops them.
If politics gets any worse England will stop buying oats with a kilt on it, stick to Canadian and US forms of whisky or what ever they call it and stop eating kippers. End of civilisation.
Not to mention the Scottish economy, 60%+ of all Scottish exports go to rUK. If you play with matches...
on their way to Europe , so merely transit
So current exports marked for rUK are actually marked for the EU market and just move through rUK.
Right.
I love Scotland, I really do, but I fear for its future prosperity if it’s driven by logic like that.
The Brexityoons:
Global UK must look beyond the narrow confines of the EU towards the big wide world and all its trading opportunities.
I have received a second reminder from the Census Office. What a waste of postage! I wonder when a form will arrive.
I never heard anything after throwing the first one in the bin. If anybody comes to the door I'll just play Smash the State by the Melvins on my phone while telling them to fuck off.
Are people not confusing the effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of stopping illness with the effectiveness of cutting transmission when talking herd immunity here ?
Mathematician on TV the other day was suggesting with a R0 of about 3.5 for the Kent variant, an effectiveness of stopping transmission of 66% (seen as optimistic by the people on TV) then you are going to need a lot more than 95% take up to provide herd immunity.
Plus, there is no point in having overall herd immunity if that is an average over a very large area as you'll have large parts of society hidden away with no herd immunity and the virus could easily run rampantly through those parts of the country, re-filling hospitals etc.
Keep an eye on Germany. Cases have gone up there (over three weeks ago, but so far deaths haven’t followed.
As for COVID going through the unvaccinated, that’s something we’ll have to live with (even if some of them won’t). There’s not enough anti vaxxers to cause too much trouble for the NHS.
But that is not what was originally being claimed.
We do not know, yet, how many will not take the jab, if 10% don't take it that will lead to thousands more deaths and the NHS being overwhelmed.
My wife is already on a 12+month waiting list for an operation to stop her being in continual pain, all her life, that has already been delayed nearly a year.
Allowing the NHS to for ever be overwhelmed does not just harm those who chose not to take the vaccine, but also those who have taken the vaccine but need medical treatment for other reasons.
The only was the NHS could be overwhelmed in that scenario would be if the 10% were all infected at the same time.
Which is certainly not going to happen if 90% have been vaccinated and with many of the 10% having already acquired immunity from previous infection.
Also, if 90% are vaccinated it will be much harder for the virus to spread. It wasn’t just the imminent threat of the health service being overwhelmed, but the exponential growth that caused the lockdowns.
Exactly.
But to lockdown nutters the number required for herd immunity is always higher than you will have.
If herd immunity is not reached, how do you stop the virus levels rising exponentially through the non vaccinated without some level of control to stop that from happening ?
It won't rise exponentially because there will never be more than small pockets of unvaccinated people. If you put all the non-vaxed together, it would rise exponentially through them. For ir a short time - exponwgrowth never seems to last long.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
Are people not confusing the effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of stopping illness with the effectiveness of cutting transmission when talking herd immunity here ?
Mathematician on TV the other day was suggesting with a R0 of about 3.5 for the Kent variant, an effectiveness of stopping transmission of 66% (seen as optimistic by the people on TV) then you are going to need a lot more than 95% take up to provide herd immunity.
Plus, there is no point in having overall herd immunity if that is an average over a very large area as you'll have large parts of society hidden away with no herd immunity and the virus could easily run rampantly through those parts of the country, re-filling hospitals etc.
Keep an eye on Germany. Cases have gone up there (over three weeks ago, but so far deaths haven’t followed.
As for COVID going through the unvaccinated, that’s something we’ll have to live with (even if some of them won’t). There’s not enough anti vaxxers to cause too much trouble for the NHS.
But that is not what was originally being claimed.
We do not know, yet, how many will not take the jab, if 10% don't take it that will lead to thousands more deaths and the NHS being overwhelmed.
My wife is already on a 12+month waiting list for an operation to stop her being in continual pain, all her life, that has already been delayed nearly a year.
Allowing the NHS to for ever be overwhelmed does not just harm those who chose not to take the vaccine, but also those who have taken the vaccine but need medical treatment for other reasons.
The only was the NHS could be overwhelmed in that scenario would be if the 10% were all infected at the same time.
Which is certainly not going to happen if 90% have been vaccinated and with many of the 10% having already acquired immunity from previous infection.
The NHS has been under huge strain, with very little elective surgery going on, for 12months during which time about 10% of the population seem to have had the virus.
Don't see why that would not repeat over the next 12months if you let the virus rip through that 10% with no immunity.
So you say 10% of the population have been infected during the last year but expect all ie 100% of the unvaccinated would be infected in the next year.
Perhaps you can explain why you think infection rates are going to increase so much when 90% are going to be vaccinated ?
On your scenario the Israeli health service should have been overwhelmed instead of the opposite happening.
We've been under lockdown for much of the last year, every time the infections were rising exponentially action was taken to stop it.
Given we won't be at herd immunity, given the rates will therefore rise exponentially, I see no reason why teh HNS won't eventually be overwhelmed again.
We will never be at herd immunity in your opinion.
Why don't you admit you want a permanent lockdown.
Are people not confusing the effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of stopping illness with the effectiveness of cutting transmission when talking herd immunity here ?
Mathematician on TV the other day was suggesting with a R0 of about 3.5 for the Kent variant, an effectiveness of stopping transmission of 66% (seen as optimistic by the people on TV) then you are going to need a lot more than 95% take up to provide herd immunity.
Plus, there is no point in having overall herd immunity if that is an average over a very large area as you'll have large parts of society hidden away with no herd immunity and the virus could easily run rampantly through those parts of the country, re-filling hospitals etc.
Keep an eye on Germany. Cases have gone up there (over three weeks ago, but so far deaths haven’t followed.
As for COVID going through the unvaccinated, that’s something we’ll have to live with (even if some of them won’t). There’s not enough anti vaxxers to cause too much trouble for the NHS.
But that is not what was originally being claimed.
We do not know, yet, how many will not take the jab, if 10% don't take it that will lead to thousands more deaths and the NHS being overwhelmed.
My wife is already on a 12+month waiting list for an operation to stop her being in continual pain, all her life, that has already been delayed nearly a year.
Allowing the NHS to for ever be overwhelmed does not just harm those who chose not to take the vaccine, but also those who have taken the vaccine but need medical treatment for other reasons.
The only was the NHS could be overwhelmed in that scenario would be if the 10% were all infected at the same time.
Which is certainly not going to happen if 90% have been vaccinated and with many of the 10% having already acquired immunity from previous infection.
The NHS has been under huge strain, with very little elective surgery going on, for 12months during which time about 10% of the population seem to have had the virus.
Don't see why that would not repeat over the next 12months if you let the virus rip through that 10% with no immunity.
So you say 10% of the population have been infected during the last year but expect all ie 100% of the unvaccinated would be infected in the next year.
Perhaps you can explain why you think infection rates are going to increase so much when 90% are going to be vaccinated ?
On your scenario the Israeli health service should have been overwhelmed instead of the opposite happening.
We've been under lockdown for much of the last year, every time the infections were rising exponentially action was taken to stop it.
Given we won't be at herd immunity, given the rates will therefore rise exponentially, I see no reason why teh HNS won't eventually be overwhelmed again.
But we will be at herd immunity. Which is about 70%.
Are people not confusing the effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of stopping illness with the effectiveness of cutting transmission when talking herd immunity here ?
Mathematician on TV the other day was suggesting with a R0 of about 3.5 for the Kent variant, an effectiveness of stopping transmission of 66% (seen as optimistic by the people on TV) then you are going to need a lot more than 95% take up to provide herd immunity.
Plus, there is no point in having overall herd immunity if that is an average over a very large area as you'll have large parts of society hidden away with no herd immunity and the virus could easily run rampantly through those parts of the country, re-filling hospitals etc.
Keep an eye on Germany. Cases have gone up there (over three weeks ago, but so far deaths haven’t followed.
As for COVID going through the unvaccinated, that’s something we’ll have to live with (even if some of them won’t). There’s not enough anti vaxxers to cause too much trouble for the NHS.
But that is not what was originally being claimed.
We do not know, yet, how many will not take the jab, if 10% don't take it that will lead to thousands more deaths and the NHS being overwhelmed.
My wife is already on a 12+month waiting list for an operation to stop her being in continual pain, all her life, that has already been delayed nearly a year.
Allowing the NHS to for ever be overwhelmed does not just harm those who chose not to take the vaccine, but also those who have taken the vaccine but need medical treatment for other reasons.
The only was the NHS could be overwhelmed in that scenario would be if the 10% were all infected at the same time.
Which is certainly not going to happen if 90% have been vaccinated and with many of the 10% having already acquired immunity from previous infection.
Also, if 90% are vaccinated it will be much harder for the virus to spread. It wasn’t just the imminent threat of the health service being overwhelmed, but the exponential growth that caused the lockdowns.
Exactly.
But to lockdown nutters the number required for herd immunity is always higher than you will have.
If herd immunity is not reached, how do you stop the virus levels rising exponentially through the non vaccinated without some level of control to stop that from happening ?
It won't rise exponentially because there will never be more than small pockets of unvaccinated people. If you put all the non-vaxed together, it would rise exponentially through them. For ir a short time - exponwgrowth never seems to last long.
See my post below.
I consider the risk to the NHS and the ability for people like my wife who are suffering continually and have no prospect of that being fixed is far too high to be ignored.
People having to have a vaccination certificate, which compared to the pain my wife suffers 24hrs a day is nothing, to increase the likelihood of the NHS returning to normal faster than otherwise would be the case is very much worth it in my opinion.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
It's the census worker I feel sorry for. They are going to have to listen to his diatribe of why he shouldn't be forced to spend three minutes clicking a button on his computer to get a paper form.
It is a thought though, isn’t it? With such a backlog of cases at the moment, is there going to be in effect an amnesty for minor crimes e.g. speeding, vandalism etc simply because there’s no way to prosecute them in a timely fashion?
I mean, if they’re even abandoning burglary cases - which we know they are - what chance of bringing a census non-returnee in?
Are people not confusing the effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of stopping illness with the effectiveness of cutting transmission when talking herd immunity here ?
Mathematician on TV the other day was suggesting with a R0 of about 3.5 for the Kent variant, an effectiveness of stopping transmission of 66% (seen as optimistic by the people on TV) then you are going to need a lot more than 95% take up to provide herd immunity.
Plus, there is no point in having overall herd immunity if that is an average over a very large area as you'll have large parts of society hidden away with no herd immunity and the virus could easily run rampantly through those parts of the country, re-filling hospitals etc.
Keep an eye on Germany. Cases have gone up there (over three weeks ago, but so far deaths haven’t followed.
As for COVID going through the unvaccinated, that’s something we’ll have to live with (even if some of them won’t). There’s not enough anti vaxxers to cause too much trouble for the NHS.
But that is not what was originally being claimed.
We do not know, yet, how many will not take the jab, if 10% don't take it that will lead to thousands more deaths and the NHS being overwhelmed.
My wife is already on a 12+month waiting list for an operation to stop her being in continual pain, all her life, that has already been delayed nearly a year.
Allowing the NHS to for ever be overwhelmed does not just harm those who chose not to take the vaccine, but also those who have taken the vaccine but need medical treatment for other reasons.
The only was the NHS could be overwhelmed in that scenario would be if the 10% were all infected at the same time.
Which is certainly not going to happen if 90% have been vaccinated and with many of the 10% having already acquired immunity from previous infection.
Also, if 90% are vaccinated it will be much harder for the virus to spread. It wasn’t just the imminent threat of the health service being overwhelmed, but the exponential growth that caused the lockdowns.
Exactly.
But to lockdown nutters the number required for herd immunity is always higher than you will have.
If herd immunity is not reached, how do you stop the virus levels rising exponentially through the non vaccinated without some level of control to stop that from happening ?
Imagine a household with lots of unvaccinated people in it. One of them catches COVID, let’s say at work. They then infect all the people in their household. The R rate for that household is awful.
But who the fuck cares? It’s one household.
and that is where we differ.
I care because my wife, who is in continual pain may have her op to fix that further delayed as the NHS have to deal with that family and all the others who have done the same thing.
There ae tens if not hundreds of thousands of people like my wife, suffering through no fault of their own.
For me any negatives of having a vaccination certificate are far far outweighed by the greater likelihood of the NHS being able to return to normal to be able to serve people like my wife again.
I totally understand your position, I just value the return to normal of the NHS very very highly and think the risk of allowing the virus to run wild through the unvaccinated causing more strain on the NHS as not acceptable given the impact it is having on so many people.
If you lived in Newham then you might have a valid concern (I’m not sure it’ll be a problem there to be honest).
The bigger issue is that there’s a big backlog to get through.
Are people not confusing the effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of stopping illness with the effectiveness of cutting transmission when talking herd immunity here ?
Mathematician on TV the other day was suggesting with a R0 of about 3.5 for the Kent variant, an effectiveness of stopping transmission of 66% (seen as optimistic by the people on TV) then you are going to need a lot more than 95% take up to provide herd immunity.
Plus, there is no point in having overall herd immunity if that is an average over a very large area as you'll have large parts of society hidden away with no herd immunity and the virus could easily run rampantly through those parts of the country, re-filling hospitals etc.
Keep an eye on Germany. Cases have gone up there (over three weeks ago, but so far deaths haven’t followed.
As for COVID going through the unvaccinated, that’s something we’ll have to live with (even if some of them won’t). There’s not enough anti vaxxers to cause too much trouble for the NHS.
But that is not what was originally being claimed.
We do not know, yet, how many will not take the jab, if 10% don't take it that will lead to thousands more deaths and the NHS being overwhelmed.
My wife is already on a 12+month waiting list for an operation to stop her being in continual pain, all her life, that has already been delayed nearly a year.
Allowing the NHS to for ever be overwhelmed does not just harm those who chose not to take the vaccine, but also those who have taken the vaccine but need medical treatment for other reasons.
The only was the NHS could be overwhelmed in that scenario would be if the 10% were all infected at the same time.
Which is certainly not going to happen if 90% have been vaccinated and with many of the 10% having already acquired immunity from previous infection.
The NHS has been under huge strain, with very little elective surgery going on, for 12months during which time about 10% of the population seem to have had the virus.
Don't see why that would not repeat over the next 12months if you let the virus rip through that 10% with no immunity.
So you say 10% of the population have been infected during the last year but expect all ie 100% of the unvaccinated would be infected in the next year.
Perhaps you can explain why you think infection rates are going to increase so much when 90% are going to be vaccinated ?
On your scenario the Israeli health service should have been overwhelmed instead of the opposite happening.
We've been under lockdown for much of the last year, every time the infections were rising exponentially action was taken to stop it.
Given we won't be at herd immunity, given the rates will therefore rise exponentially, I see no reason why teh HNS won't eventually be overwhelmed again.
Actually, I disagree with the above. The exponential phase, in every case, was over well before measures were taken to restrict the spread.
Are people not confusing the effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of stopping illness with the effectiveness of cutting transmission when talking herd immunity here ?
Mathematician on TV the other day was suggesting with a R0 of about 3.5 for the Kent variant, an effectiveness of stopping transmission of 66% (seen as optimistic by the people on TV) then you are going to need a lot more than 95% take up to provide herd immunity.
Plus, there is no point in having overall herd immunity if that is an average over a very large area as you'll have large parts of society hidden away with no herd immunity and the virus could easily run rampantly through those parts of the country, re-filling hospitals etc.
Keep an eye on Germany. Cases have gone up there (over three weeks ago, but so far deaths haven’t followed.
As for COVID going through the unvaccinated, that’s something we’ll have to live with (even if some of them won’t). There’s not enough anti vaxxers to cause too much trouble for the NHS.
But that is not what was originally being claimed.
We do not know, yet, how many will not take the jab, if 10% don't take it that will lead to thousands more deaths and the NHS being overwhelmed.
My wife is already on a 12+month waiting list for an operation to stop her being in continual pain, all her life, that has already been delayed nearly a year.
Allowing the NHS to for ever be overwhelmed does not just harm those who chose not to take the vaccine, but also those who have taken the vaccine but need medical treatment for other reasons.
The only was the NHS could be overwhelmed in that scenario would be if the 10% were all infected at the same time.
Which is certainly not going to happen if 90% have been vaccinated and with many of the 10% having already acquired immunity from previous infection.
The NHS has been under huge strain, with very little elective surgery going on, for 12months during which time about 10% of the population seem to have had the virus.
Don't see why that would not repeat over the next 12months if you let the virus rip through that 10% with no immunity.
So you say 10% of the population have been infected during the last year but expect all ie 100% of the unvaccinated would be infected in the next year.
Perhaps you can explain why you think infection rates are going to increase so much when 90% are going to be vaccinated ?
On your scenario the Israeli health service should have been overwhelmed instead of the opposite happening.
We've been under lockdown for much of the last year, every time the infections were rising exponentially action was taken to stop it.
Given we won't be at herd immunity, given the rates will therefore rise exponentially, I see no reason why teh HNS won't eventually be overwhelmed again.
But we will be at herd immunity. Which is about 70%.
Going around in circles.
I do not believe that figure, it does not align to what I have seen explained on TV.
If you are wrong, if the epidemiologist on TV was correct, you increase the risk my wife suffers for much longer because you are unwilling to consider having a vaccination certificate.
Are people not confusing the effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of stopping illness with the effectiveness of cutting transmission when talking herd immunity here ?
Mathematician on TV the other day was suggesting with a R0 of about 3.5 for the Kent variant, an effectiveness of stopping transmission of 66% (seen as optimistic by the people on TV) then you are going to need a lot more than 95% take up to provide herd immunity.
Plus, there is no point in having overall herd immunity if that is an average over a very large area as you'll have large parts of society hidden away with no herd immunity and the virus could easily run rampantly through those parts of the country, re-filling hospitals etc.
Keep an eye on Germany. Cases have gone up there (over three weeks ago, but so far deaths haven’t followed.
As for COVID going through the unvaccinated, that’s something we’ll have to live with (even if some of them won’t). There’s not enough anti vaxxers to cause too much trouble for the NHS.
But that is not what was originally being claimed.
We do not know, yet, how many will not take the jab, if 10% don't take it that will lead to thousands more deaths and the NHS being overwhelmed.
My wife is already on a 12+month waiting list for an operation to stop her being in continual pain, all her life, that has already been delayed nearly a year.
Allowing the NHS to for ever be overwhelmed does not just harm those who chose not to take the vaccine, but also those who have taken the vaccine but need medical treatment for other reasons.
The only was the NHS could be overwhelmed in that scenario would be if the 10% were all infected at the same time.
Which is certainly not going to happen if 90% have been vaccinated and with many of the 10% having already acquired immunity from previous infection.
Also, if 90% are vaccinated it will be much harder for the virus to spread. It wasn’t just the imminent threat of the health service being overwhelmed, but the exponential growth that caused the lockdowns.
Exactly.
But to lockdown nutters the number required for herd immunity is always higher than you will have.
If herd immunity is not reached, how do you stop the virus levels rising exponentially through the non vaccinated without some level of control to stop that from happening ?
Imagine a household with lots of unvaccinated people in it. One of them catches COVID, let’s say at work. They then infect all the people in their household. The R rate for that household is awful.
But who the fuck cares? It’s one household.
and that is where we differ.
I care because my wife, who is in continual pain may have her op to fix that further delayed as the NHS have to deal with that family and all the others who have done the same thing.
There ae tens if not hundreds of thousands of people like my wife, suffering through no fault of their own.
For me any negatives of having a vaccination certificate are far far outweighed by the greater likelihood of the NHS being able to return to normal to be able to serve people like my wife again.
I totally understand your position, I just value the return to normal of the NHS very very highly and think the risk of allowing the virus to run wild through the unvaccinated causing more strain on the NHS as not acceptable given the impact it is having on so many people.
If you lived in Newham then you might have a valid concern (I’m not sure it’ll be a problem there to be honest).
The bigger issue is that there’s a big backlog to get through.
Yes
I think as we come out of restrictions the state of the waiting lists for the NHS will be the next thing to be grabbing peoples attention.
The scale of the waiting lists is huge, the treatment some are waiting for is scary.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
It's the census worker I feel sorry for. They are going to have to listen to his diatribe of why he shouldn't be forced to spend three minutes clicking a button on his computer to get a paper form.
I had to do it in 2011. Truthfully, it didn’t bother me much. If they were talking, I found they were usually perfectly polite. And also, I found they usually did the form after we’d had a chat.
The (one) man who repeatedly slammed the door in my face was the only really unpleasant experience I had, and even he sent his form in in the end (I think he got fed up with slamming the door in my face every day).
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
You are clearly lacking a great deal in self awareness yourself.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
You are clearly lacking a great deal in self awareness yourself.
It is a thought though, isn’t it? With such a backlog of cases at the moment, is there going to be in effect an amnesty for minor crimes e.g. speeding, vandalism etc simply because there’s no way to prosecute them in a timely fashion?
I mean, if they’re even abandoning burglary cases - which we know they are - what chance of bringing a census non-returnee in?
My guess is that it will be a bit haphazard, but you would hope that they would pursue the most egregious cases in each category, to try to avoid any impression of effectively decriminalising certain crimes. Including census non-returnees.
Everyone knows that Flavahans is the best porridge, also a product of the EU, being Irish.
Every day is a learning day on PB. People other than Quakers make porridge. Who knew?
Can't beat Lidl's very own finest. I will still buy it is they put a German flag on it, but some strange sensibility stops them.
If politics gets any worse England will stop buying oats with a kilt on it, stick to Canadian and US forms of whisky or what ever they call it and stop eating kippers. End of civilisation.
Not to mention the Scottish economy, 60%+ of all Scottish exports go to rUK. If you play with matches...
on their way to Europe , so merely transit
So current exports marked for rUK are actually marked for the EU market and just move through rUK.
Right.
I love Scotland, I really do, but I fear for its future prosperity if it’s driven by logic like that.
Since when was the independence debate driven by logic? Visceral emotion, yes!
You can see how the union has no chance - anything based broadly on fact will just be brushed aside as UK meddling.
Depressing.
The GB union (NI is different) is under no significant threat. It won't be until something heading towards 60% of Scots consistently and prolonged say they support independence. Election results will make no difference unless it is reflected in much increased independence polling.
Nicola, IMHO, has already decided there are pluses in this for her and the SNP as well as minuses.
I'm done here, but I don't think my position, which is shared by many is that controversial.
Allowing C-19 to remain in circulation has a risk that it will negatively impact on people's non C-19 medical treatment, that risk increases with the amount of C-19 in circulation.
Having a desire to keep C-19 at a lower level as possible and the imposition people are willing to put themselves and others through to achieve that will no doubt be greatly impacted by their experiences.
My personal circumstances lead me to being very risk adverse and as such see the minimal intrusion of a vaccine certificate as well worth it, but totally understand others with differing personal circumstances will undoubtedly have different priorities.
Are people not confusing the effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of stopping illness with the effectiveness of cutting transmission when talking herd immunity here ?
Mathematician on TV the other day was suggesting with a R0 of about 3.5 for the Kent variant, an effectiveness of stopping transmission of 66% (seen as optimistic by the people on TV) then you are going to need a lot more than 95% take up to provide herd immunity.
Plus, there is no point in having overall herd immunity if that is an average over a very large area as you'll have large parts of society hidden away with no herd immunity and the virus could easily run rampantly through those parts of the country, re-filling hospitals etc.
Keep an eye on Germany. Cases have gone up there (over three weeks ago, but so far deaths haven’t followed.
As for COVID going through the unvaccinated, that’s something we’ll have to live with (even if some of them won’t). There’s not enough anti vaxxers to cause too much trouble for the NHS.
But that is not what was originally being claimed.
We do not know, yet, how many will not take the jab, if 10% don't take it that will lead to thousands more deaths and the NHS being overwhelmed.
My wife is already on a 12+month waiting list for an operation to stop her being in continual pain, all her life, that has already been delayed nearly a year.
Allowing the NHS to for ever be overwhelmed does not just harm those who chose not to take the vaccine, but also those who have taken the vaccine but need medical treatment for other reasons.
The only was the NHS could be overwhelmed in that scenario would be if the 10% were all infected at the same time.
Which is certainly not going to happen if 90% have been vaccinated and with many of the 10% having already acquired immunity from previous infection.
Also, if 90% are vaccinated it will be much harder for the virus to spread. It wasn’t just the imminent threat of the health service being overwhelmed, but the exponential growth that caused the lockdowns.
Exactly.
But to lockdown nutters the number required for herd immunity is always higher than you will have.
If herd immunity is not reached, how do you stop the virus levels rising exponentially through the non vaccinated without some level of control to stop that from happening ?
Imagine a household with lots of unvaccinated people in it. One of them catches COVID, let’s say at work. They then infect all the people in their household. The R rate for that household is awful.
But who the fuck cares? It’s one household.
and that is where we differ.
I care because my wife, who is in continual pain may have her op to fix that further delayed as the NHS have to deal with that family and all the others who have done the same thing.
There ae tens if not hundreds of thousands of people like my wife, suffering through no fault of their own.
For me any negatives of having a vaccination certificate are far far outweighed by the greater likelihood of the NHS being able to return to normal to be able to serve people like my wife again.
I totally understand your position, I just value the return to normal of the NHS very very highly and think the risk of allowing the virus to run wild through the unvaccinated causing more strain on the NHS as not acceptable given the impact it is having on so many people.
If you lived in Newham then you might have a valid concern (I’m not sure it’ll be a problem there to be honest).
The bigger issue is that there’s a big backlog to get through.
Yes
I think as we come out of restrictions the state of the waiting lists for the NHS will be the next thing to be grabbing peoples attention.
The scale of the waiting lists is huge, the treatment some are waiting for is scary.
There are going to be backlogs for everything. Including things like boiler services, lawsuits, probate perhaps (don’t know where that’s been going with more deaths and lower capacity). Car repairs as well, in many cases.
The NHS is going to be the most visible one though, particularly those like your wife who are in urgent need of treatment.
I'm done here, but I don't think my position, which is shared by many is that controversial.
Allowing C-19 to remain in circulation has a risk that it will negatively impact on people's non C-19 medical treatment, that risk increases with the amount of C-19 in circulation.
Having a desire to keep C-19 at a lower level as possible and the imposition people are willing to put themselves and others through to achieve that will no doubt be greatly impacted by their experiences.
My personal circumstances lead me to being very risk adverse and as such see the minimal intrusion of a vaccine certificate as well worth it, but totally understand others with differing personal circumstances will undoubtedly have different priorities.
What makes you think football grounds and theatres will be more of a problem than households?
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
You are clearly lacking a great deal in self awareness yourself.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
You are clearly lacking a great deal in self awareness yourself.
Yes, of course, Justin.
Even people with Phds make idiots of themselves from time to time.You are clearly far too proud - or vain - to have to openly admit that you were spouting gibberish by suggesting that two constituencies could be merged to produce an electorate of 116,000.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
You are clearly lacking a great deal in self awareness yourself.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
You are clearly lacking a great deal in self awareness yourself.
Yes, of course, Justin.
Even people with Phds make idiots of themselves from time to time.You are clearly far too proud - or vain - to have to openly admit that you were spouting gibberish by suggesting that two constituencies could be merged to produce an electorate of 116,000.
I'm done here, but I don't think my position, which is shared by many is that controversial.
Allowing C-19 to remain in circulation has a risk that it will negatively impact on people's non C-19 medical treatment, that risk increases with the amount of C-19 in circulation.
Having a desire to keep C-19 at a lower level as possible and the imposition people are willing to put themselves and others through to achieve that will no doubt be greatly impacted by their experiences.
My personal circumstances lead me to being very risk adverse and as such see the minimal intrusion of a vaccine certificate as well worth it, but totally understand others with differing personal circumstances will undoubtedly have different priorities.
What makes you think football grounds and theatres will be more of a problem than households?
I'd be less worried about outdoor venues, although weren't outbreaks at the start of the pandemic linked to away games? At home you are rarely mixing with people other than your family.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
You are clearly lacking a great deal in self awareness yourself.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
You are clearly lacking a great deal in self awareness yourself.
Yes, of course, Justin.
Even people with Phds make idiots of themselves from time to time.You are clearly far too proud - or vain - to have to openly admit that you were spouting gibberish by suggesting that two constituencies could be merged to produce an electorate of 116,000.
I am slowly coming to the surprising conclusion that people who have Phds are no more insightful when talking about issues outside of the very specific parameters of the specialism they were awarded the degree in, than the average man on the street. In fact it could be argued that the self confidence and authority that bestows a holder of a Phd makes them even more susceptible to the Dunning and Kruger effect.
I'm done here, but I don't think my position, which is shared by many is that controversial.
Allowing C-19 to remain in circulation has a risk that it will negatively impact on people's non C-19 medical treatment, that risk increases with the amount of C-19 in circulation.
Having a desire to keep C-19 at a lower level as possible and the imposition people are willing to put themselves and others through to achieve that will no doubt be greatly impacted by their experiences.
My personal circumstances lead me to being very risk adverse and as such see the minimal intrusion of a vaccine certificate as well worth it, but totally understand others with differing personal circumstances will undoubtedly have different priorities.
What makes you think football grounds and theatres will be more of a problem than households?
I'd be less worried about outdoor venues, although weren't outbreaks at the start of the pandemic linked to away games? At home you are rarely mixing with people other than your family.
That was as much to do with pubs being rammed I think. Atletico Madrid in Liverpool.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
You are clearly lacking a great deal in self awareness yourself.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
I would rather enjoy a day in court were it to come to that. Probably unlikely though.
Yeah, that would really show them.
I’m just wondering how Justin would deal with the judge disagreeing with him.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
You are clearly lacking a great deal in self awareness yourself.
Yes, of course, Justin.
Even people with Phds make idiots of themselves from time to time.You are clearly far too proud - or vain - to have to openly admit that you were spouting gibberish by suggesting that two constituencies could be merged to produce an electorate of 116,000.
I am slowly coming to the surprising conclusion that people who have Phds are no more insightful when talking about issues outside of the very specific parameters of the specialism they were awarded the degree in, than the average man on the street. In fact it could be argued that the self confidence and authority that bestows a holder of a Phd makes them even more susceptible to the Dunning and Kruger effect.
Aside from this morning's demonstration, we've seen it a lot this pandemic. The big tv channels/papers get experts to talk about areas adjacent to their knowledge, at which point they're no longer experts often just people who are very authoritatively incorrect with a big platform.
Interesting to see the perspective of our nearest neighbour.
Personally I find flag battles, on either side, to be tiresomely juvenile. Yes, we have a flag. So does everyone else - after these sorts of shenanigans https://youtu.be/_9W1zTEuKLY - so what?
I did see this on twitter and it made me laugh...
I don't suppose there is anywhere on the whole island of Ireland where anyone cares what flag you are waving, what colour it is or what side you support. Nearly everyone in GB is the same. Most parish churches in England will be flying the flag of St George today. Generally this has passed off peacefully with few petrol bombs, light police casualties and almost no rioting.
On the "exponential phase" of the various epicurves I'd just like to point out that all phases are exponential - rising, falling and turning points. What is changing is the exponent of the exponential, which varies over time as conditions - like lock-downs, vaccine induced immunity etc - change.
If you lived in Newham then you might have a valid concern (I’m not sure it’ll be a problem there to be honest).
The bigger issue is that there’s a big backlog to get through.
According to the population estimates (which I would take for Newham with a bucket full of salt), the vaccination take-up rate among those aged 70+ is 78% (compared with Surrey Heath where it is 98%).
That equates to just under 4,000 unvaccinated elderly in Newham who are, and let's not beat about the proverbial, the next potential wave of cases and deaths from all this (the equivalent number in Surrey Heath is 200)
The total of unvaccinated 70+ in England is just under half a million - I suppose many of them are and remain vulnerable to the virus. There will be many reasons why they've not been vaccinated but that is the block of people most likely to require hospitalisation going forward.
Whether 200 or 4,000, we need to do as much as we can to get these older people vaccinated if we want to get the NHS back to doing what it should and what it hasn't been able to.
I'm done here, but I don't think my position, which is shared by many is that controversial.
Allowing C-19 to remain in circulation has a risk that it will negatively impact on people's non C-19 medical treatment, that risk increases with the amount of C-19 in circulation.
Having a desire to keep C-19 at a lower level as possible and the imposition people are willing to put themselves and others through to achieve that will no doubt be greatly impacted by their experiences.
My personal circumstances lead me to being very risk adverse and as such see the minimal intrusion of a vaccine certificate as well worth it, but totally understand others with differing personal circumstances will undoubtedly have different priorities.
What makes you think football grounds and theatres will be more of a problem than households?
I'd be less worried about outdoor venues, although weren't outbreaks at the start of the pandemic linked to away games? At home you are rarely mixing with people other than your family.
I think the Atalanta (who are from Bergamo) v Valencia game at San Siro (Milan) may have contributed to the problems, but I don't think football or horse racing was any worse than public transport or pubs or whatever.
I'm done here, but I don't think my position, which is shared by many is that controversial.
Allowing C-19 to remain in circulation has a risk that it will negatively impact on people's non C-19 medical treatment, that risk increases with the amount of C-19 in circulation.
Having a desire to keep C-19 at a lower level as possible and the imposition people are willing to put themselves and others through to achieve that will no doubt be greatly impacted by their experiences.
My personal circumstances lead me to being very risk adverse and as such see the minimal intrusion of a vaccine certificate as well worth it, but totally understand others with differing personal circumstances will undoubtedly have different priorities.
What makes you think football grounds and theatres will be more of a problem than households?
I'd be less worried about outdoor venues, although weren't outbreaks at the start of the pandemic linked to away games? At home you are rarely mixing with people other than your family.
I think the Atalanta (who are from Bergamo) v Valencia game at San Siro (Milan) may have contributed to the problems, but I don't think football or horse racing was any worse than public transport or pubs or whatever.
The media worked themselves into a total lather over 2 specific outdoor events, then became totally uninterested about a whole series of other ones. It was as if it was a stick to beat the government with....
Edit - incidentally, there will not be a university in Lampeter by the next election, as it will be closing in the next couple of years.
Source ?
UWTSD, despite predictions of its demise, has actually expanded and expanded, swallowing up campuses in Carmarthen & Swansea & with outposts in Cardiff & London.
You know how things are done in South Wales. The VC is very close to the Labour Party and has excellent connections with the Senedd. In fact, ex-Labour pols often move on to academic appointments in Lampeter (like "Dr" Jane Davidson).
My prediction is Lampeter will be fine. And certainly, the very undistinguished VC (Medwin Hughes) will be fine -- when we last heard about his stratospheric salary, it was the biggest in academia in Wales.
I'd be less worried about outdoor venues, although weren't outbreaks at the start of the pandemic linked to away games? At home you are rarely mixing with people other than your family.
I don't know anything about football or cricket or rugby grounds but I can speak with authority on racecourses.
The thing about going to a race meeting is it's hugely weather-dependent. If it's a lovely sunny afternoon or evening you can spend most of the afternoon outdoors. However, if it's a wet old day, everyone stays in and ends up watching the race on tv.
The risk is a big crowd on a wet day - not very likely for a midweek all-weather meeting to be honest. The answer is going to be reduced crowd sizes at big meetings until everyone feels confident we can return to full crowds.
Smaller meetings can be brought back to full crowds more quickly - the problem will be summer evening meetings. I see courses have started cancelling the planned music events or putting them back into August and September which seems prudent - if it's good enough for Glastonbury, it's good enough for Lingfield Park tribute night.
Are people not confusing the effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of stopping illness with the effectiveness of cutting transmission when talking herd immunity here ?
Mathematician on TV the other day was suggesting with a R0 of about 3.5 for the Kent variant, an effectiveness of stopping transmission of 66% (seen as optimistic by the people on TV) then you are going to need a lot more than 95% take up to provide herd immunity.
Plus, there is no point in having overall herd immunity if that is an average over a very large area as you'll have large parts of society hidden away with no herd immunity and the virus could easily run rampantly through those parts of the country, re-filling hospitals etc.
Keep an eye on Germany. Cases have gone up there (over three weeks ago, but so far deaths haven’t followed.
As for COVID going through the unvaccinated, that’s something we’ll have to live with (even if some of them won’t). There’s not enough anti vaxxers to cause too much trouble for the NHS.
But that is not what was originally being claimed.
We do not know, yet, how many will not take the jab, if 10% don't take it that will lead to thousands more deaths and the NHS being overwhelmed.
My wife is already on a 12+month waiting list for an operation to stop her being in continual pain, all her life, that has already been delayed nearly a year.
Allowing the NHS to for ever be overwhelmed does not just harm those who chose not to take the vaccine, but also those who have taken the vaccine but need medical treatment for other reasons.
The only was the NHS could be overwhelmed in that scenario would be if the 10% were all infected at the same time.
Which is certainly not going to happen if 90% have been vaccinated and with many of the 10% having already acquired immunity from previous infection.
Also, if 90% are vaccinated it will be much harder for the virus to spread. It wasn’t just the imminent threat of the health service being overwhelmed, but the exponential growth that caused the lockdowns.
Exactly.
But to lockdown nutters the number required for herd immunity is always higher than you will have.
If herd immunity is not reached, how do you stop the virus levels rising exponentially through the non vaccinated without some level of control to stop that from happening ?
Vaccines only need to be 70% effective at blocking transmission with 95% takeup to achieve herd immunity from a standing start. In reality we've significant existing immunity, particularly in groups which are likely to have low vax takeup.
I can't be bothered to do the numbers properly again, but even the scenario you paint of 10% unvaxed at 66% efficacy takes natural R down to about 1.3. That means a slow enough doubling rate that hospitals will cope, especially as the unprotected are concentrated in the young age bands with comparatively low hospitalisation rates.
I need to buy a specific piece of electrical kit. I can find it online, located in Germany for circa £325 or over £400 in the UK.
If I buy it online from Germany, will I be charged VAT on top as it comes into the UK?
With VAT it will be £390.
So the question must be will you pay duty, delivery or a handling charge ?
Amazon.de will remove the German VAT and add UK VAT instead - I've been buying a fair bit from Amazon's EU sites recently.
Most other German sites will leave you to sort the UK VAT out yourself - that will be £62.50 + handling fee so it's going to be very close to £400...
Thanks to everyone who responded earlier to this query... been out for a long walk followed by lunch in the garden - glorious sunshine here today. Cold snap, what cold snap?
I was actually looking at buying from the German vendor via eBay - I assume eBay don't do the Amazon thing with VAT (taking off the German VAT and adding UK)?
Edit - incidentally, there will not be a university in Lampeter by the next election, as it will be closing in the next couple of years.
Source ?
UWTSD, despite predictions of its demise, has actually expanded and expanded, swallowing up campuses in Carmarthen & Swansea & with outposts in Cardiff & London.
You know how things are done in South Wales. The VC is very close to the Labour Party and has excellent connections with the Senedd. In fact, ex-Labour pols often move on to academic appointments in Lampeter (like "Dr" Jane Davidson).
My prediction is Lampeter will be fine. And certainly, the very undistinguished VC (Medwin Hughes) will be fine -- when we last heard about his stratospheric salary, it was the biggest in academia in Wales.
And it hasn't swallowed up Carmarthen - Carmarthen has swallowed it. Hughes has been running the Lampeter campus down with a few to closure because it's a bloody nuisance to him and he wants to concentrate all the work at Carmarthen and Swansea. But to do that, he needs to do an impact assessment showing that it's no longer important to the local economy (which is why it was merged with Carmarthen in the first place rather than shut down).
From a previous thread, I'm not sure why people are surprised that Keir rates worse than Boris on honesty. Starmer is a dishonest, slimy lawyer. Not just a stereotype, but on big picture issues. He is more dishonest even than Boris and yes that says a lot, Boris lies about the small stuff, with a twinkle in his eye that says "you know I'm not being straight here, I know you know that too, but lets play along". Starmer lies on the big stuff with a straight face.
He spent years working with Corbyn, serving in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet, pushing for him to be PM. Then he gets the leadership and suddenly it is "Corbyn who?" and he's kicked out of the Party.
He was an arch Europhile, leading figure calling for a People's Vote, pushing hard for Labour to back a second referendum. Then he gets the leadership and suddenly he has no interest in Britain being in Europe.
He was pushing hard for Britain to be in the European institutions like the EMA, then the vaccine rollout is a success and suddenly he has no interest in Britain being linked to Europe.
And so on and so forth, could name other issues like his abandoning his republicanism and so on, but those big picture flip flops are what most people know about Starmer. He changes his principles without blinking and acts like nothing has even happened and like we're crazy for thinking he was previously passionately arguing the opposite.
There is something fundamentally dishonest and creepy about that.
And nothing incompetent about the UK's vaccine rollout. It's in the top 3 most competent in the world.
Which is all that now matters.
Although it is genuinely surprising that he managed to do so well at that given how great a fiasco every other policy he’s attempted has been.
I wonder if that’s because he took no personal interest in it, seemingly leaving it all to the task force?
You don't need to wonder; it's known already that SAGE (Vallance in particular) insisted that day-to-day decisions on the vaccine procurement programme (which was already underway with the work done by scientists and senior pharma execs, before politicians got interested) be kept away from politicians, because the country simply could not afford another fiasco like the Tories had made of PPE procurement.
Can you provide evidence for that claim? It would be a massive overreach by SAGE if so.
I’d be surprised at Vallance “insisting” on that as well because it’s simply not his place to do so
And nothing incompetent about the UK's vaccine rollout. It's in the top 3 most competent in the world.
Which is all that now matters.
Although it is genuinely surprising that he managed to do so well at that given how great a fiasco every other policy he’s attempted has been.
I wonder if that’s because he took no personal interest in it, seemingly leaving it all to the task force?
You don't need to wonder; it's known already that SAGE (Vallance in particular) insisted that day-to-day decisions on the vaccine procurement programme (which was already underway with the work done by scientists and senior pharma execs, before politicians got interested) be kept away from politicians, because the country simply could not afford another fiasco like the Tories had made of PPE procurement.
Can you provide evidence for that claim? It would be a massive overreach by SAGE if so.
I’d be surprised at Vallance “insisting” on that as well because it’s simply not his place to do so
Comments
I care because my wife, who is in continual pain may have her op to fix that further delayed as the NHS have to deal with that family and all the others who have done the same thing.
There ae tens if not hundreds of thousands of people like my wife, suffering through no fault of their own.
For me any negatives of having a vaccination certificate are far far outweighed by the greater likelihood of the NHS being able to return to normal to be able to serve people like my wife again.
I totally understand your position, I just value the return to normal of the NHS very very highly and think the risk of allowing the virus to run wild through the unvaccinated causing more strain on the NHS as not acceptable given the impact it is having on so many people.
Global UK must look beyond the narrow confines of the EU towards the big wide world and all its trading opportunities.
Not you Scotland obvs, YOU NEED US
If you put all the non-vaxed together, it would rise exponentially through them. For ir a short time - exponwgrowth never seems to last long.
If it’s the way he responds on here, he wouldn’t get a small fine, he’d get five years.
I agree with him (on this) though, I don’t think it will come to that. Somebody will visit him at some point, as long as Norfolk isn’t one of the areas where that recruitment agency has screwed up. They will bring a form, he will fill it in and all will be well.
Most of the nore intrusive bits there is an option not to answer.
Why don't you admit you want a permanent lockdown.
I consider the risk to the NHS and the ability for people like my wife who are suffering continually and have no prospect of that being fixed is far too high to be ignored.
People having to have a vaccination certificate, which compared to the pain my wife suffers 24hrs a day is nothing, to increase the likelihood of the NHS returning to normal faster than otherwise would be the case is very much worth it in my opinion.
I mean, if they’re even abandoning burglary cases - which we know they are - what chance of bringing a census non-returnee in?
The bigger issue is that there’s a big backlog to get through.
I do not believe that figure, it does not align to what I have seen explained on TV.
If you are wrong, if the epidemiologist on TV was correct, you increase the risk my wife suffers for much longer because you are unwilling to consider having a vaccination certificate.
I think as we come out of restrictions the state of the waiting lists for the NHS will be the next thing to be grabbing peoples attention.
The scale of the waiting lists is huge, the treatment some are waiting for is scary.
The (one) man who repeatedly slammed the door in my face was the only really unpleasant experience I had, and even he sent his form in in the end (I think he got fed up with slamming the door in my face every day).
Nicola, IMHO, has already decided there are pluses in this for her and the SNP as well as minuses.
Allowing C-19 to remain in circulation has a risk that it will negatively impact on people's non C-19 medical treatment, that risk increases with the amount of C-19 in circulation.
Having a desire to keep C-19 at a lower level as possible and the imposition people are willing to put themselves and others through to achieve that will no doubt be greatly impacted by their experiences.
My personal circumstances lead me to being very risk adverse and as such see the minimal intrusion of a vaccine certificate as well worth it, but totally understand others with differing personal circumstances will undoubtedly have different priorities.
The NHS is going to be the most visible one though, particularly those like your wife who are in urgent need of treatment.
Atletico Madrid in Liverpool.
That equates to just under 4,000 unvaccinated elderly in Newham who are, and let's not beat about the proverbial, the next potential wave of cases and deaths from all this (the equivalent number in Surrey Heath is 200)
The total of unvaccinated 70+ in England is just under half a million - I suppose many of them are and remain vulnerable to the virus. There will be many reasons why they've not been vaccinated but that is the block of people most likely to require hospitalisation going forward.
Whether 200 or 4,000, we need to do as much as we can to get these older people vaccinated if we want to get the NHS back to doing what it should and what it hasn't been able to.
https://twitter.com/m6info/status/1378089447271596038
UWTSD, despite predictions of its demise, has actually expanded and expanded, swallowing up campuses in Carmarthen & Swansea & with outposts in Cardiff & London.
You know how things are done in South Wales. The VC is very close to the Labour Party and has excellent connections with the Senedd. In fact, ex-Labour pols often move on to academic appointments in Lampeter (like "Dr" Jane Davidson).
My prediction is Lampeter will be fine. And certainly, the very undistinguished VC (Medwin Hughes) will be fine -- when we last heard about his stratospheric salary, it was the biggest in academia in Wales.
The thing about going to a race meeting is it's hugely weather-dependent. If it's a lovely sunny afternoon or evening you can spend most of the afternoon outdoors. However, if it's a wet old day, everyone stays in and ends up watching the race on tv.
The risk is a big crowd on a wet day - not very likely for a midweek all-weather meeting to be honest. The answer is going to be reduced crowd sizes at big meetings until everyone feels confident we can return to full crowds.
Smaller meetings can be brought back to full crowds more quickly - the problem will be summer evening meetings. I see courses have started cancelling the planned music events or putting them back into August and September which seems prudent - if it's good enough for Glastonbury, it's good enough for Lingfield Park tribute night.
https://twitter.com/JamesCleverly/status/1378663878473711616?s=20
NEW THREAD
I can't be bothered to do the numbers properly again, but even the scenario you paint of 10% unvaxed at 66% efficacy takes natural R down to about 1.3. That means a slow enough doubling rate that hospitals will cope, especially as the unprotected are concentrated in the young age bands with comparatively low hospitalisation rates.
I was actually looking at buying from the German vendor via eBay - I assume eBay don't do the Amazon thing with VAT (taking off the German VAT and adding UK)?
It's down to under 400 students, from 1800.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-48747118
And it hasn't swallowed up Carmarthen - Carmarthen has swallowed it. Hughes has been running the Lampeter campus down with a few to closure because it's a bloody nuisance to him and he wants to concentrate all the work at Carmarthen and Swansea. But to do that, he needs to do an impact assessment showing that it's no longer important to the local economy (which is why it was merged with Carmarthen in the first place rather than shut down).
Source - several very disgruntled lecturers.
- He spent years working with Corbyn, serving in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet, pushing for him to be PM. Then he gets the leadership and suddenly it is "Corbyn who?" and he's kicked out of the Party.
- He was an arch Europhile, leading figure calling for a People's Vote, pushing hard for Labour to back a second referendum. Then he gets the leadership and suddenly he has no interest in Britain being in Europe.
- He was pushing hard for Britain to be in the European institutions like the EMA, then the vaccine rollout is a success and suddenly he has no interest in Britain being linked to Europe.
And so on and so forth, could name other issues like his abandoning his republicanism and so on, but those big picture flip flops are what most people know about Starmer. He changes his principles without blinking and acts like nothing has even happened and like we're crazy for thinking he was previously passionately arguing the opposite.There is something fundamentally dishonest and creepy about that.
I’d be surprised at Vallance “insisting” on that as well because it’s simply not his place to do so