Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....
Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain
100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez
Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.
Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.
Not true. Ferguson has generally been one of the more level-headed boffins
Remember his original prediction, right at the start of Covid, in an interview with Channel 4 which produced outright incredulity and derision, here and elsewhere
He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation".
We have had intense lockdowns and we basically shuttered our cities, and we still have 150,000 dead, with maybe more to come
He was right. If anything he might have under-estimated how many would die with no counter-measures taken
The 'pantsdown' thing is also a bit odd, as that's not the troubling bit of what he did - his mother in law defended him, implying that he and her daughter were already separated and the woman he slept with was apparently in an open marriage. Outside of lockdown, his actions appear morally fine.
The criticism should be (only) for the hipocrisy of breaking lockdown guidance (he did not break the law, as it stood at the time) while being one of the government advisors pushing the need for lockdown.
I guess it doesn't sound as good, but "Professor Hypocrite" is a far more suitable derogatory term.
He made a serious error of judgment in his personal life but if we disregarded professional opinion because of such errors then we wouldn’t listen to any professionals. His analysis has, in this pandemic, been sound and was, until Johnson spaffed away our vaccine advantage, quite upbeat of late.
Ferguson's serious error of judgement was to fail to balance he colossal harmful effects of the lockdowns he prescribed in his recommendation
In saying he thinks 21 June is a 'very difficult decision', he is almost tacitly admitting as much.
No he didn't. "We do not consider the ethical or economic implications of either strategy here, except to note that there is no easy policy decision to be made. Suppression, while successful to date in China and South Korea, carries with it enormous social and economic costs which may themselves have significant impact on health and well-being in the short and longer-term."
Who said that? Ferguson, in the introduction to his famous paper in March. Front and centre.
Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....
Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain
Why are cases in India falling off a cliff at the moment?
To me that looks like the normal initial rolloff after a sharp surge followed by vaccine or lockdown - compare UK in Jan or Belgium last Nov.
They are at a vaccine % like the UK in very early Feb, and our cases had reduced by about half from Peak at that point.
Sujbject to data etc. Not sure what the lockdown situation is in India now.
Social distancing does not really happen in India, if this new variant was so infectious then surely it should be going through the whole unvaccinated population, its not, new cases are falling dramatically.
Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....
Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain
100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez
Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.
Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.
Not true. Ferguson has generally been one of the more level-headed boffins
Remember his original prediction, right at the start of Covid, in an interview with Channel 4 which produced outright incredulity and derision, here and elsewhere
He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation".
We have had intense lockdowns and we basically shuttered our cities, and we still have 150,000 dead, with maybe more to come
He was right. If anything he might have under-estimated how many would die with no counter-measures taken
Far too simplistic a calculation.
We have an NHS waiting list of 5million and counting, countless tales of undiagnosed cancers, a school age population up to 18 months behind in its learning, a hidden unemployment mountain of millions and an additional debt of GBP370bn. Plus, a potential wave of inflation threatening to decimate people's living standards for years.
How many deaths, in the now and in the next decade, will those cause?
Plus ironically considering the way obesity makes the virus worse, the lockdown lard a lot of people (half the country according to some surveys) have put on won't be helping either.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Where do you get a figure of 5m from? Even supposing they would all get infected and wouldn’t be protected by a degree of herd immunity and personal caution.
And also bear in mind that one the basis of your estimate the NHS would collapse even if the “delta” variant was identical to the alpha variant! 50% of massive numbers is still massive numbers!
From the England weekly release (data up to the 1st June), and using NIMS population data
The risk to 40-44 is nothing like the risk to 80+ so employing a generic “risk of severe illness/death” percentage across the lot is making a lot of assumptions. Even ignoring herd immunity effects etc.
Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....
Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain
Why are cases in India falling off a cliff at the moment?
To me that looks like the normal initial rolloff after a sharp surge followed by vaccine or lockdown - compare UK in Jan or Belgium last Nov.
They are at a vaccine % like the UK in very early Feb, and our cases had reduced by about half from Peak at that point.
Sujbject to data etc. Not sure what the lockdown situation is in India now.
To be honest if I was spotting corpses floating down the river as a regular occurrence I might stay indoors a touch more than usual.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....
Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain
100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez
Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.
Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.
Not true. Ferguson has generally been one of the more level-headed boffins
Remember his original prediction, right at the start of Covid, in an interview with Channel 4 which produced outright incredulity and derision, here and elsewhere
He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation".
We have had intense lockdowns and we basically shuttered our cities, and we still have 150,000 dead, with maybe more to come
He was right. If anything he might have under-estimated how many would die with no counter-measures taken
The 'pantsdown' thing is also a bit odd, as that's not the troubling bit of what he did - his mother in law defended him, implying that he and her daughter were already separated and the woman he slept with was apparently in an open marriage. Outside of lockdown, his actions appear morally fine.
The criticism should be (only) for the hipocrisy of breaking lockdown guidance (he did not break the law, as it stood at the time) while being one of the government advisors pushing the need for lockdown.
I guess it doesn't sound as good, but "Professor Hypocrite" is a far more suitable derogatory term.
He made a serious error of judgment in his personal life but if we disregarded professional opinion because of such errors then we wouldn’t listen to any professionals. His analysis has, in this pandemic, been sound and was, until Johnson spaffed away our vaccine advantage, quite upbeat of late.
Ferguson's serious error of judgement was to fail to balance he colossal harmful effects of the lockdowns he prescribed in his recommendation
In saying he thinks 21 June is a 'very difficult decision', he is almost tacitly admitting as much.
"He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation"."
His model predicted disaster for non-lockdown Sweden.
It didn't happen.
The model is wrong.
The model predicted 'disaster' for Sweden in a life as normal scenario. In Sweden, as elsewhere (although much less forced) people changed behaviour (and some restrictions were implemented)
The Ferguson worst case estimates are about twice (if I recall correctly) the actual death toll in Sweden. Compared to about 3-4 times the actual UK death toll (depending which death figures you use). Which makes sense if you consider that the UK locked down much harder than Sweden.
But people choose their own behaviour if they're concerned, that's the point in a liberal free society. When there's a risk, people choose their own way to respond.
Life as normal doesn't happen in any country in a pandemic.
Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....
Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain
100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez
Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.
Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.
Not true. Ferguson has generally been one of the more level-headed boffins
Remember his original prediction, right at the start of Covid, in an interview with Channel 4 which produced outright incredulity and derision, here and elsewhere
He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation".
We have had intense lockdowns and we basically shuttered our cities, and we still have 150,000 dead, with maybe more to come
He was right. If anything he might have under-estimated how many would die with no counter-measures taken
The 'pantsdown' thing is also a bit odd, as that's not the troubling bit of what he did - his mother in law defended him, implying that he and her daughter were already separated and the woman he slept with was apparently in an open marriage. Outside of lockdown, his actions appear morally fine.
The criticism should be (only) for the hipocrisy of breaking lockdown guidance (he did not break the law, as it stood at the time) while being one of the government advisors pushing the need for lockdown.
I guess it doesn't sound as good, but "Professor Hypocrite" is a far more suitable derogatory term.
He made a serious error of judgment in his personal life but if we disregarded professional opinion because of such errors then we wouldn’t listen to any professionals. His analysis has, in this pandemic, been sound and was, until Johnson spaffed away our vaccine advantage, quite upbeat of late.
Ferguson's serious error of judgement was to fail to balance he colossal harmful effects of the lockdowns he prescribed in his recommendation
In saying he thinks 21 June is a 'very difficult decision', he is almost tacitly admitting as much.
No he didn't. "We do not consider the ethical or economic implications of either strategy here, except to note that there is no easy policy decision to be made. Suppression, while successful to date in China and South Korea, carries with it enormous social and economic costs which may themselves have significant impact on health and well-being in the short and longer-term."
Who said that? Ferguson, in the introduction to his famous paper in March. Front and centre.
You've never even read it, have you?
So he didn’t balance one against the other then? He left that to the politicians.
On professor pantsdown’s original prediction, we got to something like 40% acquired immunity with about 150k excess deaths. And that was with a policy that seemed perfectly designed to ensure as many old vulnerable people as possible would catch it.
So he was a bit off. But certainly a bit better than just the correct order of magnitude.
His original forecast was before dexamethasone was known to be a viable treatment.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
Have they? Over 50s haven't all had their second jab just yet. Mine is on Tuesday. And polling suggests a plurality don't want restrictions lifted on June 21. I happen to disagree. But there we are.
The crux of the problem that @Cocky_cockney raises is that this government is functionally incompetent. I have been banging the drum for ages that "we won, we're popular, it doesn't matter" isn't good enough. Lies, corruption, incompetence, strategy based on newspaper headlines - this isn't how good government is done.
Since the start it has been blindingly obvious this clowncar government don't know how to communicate. Guidance that is contradicted one minister on the radio to the next that contradicts the law. A new 5 stage plan launched at 3.5. Regional tiers supposedly all the same but the rules are different in each place affected.
So it isn't a surprise that we're here. If you are double vaccinated then why do you need to isolate for 10 days and take 3 tests to come back from countries who have less pox than we do? Its illogical and stupid. They declared that 6 people in a choir couldn't meet covid secure in a venue to sing, but bands can play with the audience singing along. Who makes this shit up?
Fundamentally they do it and they get away with it because @Philip_Thompson and @Cocky_cockney etc rightly tear chunks of the government but vote for it anyway. They think you are stupid and tret you accordingly.
On linkedIn I currently see a thread from knowledgeable people complaining about another further coming HMRC attack on self employment.
The simple fact is that with the Tories on 40% percentage of the vote they can (sadly) do what they want.
As discussed last night, the Tories don’t need to govern for working people / the economically active.
The grey vote trumps all.
And as discussed last night that's complete claptrap.
The Tories win those aged 39+ not those aged 65+
If Labour won all years up to 65 then they'd win the election.
Sadly missing the point again.
The grey bloc is the decisive vote. Age is more explanatory than class (or education).
Hence the Tories can “fuck business” at leisure because the oldies have their triple lock and rising house prices.
Not true, the age at which most people first voted Tory in 2017 was 47 and the Tories did not win a majority.
In 2019 however the age at which most people first voted Tory was 39 and the Tories won a comfortable majority
You are missing the swing to Tory *within* the retired cohort.
I can’t read the article but what is the swing on the other wage bands?
Britain Elects tweeted this GE2019: Labour won 38.4% of non-retiree households earning between £25,000-30,000 a year, but that figure represents a fall of 12pts on 2017...
Yes. Corbyn! But astonishingly according to BES they still won all (non retired) income earners up to £100k.
Only under 34, over 34 the Tories won all classes bar DEs with Mori
You are (deliberately?) introducing new variables to muddy the key point.
Regardless of age, Labour won non retirees up to £100k.
(Though there wasn’t much in it).
Regardless of age, Labour won caveating based upon age?
If you want to exclude retirees then exclude students. You won't, because it doesn't suit your agenda.
The elephant in the room for Labour is that this win with working age + students in 2019 is trending downwards from 2017 isn’t it? @Gardenwalker you have the data, can you check please? Or @Philip_Thompson if you have it
I don’t have it. I wish I did. But others noted, yes that trend is downwards.
I’m not here to say Corbyn is popular. Far from it. I’m here to note: -the grey vote is decisive -the narrative that the working class have gone Tory is...shaky.
Those who are working class and retired have clearly gone Tory. I am far from convinced those who are working class and working have done the same.
This would align to my view, which is that the opinion polls (and actual elections) at the moment are massively skewed by continual exposure of government ministers and the PM on TV. Retired people watch more TV than any other demographic, hence the reason for so many ads for recliner chairs and stairlifts!
The pandemic "extra TV dividend" for those in power is also reflected in Wales with Mark Drakeford, and to a lesser extent Sturgeon in Scotland.
Those who wish to dismiss this may want to ask why corporations will spend a fortune on TV advertising and PR to get their executives on TV as much as possible. Those in the media that look at political balance might want to reflect on how this can be properly addressed
Those stairlifts look quite dinky but there's no way I'd have one. What if it gets stuck while you're in it?
You have an emergency alarm service, and a button on a bracelet or round your neck.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Not sure of source for hospitalisation rates, but very crudely the peak of hospitalisations in Jan wave is ~ 6-7% of the peak in cases. So your 5-10% seems reasonable. However, that's all ages and - presumably, in January - skewed towards the older population. Surely a much, much lower hospitalisation rate for the unvaxxed who will be predominantly young? (at this point, mostly 30s or under for 3 weeks post vaccination)
it's actually worse than I said
2 and a half times the hospitalisations, not twice
The @PHE_uk report today paints a grim picture - TL;DR: -delta variant has almost replaced the beta variant in much of England - 50-60% more transmissible - ~2.5x higher risk of hospitalisations - Schools appear to be a key area of spread with many large no.s of clusters
Ok, but still 2.5 times a number much smaller than 5-10% of cases assuming the older, originally more vulnerable but now double jabbed are largely safe (and the PHE report suggests about 80% protection from symptomatic infection still, probably better for hospitalisations)
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Not sure of source for hospitalisation rates, but very crudely the peak of hospitalisations in Jan wave is ~ 6-7% of the peak in cases. So your 5-10% seems reasonable. However, that's all ages and - presumably, in January - skewed towards the older population. Surely a much, much lower hospitalisation rate for the unvaxxed who will be predominantly young? (at this point, mostly 30s or under for 3 weeks post vaccination)
Yes - and this why we are seeing death rates remaining low. The issue is now the hospitalisation vulnerable. Which goes down to 40 or so.
Let's see where the 40-somethings group settles in another week. There's under a million people in England over 60 on the NIMS data without a first dose and as has been said, the true number is likely to be a bit smaller than that.
86% of over 40s having one dose and 77% of over 30s should be giving a decent firebreak and in most of the country of course, these numbers are higher. I suspect what we'll see is some smouldering embers in the more antivax locations and groups, who are by definition less careful, but by next spring it will be hard to find any cases.
IMPORTANT TO NOTE: they are now estimating REAL death totals not just government stats
Yes - to elucidate, the University of Washington model says that all those deaths have basically happened already. ie It is 99% a re-estimation of previous estimates.
Not 99%.
Check the curves on Asian countries like Thailand and Malaysia. Spiralling into a terrible third wave
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....
Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain
100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez
Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.
Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.
Not true. Ferguson has generally been one of the more level-headed boffins
Remember his original prediction, right at the start of Covid, in an interview with Channel 4 which produced outright incredulity and derision, here and elsewhere
He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation".
We have had intense lockdowns and we basically shuttered our cities, and we still have 150,000 dead, with maybe more to come
He was right. If anything he might have under-estimated how many would die with no counter-measures taken
The 'pantsdown' thing is also a bit odd, as that's not the troubling bit of what he did - his mother in law defended him, implying that he and her daughter were already separated and the woman he slept with was apparently in an open marriage. Outside of lockdown, his actions appear morally fine.
The criticism should be (only) for the hipocrisy of breaking lockdown guidance (he did not break the law, as it stood at the time) while being one of the government advisors pushing the need for lockdown.
I guess it doesn't sound as good, but "Professor Hypocrite" is a far more suitable derogatory term.
He made a serious error of judgment in his personal life but if we disregarded professional opinion because of such errors then we wouldn’t listen to any professionals. His analysis has, in this pandemic, been sound and was, until Johnson spaffed away our vaccine advantage, quite upbeat of late.
Ferguson's serious error of judgement was to fail to balance he colossal harmful effects of the lockdowns he prescribed in his recommendation
In saying he thinks 21 June is a 'very difficult decision', he is almost tacitly admitting as much.
"He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation"."
His model predicted disaster for non-lockdown Sweden.
The amount of times I've heard the Tobys of the world wittering on about that, and in the actual modelling, they only go over very specific elements and in those, they make it clear that they're modelling reductions in social mixing and anything else that works for that would do as well.
So I'd like to see where they described the restrictions applied in Sweden and came out with these numbers. I really would.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
There is severe inbuilt moral hazard into the NHS model, that is only partially addressed by tax on fags and booze and a few pence on sugar.
The difference is that Fatty Arbuckle eating a 5kg burger isn't endangering others, while Mr Proud Libertarian Contrarian is endangering others by his bizarre refusal to accept a preemptive medical intervention, in the form of a covid vaccine.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Where do you get a figure of 5m from? Even supposing they would all get infected and wouldn’t be protected by a degree of herd immunity and personal caution.
And also bear in mind that one the basis of your estimate the NHS would collapse even if the “delta” variant was identical to the alpha variant! 50% of massive numbers is still massive numbers!
From the England weekly release (data up to the 1st June), and using NIMS population data
The risk to 40-44 is nothing like the risk to 80+ so employing a generic “risk of severe illness/death” percentage across the lot is making a lot of assumptions. Even ignoring herd immunity effects etc.
From December last year, the CFR curve looked like this
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Where do you get a figure of 5m from? Even supposing they would all get infected and wouldn’t be protected by a degree of herd immunity and personal caution.
And also bear in mind that one the basis of your estimate the NHS would collapse even if the “delta” variant was identical to the alpha variant! 50% of massive numbers is still massive numbers!
From the England weekly release (data up to the 1st June), and using NIMS population data
The risk to 40-44 is nothing like the risk to 80+ so employing a generic “risk of severe illness/death” percentage across the lot is making a lot of assumptions. Even ignoring herd immunity effects etc.
From December last year, the CFR curve looked like this
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
There is severe inbuilt moral hazard into the NHS model, that is only partially addressed by tax on fags and booze and a few pence on sugar.
The difference is that Fatty Arbuckle eating a 5kg burger isn't endangering others, while Mr Proud Libertarian Contrarian is endangering others by his bizarre refusal to accept a preemptive medical intervention, in the form of a covid vaccine.
Exactly. That’s the difference. Refusing a vaccine makes you a selfish prick because you may kill others. It’s not acceptable behaviour and should come with consequences. I might not withhold treatment but I would make you last in the queue for Covid treatment, and first out the door if beds had to be prioritised.
Vaccinating children as young as 12 is going to be very controversial indeed. Whichever way the JCVI jumps.
What will be interesting is where other nations sit in the future wrt to vaccine certificates for under 18 travellers. If a vaccine is licensed in that country for 12+, is there any particular reason why they would waive the requirement for a foreign tourist aged 13? What if the country they are from has not approved vaccines in children? Messy.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
There is severe inbuilt moral hazard into the NHS model, that is only partially addressed by tax on fags and booze and a few pence on sugar.
The difference is that Fatty Arbuckle eating a 5kg burger isn't endangering others, while Mr Proud Libertarian Contrarian is endangering others by his bizarre refusal to accept a preemptive medical intervention, in the form of a covid vaccine.
Exactly. That’s the difference. Refusing a vaccine makes you a selfish prick because you may kill others. It’s not acceptable behaviour and should come with consequences. I might not withhold treatment but I would make you last in the queue for Covid treatment, and first out the door if beds had to be prioritised.
The trouble is, Fatty Arbuckle just gets put on a creaking bed somewhere in the ward. Free Spirit Bold Thinker Contrarian requires a designated ward well away from other patients.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Not sure of source for hospitalisation rates, but very crudely the peak of hospitalisations in Jan wave is ~ 6-7% of the peak in cases. So your 5-10% seems reasonable. However, that's all ages and - presumably, in January - skewed towards the older population. Surely a much, much lower hospitalisation rate for the unvaxxed who will be predominantly young? (at this point, mostly 30s or under for 3 weeks post vaccination)
Yes - and this why we are seeing death rates remaining low. The issue is now the hospitalisation vulnerable. Which goes down to 40 or so.
Let's see where the 40-somethings group settles in another week. There's under a million people in England over 60 on the NIMS data without a first dose and as has been said, the true number is likely to be a bit smaller than that.
86% of over 40s having one dose and 77% of over 30s should be giving a decent firebreak and in most of the country of course, these numbers are higher. I suspect what we'll see is some smouldering embers in the more antivax locations and groups, who are by definition less careful, but by next spring it will be hard to find any cases.
I would take the statements that the NIMS numbers are off by large amounts with a pinch of salt. That argument tends to be used by people pushing agendas.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
There is severe inbuilt moral hazard into the NHS model, that is only partially addressed by tax on fags and booze and a few pence on sugar.
The difference is that Fatty Arbuckle eating a 5kg burger isn't endangering others, while Mr Proud Libertarian Contrarian is endangering others by his bizarre refusal to accept a preemptive medical intervention, in the form of a covid vaccine.
Exactly. That’s the difference. Refusing a vaccine makes you a selfish prick because you may kill others. It’s not acceptable behaviour and should come with consequences. I might not withhold treatment but I would make you last in the queue for Covid treatment, and first out the door if beds had to be prioritised.
The trouble is, Fatty Arbuckle just gets put on a creaking bed somewhere in the ward. Free Spirit Bold Thinker Contrarian requires a designated ward well away from other patients.
Fatty Arbuckle probably didn't buy fresh mince (VAT-free) for his burgers and has likely paid 20% VAT to be paid to HMRC at whatever burger chain he bought his burgers from too.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Where do you get a figure of 5m from? Even supposing they would all get infected and wouldn’t be protected by a degree of herd immunity and personal caution.
And also bear in mind that one the basis of your estimate the NHS would collapse even if the “delta” variant was identical to the alpha variant! 50% of massive numbers is still massive numbers!
From the England weekly release (data up to the 1st June), and using NIMS population data
The risk to 40-44 is nothing like the risk to 80+ so employing a generic “risk of severe illness/death” percentage across the lot is making a lot of assumptions. Even ignoring herd immunity effects etc.
From December last year, the CFR curve looked like this
Which meant that if *every single unvaccinated person* caught COVID, you would get a max of 100K deaths
Is it possible to reverse engineer the calculation for how many cases a day we'd need to get problem levels of hospitalisation?
I've been trying to get a CHR (Case Hospitalisation Rate) calculation together. The problem is getting data to build the hospitalisation probability over time curve - there is such a curve for fatalities.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Not sure of source for hospitalisation rates, but very crudely the peak of hospitalisations in Jan wave is ~ 6-7% of the peak in cases. So your 5-10% seems reasonable. However, that's all ages and - presumably, in January - skewed towards the older population. Surely a much, much lower hospitalisation rate for the unvaxxed who will be predominantly young? (at this point, mostly 30s or under for 3 weeks post vaccination)
Yes - and this why we are seeing death rates remaining low. The issue is now the hospitalisation vulnerable. Which goes down to 40 or so.
Let's see where the 40-somethings group settles in another week. There's under a million people in England over 60 on the NIMS data without a first dose and as has been said, the true number is likely to be a bit smaller than that.
86% of over 40s having one dose and 77% of over 30s should be giving a decent firebreak and in most of the country of course, these numbers are higher. I suspect what we'll see is some smouldering embers in the more antivax locations and groups, who are by definition less careful, but by next spring it will be hard to find any cases.
I would take the statements that the NIMS numbers are off by large amounts with a pinch of salt. That argument tends to be used by people pushing agendas.
When were they last updated? Since the vaccine programme started, we'd have expected a good chunk of the 137k unvaccinated over 80 to have died wouldn't we?
Vaccinating children as young as 12 is going to be very controversial indeed. Whichever way the JCVI jumps.
What will be interesting is where other nations sit in the future wrt to vaccine certificates for under 18 travellers. If a vaccine is licensed in that country for 12+, is there any particular reason why they would waive the requirement for a foreign tourist aged 13? What if the country they are from has not approved vaccines in children? Messy.
Not to mention schools. The potential for conflict is high. Each class will contain those whose parents refuse consent, and those who don't want their kids mingling with the unvaccinated. Plus. Presumably these will be done in school? Difficult to conceal who has and hasn't been done.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
There is severe inbuilt moral hazard into the NHS model, that is only partially addressed by tax on fags and booze and a few pence on sugar.
The difference is that Fatty Arbuckle eating a 5kg burger isn't endangering others, while Mr Proud Libertarian Contrarian is endangering others by his bizarre refusal to accept a preemptive medical intervention, in the form of a covid vaccine.
Exactly. That’s the difference. Refusing a vaccine makes you a selfish prick because you may kill others. It’s not acceptable behaviour and should come with consequences. I might not withhold treatment but I would make you last in the queue for Covid treatment, and first out the door if beds had to be prioritised.
The trouble is, Fatty Arbuckle just gets put on a creaking bed somewhere in the ward. Free Spirit Bold Thinker Contrarian requires a designated ward well away from other patients.
Yes. I think the key thing is to explain to these people just how much contempt the rest of us hold them in, and make life generally unpleasant for them. No vaccine by choice? No theatre. No cinema. No sport. No pub. No restaurant. No shopping outside of three nominated hours per week. Five hours in the stocks each month if I could.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Not sure of source for hospitalisation rates, but very crudely the peak of hospitalisations in Jan wave is ~ 6-7% of the peak in cases. So your 5-10% seems reasonable. However, that's all ages and - presumably, in January - skewed towards the older population. Surely a much, much lower hospitalisation rate for the unvaxxed who will be predominantly young? (at this point, mostly 30s or under for 3 weeks post vaccination)
Yes - and this why we are seeing death rates remaining low. The issue is now the hospitalisation vulnerable. Which goes down to 40 or so.
Let's see where the 40-somethings group settles in another week. There's under a million people in England over 60 on the NIMS data without a first dose and as has been said, the true number is likely to be a bit smaller than that.
86% of over 40s having one dose and 77% of over 30s should be giving a decent firebreak and in most of the country of course, these numbers are higher. I suspect what we'll see is some smouldering embers in the more antivax locations and groups, who are by definition less careful, but by next spring it will be hard to find any cases.
I would take the statements that the NIMS numbers are off by large amounts with a pinch of salt. That argument tends to be used by people pushing agendas.
When were they last updated? Since the vaccine programme started, we'd have expected a good chunk of the 137k unvaccinated over 80 to have died wouldn't we?
They seemed to be updated in each weekly release - the numbers differ from week to week.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Where do you get a figure of 5m from? Even supposing they would all get infected and wouldn’t be protected by a degree of herd immunity and personal caution.
And also bear in mind that one the basis of your estimate the NHS would collapse even if the “delta” variant was identical to the alpha variant! 50% of massive numbers is still massive numbers!
From the England weekly release (data up to the 1st June), and using NIMS population data
The risk to 40-44 is nothing like the risk to 80+ so employing a generic “risk of severe illness/death” percentage across the lot is making a lot of assumptions. Even ignoring herd immunity effects etc.
From December last year, the CFR curve looked like this
Which meant that if *every single unvaccinated person* caught COVID, you would get a max of 100K deaths
If the Case Fatality Rate is higher then it stands to reason that there would be more deaths per head of population in the unvaccinated class. It also follows on that there would be a higher number of deaths in the vaccinated population for whom the vaccine only just saved them from death from the Alpha variant.
Whether we know if the newer variants are more lethal, I don't yet know, but it would be sensible to assume that they are for the purposes of modelling and planning for possible outcomes.
When setting public health policies, we've clearly learnt from the past 18 months that putting optimists in charge comes back to bite us.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Not sure of source for hospitalisation rates, but very crudely the peak of hospitalisations in Jan wave is ~ 6-7% of the peak in cases. So your 5-10% seems reasonable. However, that's all ages and - presumably, in January - skewed towards the older population. Surely a much, much lower hospitalisation rate for the unvaxxed who will be predominantly young? (at this point, mostly 30s or under for 3 weeks post vaccination)
Yes - and this why we are seeing death rates remaining low. The issue is now the hospitalisation vulnerable. Which goes down to 40 or so.
Let's see where the 40-somethings group settles in another week. There's under a million people in England over 60 on the NIMS data without a first dose and as has been said, the true number is likely to be a bit smaller than that.
86% of over 40s having one dose and 77% of over 30s should be giving a decent firebreak and in most of the country of course, these numbers are higher. I suspect what we'll see is some smouldering embers in the more antivax locations and groups, who are by definition less careful, but by next spring it will be hard to find any cases.
I would take the statements that the NIMS numbers are off by large amounts with a pinch of salt. That argument tends to be used by people pushing agendas.
Most people want to get to the truth.
Its estimated that between 700k and a million EU workers, who were here perfectly legally and should have been included in stats like NIMS, have left the country. If that's the case then how have the NIMS numbers been adjusted to take that into account? If they haven't they're the wrong denominator, whether you have an agenda or not.
Vaccinating children as young as 12 is going to be very controversial indeed. Whichever way the JCVI jumps.
What will be interesting is where other nations sit in the future wrt to vaccine certificates for under 18 travellers. If a vaccine is licensed in that country for 12+, is there any particular reason why they would waive the requirement for a foreign tourist aged 13? What if the country they are from has not approved vaccines in children? Messy.
Not to mention schools. The potential for conflict is high. Each class will contain those whose parents refuse consent, and those who don't want their kids mingling with the unvaccinated. Plus. Presumably these will be done in school? Difficult to conceal who has and hasn't been done.
This is actually a far bigger problem in schools for existing vaccines on childhood diseases than it is for covid. Personally I liked the model in Singapore, where if you couldn't provide a complete immunisation certificate (or medical exemption), you were barred from school.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Where do you get a figure of 5m from? Even supposing they would all get infected and wouldn’t be protected by a degree of herd immunity and personal caution.
And also bear in mind that one the basis of your estimate the NHS would collapse even if the “delta” variant was identical to the alpha variant! 50% of massive numbers is still massive numbers!
From the England weekly release (data up to the 1st June), and using NIMS population data
The risk to 40-44 is nothing like the risk to 80+ so employing a generic “risk of severe illness/death” percentage across the lot is making a lot of assumptions. Even ignoring herd immunity effects etc.
From December last year, the CFR curve looked like this
Which meant that if *every single unvaccinated person* caught COVID, you would get a max of 100K deaths
Is it possible to reverse engineer the calculation for how many cases a day we'd need to get problem levels of hospitalisation?
I've been trying to get a CHR (Case Hospitalisation Rate) calculation together. The problem is getting data to build the hospitalisation probability over time curve - there is such a curve for fatalities.
Well stick at it because I don't think we'll see one from the government.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
Not sure of source for hospitalisation rates, but very crudely the peak of hospitalisations in Jan wave is ~ 6-7% of the peak in cases. So your 5-10% seems reasonable. However, that's all ages and - presumably, in January - skewed towards the older population. Surely a much, much lower hospitalisation rate for the unvaxxed who will be predominantly young? (at this point, mostly 30s or under for 3 weeks post vaccination)
Yes - and this why we are seeing death rates remaining low. The issue is now the hospitalisation vulnerable. Which goes down to 40 or so.
Let's see where the 40-somethings group settles in another week. There's under a million people in England over 60 on the NIMS data without a first dose and as has been said, the true number is likely to be a bit smaller than that.
86% of over 40s having one dose and 77% of over 30s should be giving a decent firebreak and in most of the country of course, these numbers are higher. I suspect what we'll see is some smouldering embers in the more antivax locations and groups, who are by definition less careful, but by next spring it will be hard to find any cases.
I would take the statements that the NIMS numbers are off by large amounts with a pinch of salt. That argument tends to be used by people pushing agendas.
When were they last updated? Since the vaccine programme started, we'd have expected a good chunk of the 137k unvaccinated over 80 to have died wouldn't we?
They seemed to be updated in each weekly release - the numbers differ from week to week.
Behind every man now alive stand thirty ghosts, for that is the ratio by which the dead outnumber the living - Arthur C. Clarke
Boo!
Is that anywhere near correct? I thought that because of population growth and longevity a much higher proportion of humans are alive today than at any time in human history?
This little graphic is quite illuminating.
It's amazing that the level of native americans is so low, given the size of the USA. I guess that agricultural methods, or the lack of them held back their population?
Estimates I’ve seen for the population pre-colonisation were more like 7-15 million.
They were devastated by European diseases that had travelled north from South America before any significant European colonisation of the north. Imagine what 70-90% death rates does to a civilisation.
Then the remnant population was squeezed by the incoming colonists in various terrible ways. Rampant alcoholism feuled by sale of hard liquour by unscrupulous merchants, the Trail of Tears, low grade violence from white settlers etc etc.
All true, but doesn't really explain why the population of North America was so low in 1000 compared to South America.
My understanding is that an analysis of Native American languages suggests that after crossing the Bering Strait, human societies moved south to South America and then repopulated the north from South America. Had some massive calamity befallen the original settlers in the North? It's not inconceivable that diseases brought from the viking transAtlanticists could have been calamitous for North Americans. Though it seems highly unfortunate that such a small European population and the relatively small number of contacts which must have taken place could infect the whole continent.
Then as now, Americans eat too much beef. Chasing buffalo about the place was never going to lead to massive population growth.
"250% excess mortality April-May 2021 in Delhi, India (25k absolute). A city where randomised Ab surveillance survey had found 56% previously exposed by Feb 2021.
Equivalent excess rate for UK would be 230k excess deaths over the 2 months for context of the scale of the wave."
"250% excess mortality April-May 2021 in Delhi, India (25k absolute). A city where randomised Ab surveillance survey had found 56% previously exposed by Feb 2021.
Equivalent excess rate for UK would be 230k excess deaths over the 2 months for context of the scale of the wave."
That Ab surveillance study was debunked as seriously flawed. It was like the Brazilian one in manaus that said whatever it was 75% or something crazy had Ab.
Other Ab surveysbin India had it at more like 20% in urban areas.
Vaccinating children as young as 12 is going to be very controversial indeed. Whichever way the JCVI jumps.
What will be interesting is where other nations sit in the future wrt to vaccine certificates for under 18 travellers. If a vaccine is licensed in that country for 12+, is there any particular reason why they would waive the requirement for a foreign tourist aged 13? What if the country they are from has not approved vaccines in children? Messy.
Not to mention schools. The potential for conflict is high. Each class will contain those whose parents refuse consent, and those who don't want their kids mingling with the unvaccinated. Plus. Presumably these will be done in school? Difficult to conceal who has and hasn't been done.
This is actually a far bigger problem in schools for existing vaccines on childhood diseases than it is for covid. Personally I liked the model in Singapore, where if you couldn't provide a complete immunisation certificate (or medical exemption), you were barred from school.
The problem is this - for fatalities we have scientific papers which come up with distribution curves that match the observed fatality curves quite well. So you can take the number of cases, and project forward the expected number of deaths over the following days. Then try and match that against what actually happened.
For hospital admission, I have haven't found a paper on this - yet. Without that probability curve, it's not really possible to do the calculation of the CHR.
To work out such a curve, you need to analyse the medical records of alot of people. Plot the graph of what happened, when and try a find a function that generates a similar curve.
Vaccinating children as young as 12 is going to be very controversial indeed. Whichever way the JCVI jumps.
What will be interesting is where other nations sit in the future wrt to vaccine certificates for under 18 travellers. If a vaccine is licensed in that country for 12+, is there any particular reason why they would waive the requirement for a foreign tourist aged 13? What if the country they are from has not approved vaccines in children? Messy.
Not to mention schools. The potential for conflict is high. Each class will contain those whose parents refuse consent, and those who don't want their kids mingling with the unvaccinated. Plus. Presumably these will be done in school? Difficult to conceal who has and hasn't been done.
This is actually a far bigger problem in schools for existing vaccines on childhood diseases than it is for covid. Personally I liked the model in Singapore, where if you couldn't provide a complete immunisation certificate (or medical exemption), you were barred from school.
The problem is this - for fatalities we have scientific papers which come up with distribution curves that match the observed fatality curves quite well. So you can take the number of cases, and project forward the expected number of deaths over the following days. Then try and match that against what actually happened.
For hospital admission, I have haven't found a paper on this - yet. Without that probability curve, it's not really possible to do the calculation of the CHR.
To work out such a curve, you need to analyse the medical records of alot of people. Plot the graph of what happened, when and try a find a function that generates a similar curve.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
I see that the hysterical hyperventilation over the effects of the Indian Plague in the UK hasn't let up.
I'm fascinated to hear what logical explanation can be found to square the catastrophic predictions of hundreds of thousands of deaths, a collapsed healthcare system and yet more sodding lockdowns that we're presently hearing from some people with the facts on the ground. How are these apocalyptic scenarios consistent with the outcomes being observed in Bolton or in Bedford?
I see that the hysterical hyperventilation over the effects of the Indian Plague in the UK hasn't let up.
I'm fascinated to hear what logical explanation can be found to square the catastrophic predictions of hundreds of thousands of deaths, a collapsed healthcare system and yet more sodding lockdowns that we're presently hearing from some people with the facts on the ground. How are these apocalyptic scenarios consistent with the outcomes being observed in Bolton or in Bedford?
It's a good point. To be clear I do not think we will go back into another full lockdown. However the increase in cases nationally is not for shrugging at.
Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....
Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain
100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez
Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.
Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.
Not true. Ferguson has generally been one of the more level-headed boffins
Remember his original prediction, right at the start of Covid, in an interview with Channel 4 which produced outright incredulity and derision, here and elsewhere
He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation".
We have had intense lockdowns and we basically shuttered our cities, and we still have 150,000 dead, with maybe more to come
He was right. If anything he might have under-estimated how many would die with no counter-measures taken
The 'pantsdown' thing is also a bit odd, as that's not the troubling bit of what he did - his mother in law defended him, implying that he and her daughter were already separated and the woman he slept with was apparently in an open marriage. Outside of lockdown, his actions appear morally fine.
The criticism should be (only) for the hipocrisy of breaking lockdown guidance (he did not break the law, as it stood at the time) while being one of the government advisors pushing the need for lockdown.
I guess it doesn't sound as good, but "Professor Hypocrite" is a far more suitable derogatory term.
He made a serious error of judgment in his personal life but if we disregarded professional opinion because of such errors then we wouldn’t listen to any professionals. His analysis has, in this pandemic, been sound and was, until Johnson spaffed away our vaccine advantage, quite upbeat of late.
Ferguson's serious error of judgement was to fail to balance he colossal harmful effects of the lockdowns he prescribed in his recommendation
In saying he thinks 21 June is a 'very difficult decision', he is almost tacitly admitting as much.
"He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation"."
His model predicted disaster for non-lockdown Sweden.
It didn't happen.
The model is wrong.
The model predicted 'disaster' for Sweden in a life as normal scenario. In Sweden, as elsewhere (although much less forced) people changed behaviour (and some restrictions were implemented)
The Ferguson worst case estimates are about twice (if I recall correctly) the actual death toll in Sweden. Compared to about 3-4 times the actual UK death toll (depending which death figures you use). Which makes sense if you consider that the UK locked down much harder than Sweden.
But people choose their own behaviour if they're concerned, that's the point in a liberal free society. When there's a risk, people choose their own way to respond.
Life as normal doesn't happen in any country in a pandemic.
I didn't get your point to start with (might still not). Is it that the models were therefore unrealistic?
If so, then yes - and that's why many of us were arguing against the doom mongers early last year, saying that these projections would never happen because they depended on no mitigation which would happen.
But how do you do a realistic model, in early 2020 on no government action, if so? Now it's a bit easier, some data, particularly thanks to Sweden. But early last year it was very hard to say if, when, in what ways and how much people would modify their behaviour. Some data from SARS1 etc, but in very different countries. Before that, you're back to Spanish flu for a really big one and that's not very applicable - most people back then if they didn't physically go out to work then they had no income.
I see that the hysterical hyperventilation over the effects of the Indian Plague in the UK hasn't let up.
I'm fascinated to hear what logical explanation can be found to square the catastrophic predictions of hundreds of thousands of deaths, a collapsed healthcare system and yet more sodding lockdowns that we're presently hearing from some people with the facts on the ground. How are these apocalyptic scenarios consistent with the outcomes being observed in Bolton or in Bedford?
It's a good point. To be clear I do not think we will go back into another full lockdown. However the increase in cases nationally is not for shrugging at.
I’m more interested if that translates to hospitalisations
I see that the hysterical hyperventilation over the effects of the Indian Plague in the UK hasn't let up.
I'm fascinated to hear what logical explanation can be found to square the catastrophic predictions of hundreds of thousands of deaths, a collapsed healthcare system and yet more sodding lockdowns that we're presently hearing from some people with the facts on the ground. How are these apocalyptic scenarios consistent with the outcomes being observed in Bolton or in Bedford?
It's a good point. To be clear I do not think we will go back into another full lockdown. However the increase in cases nationally is not for shrugging at.
Unless or until proper evidence is unearthed to demonstrate that it is likely to put the healthcare system under severe and sustained pressure, then I would argue that, basically, it is for shrugging at. Otherwise, if we have a massive panic flap every time a new variant is detected or a cluster breaks out somewhere, we're going to be living a half-life governed by rules and prohibitions forever.
I see that the hysterical hyperventilation over the effects of the Indian Plague in the UK hasn't let up.
I'm fascinated to hear what logical explanation can be found to square the catastrophic predictions of hundreds of thousands of deaths, a collapsed healthcare system and yet more sodding lockdowns that we're presently hearing from some people with the facts on the ground. How are these apocalyptic scenarios consistent with the outcomes being observed in Bolton or in Bedford?
It's a good point. To be clear I do not think we will go back into another full lockdown. However the increase in cases nationally is not for shrugging at.
I disagree entirely.
Cases are not as significant a factor as they once were.
Hospitalisations (including duration of stay, as it seems to be much shorter now) are the only figures that should be influencing government in the next 10 days.
It should be especially interested in the areas around Blackburn, Bolton, Bedford etc.
I wonder what your imaginary Israeli counterpart is currently saying? Probably something like 'phew its lucky they didn't listen to my bearishness a couple of months ago when our cases rose'....
Vaccinating children as young as 12 is going to be very controversial indeed. Whichever way the JCVI jumps.
What will be interesting is where other nations sit in the future wrt to vaccine certificates for under 18 travellers. If a vaccine is licensed in that country for 12+, is there any particular reason why they would waive the requirement for a foreign tourist aged 13? What if the country they are from has not approved vaccines in children? Messy.
Not to mention schools. The potential for conflict is high. Each class will contain those whose parents refuse consent, and those who don't want their kids mingling with the unvaccinated. Plus. Presumably these will be done in school? Difficult to conceal who has and hasn't been done.
This is actually a far bigger problem in schools for existing vaccines on childhood diseases than it is for covid. Personally I liked the model in Singapore, where if you couldn't provide a complete immunisation certificate (or medical exemption), you were barred from school.
The problem is this - for fatalities we have scientific papers which come up with distribution curves that match the observed fatality curves quite well. So you can take the number of cases, and project forward the expected number of deaths over the following days. Then try and match that against what actually happened.
For hospital admission, I have haven't found a paper on this - yet. Without that probability curve, it's not really possible to do the calculation of the CHR.
To work out such a curve, you need to analyse the medical records of alot of people. Plot the graph of what happened, when and try a find a function that generates a similar curve.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
Just read that 1 million people are suffering from Long Covid in the UK. This could have a long lasting impact on our society, in particular as a strain on our Health Services.
That's why I am all for vaccinating children if the evidence is there that it is safe to do so. I just don't think with this you can just let it mingle through the populace even though the chances of hospitalisation are low for this age range.
Half of passengers booked to travel to Portugal this month with Tui are going ahead with their trips, despite the country being moved to the amber list.
Why Airbridge v2 is dumb....if there really is a super mutant vaccine resistant strain in Portugal, its going to be imported here.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
You're not thinking straight.
No NHS treatment for the unvaccinated, mountain climbers, motorcyclists, 3-day eventers, flint knappers, lumberjacks, boxers and blokes who insist on going up a ladder to fix things.
I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.
That has happened now.
But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?
Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS
We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)
However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies
I’m sorry but I have to agree with this. The relentless optimism about 21 June on here, which I used to share, is just wilful blindness
Are people optimistic? Many are very optimistic that the situation is such we should reopen, which may or may not be right, but whether Boris will do that even in that scenario they may be less optimistic.
Vaccinating children as young as 12 is going to be very controversial indeed. Whichever way the JCVI jumps.
What will be interesting is where other nations sit in the future wrt to vaccine certificates for under 18 travellers. If a vaccine is licensed in that country for 12+, is there any particular reason why they would waive the requirement for a foreign tourist aged 13? What if the country they are from has not approved vaccines in children? Messy.
Not to mention schools. The potential for conflict is high. Each class will contain those whose parents refuse consent, and those who don't want their kids mingling with the unvaccinated. Plus. Presumably these will be done in school? Difficult to conceal who has and hasn't been done.
This is actually a far bigger problem in schools for existing vaccines on childhood diseases than it is for covid. Personally I liked the model in Singapore, where if you couldn't provide a complete immunisation certificate (or medical exemption), you were barred from school.
The problem is this - for fatalities we have scientific papers which come up with distribution curves that match the observed fatality curves quite well. So you can take the number of cases, and project forward the expected number of deaths over the following days. Then try and match that against what actually happened.
For hospital admission, I have haven't found a paper on this - yet. Without that probability curve, it's not really possible to do the calculation of the CHR.
To work out such a curve, you need to analyse the medical records of alot of people. Plot the graph of what happened, when and try a find a function that generates a similar curve.
He's trying to claim lockdown only started on the 26th of March because that was when the Coronavirus legislation went into force and not the 23rd when lockdown was announce, people were told to stay at home and schools were closed?
Half of passengers booked to travel to Portugal this month with Tui are going ahead with their trips, despite the country being moved to the amber list.
Why Airbridge v2 is dumb....if there really is a super mutant vaccine resistant strain in Portugal, its going to be imported here.
The one thing we have consistently got wrong is travel. We seem to be making the very same mistakes as last year. It goes beyond not learning lessons, it's almost as though the government wants to get in a mess.
Vaccinating children as young as 12 is going to be very controversial indeed. Whichever way the JCVI jumps.
What will be interesting is where other nations sit in the future wrt to vaccine certificates for under 18 travellers. If a vaccine is licensed in that country for 12+, is there any particular reason why they would waive the requirement for a foreign tourist aged 13? What if the country they are from has not approved vaccines in children? Messy.
Not to mention schools. The potential for conflict is high. Each class will contain those whose parents refuse consent, and those who don't want their kids mingling with the unvaccinated. Plus. Presumably these will be done in school? Difficult to conceal who has and hasn't been done.
This is actually a far bigger problem in schools for existing vaccines on childhood diseases than it is for covid. Personally I liked the model in Singapore, where if you couldn't provide a complete immunisation certificate (or medical exemption), you were barred from school.
The problem is this - for fatalities we have scientific papers which come up with distribution curves that match the observed fatality curves quite well. So you can take the number of cases, and project forward the expected number of deaths over the following days. Then try and match that against what actually happened.
For hospital admission, I have haven't found a paper on this - yet. Without that probability curve, it's not really possible to do the calculation of the CHR.
To work out such a curve, you need to analyse the medical records of alot of people. Plot the graph of what happened, when and try a find a function that generates a similar curve.
Interesting. I wouldn't find it that surprising, if true (particularly for the original variant, on which this is based?). Afterall, you only need to do enough to put R<1 to make cases decline, albeit possibly slowly (measures making R=0.99 a couple of weeks before full lockdown could give you a pre-lockdown peak).
Also, in this case, it's fatal infections being looked at? If treatment got a bit better, that could also shift that peak forwards a bit.
What a hard lockdown probably does is drop off the cases much more quickly, by reducing R more than the lesser measures.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Tell you what. Why not just have the bloody vaccine and be done with it all.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
This seemingly widespread talk of and belief in ghosts, conspiracy theories, aliens, etc on PB of all places, is proof if proof be needed of the battering that people's mental health has taken over the course of this pandemic. They have sadly been beaten down and are ready to believe anything because that (tinfoil hat on) is how we are easy to govern.
Hold it together, people, ffs.
I don't believe in ghosts but I am a logical person and the phantom call to my mums mobile by my mobile as I was saying goodbye to her in her hallway, when my phone was in my pocket and was not ringing her, defied logic.
Butt dial? There is and will be an explanation short of Elizabeth II calling to see how your mum was doing.
Phone was screen locked, no record of any call to my mum, when she answered the call there was no one there.
The coincidence of being in my mums house for the first time in months and a phantom call being made to her mobile from my mobile just as I was saying goodbye was surreal. The look on her face as she showed me her phone with my name as the caller when I had my phone in my hand showing I was not calling her was hilarious.
So this was probably a scam call. Why they picked your number is more interesting. It could be at random, which would make this a pretty neat co-incidence. I've noticed that scammers recently seem to pick numbers *similar* to mine, which might make it more likely if hers is similar to yours (eg, because you bought them at the same time)
The other possibility would be that the scammer had obtained your contact list somehow, and was going to pull an a scam along the lines of 'I'm trapped in china without my passport, please send money'
Scam calls are often silent because they assign the call to an operator only if the victim stays on the line, and they want to max out their operators time so overbook callees.
This week a 32-year-old Canadian woman, Jasmine Hartin, was accused of the negligent manslaughter of a local [Belizean] police superintendent, Henry Jemmott. The case has attracted attention because Hartin is the partner of Andrew Ashcroft, son of Michael Ashcroft, the Conservative party donor and Belize’s most influential resident. Lord Ashcroft is a former Tory party deputy chairman, a one-time member of the House of Lords, and a billionaire.
The question now is whether justice can be dispassionately delivered, given Lord Ashcroft’s larger-than-life status in the one-time British colony, which won independence in 1981, to the displeasure of next-door Guatemala. Ashcroft is a joint UK and Belize national. He has made no comment.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
This week a 32-year-old Canadian woman, Jasmine Hartin, was accused of the negligent manslaughter of a local [Belizean] police superintendent, Henry Jemmott. The case has attracted attention because Hartin is the partner of Andrew Ashcroft, son of Michael Ashcroft, the Conservative party donor and Belize’s most influential resident. Lord Ashcroft is a former Tory party deputy chairman, a one-time member of the House of Lords, and a billionaire.
The question now is whether justice can be dispassionately delivered, given Lord Ashcroft’s larger-than-life status in the one-time British colony, which won independence in 1981, to the displeasure of next-door Guatemala. Ashcroft is a joint UK and Belize national. He has made no comment.
I'm probably skirting the sub judice rule here...but I think she got a bit lucky with a negligent manslaughter charge...
This seemingly widespread talk of and belief in ghosts, conspiracy theories, aliens, etc on PB of all places, is proof if proof be needed of the battering that people's mental health has taken over the course of this pandemic. They have sadly been beaten down and are ready to believe anything because that (tinfoil hat on) is how we are easy to govern.
Hold it together, people, ffs.
I don't believe in ghosts but I am a logical person and the phantom call to my mums mobile by my mobile as I was saying goodbye to her in her hallway, when my phone was in my pocket and was not ringing her, defied logic.
Butt dial? There is and will be an explanation short of Elizabeth II calling to see how your mum was doing.
Phone was screen locked, no record of any call to my mum, when she answered the call there was no one there.
The coincidence of being in my mums house for the first time in months and a phantom call being made to her mobile from my mobile just as I was saying goodbye was surreal. The look on her face as she showed me her phone with my name as the caller when I had my phone in my hand showing I was not calling her was hilarious.
So this was probably a scam call. Why they picked your number is more interesting. It could be at random, which would make this a pretty neat co-incidence. I've noticed that scammers recently seem to pick numbers *similar* to mine, which might make it more likely if hers is similar to yours (eg, because you bought them at the same time)
The other possibility would be that the scammer had obtained your contact list somehow, and was going to pull an a scam along the lines of 'I'm trapped in china without my passport, please send money'
Scam calls are often silent because they assign the call to an operator only if the victim stays on the line, and they want to max out their operators time so overbook callees.
It was through Whatsapp.
Never happened before nor since. It was the first time I had stood in her hallway for 4 months.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
I think you would have more credibility with us all if you just admitted you are a right wing nutter that is scared of needles.
This seemingly widespread talk of and belief in ghosts, conspiracy theories, aliens, etc on PB of all places, is proof if proof be needed of the battering that people's mental health has taken over the course of this pandemic. They have sadly been beaten down and are ready to believe anything because that (tinfoil hat on) is how we are easy to govern.
Hold it together, people, ffs.
I don't believe in ghosts but I am a logical person and the phantom call to my mums mobile by my mobile as I was saying goodbye to her in her hallway, when my phone was in my pocket and was not ringing her, defied logic.
Butt dial? There is and will be an explanation short of Elizabeth II calling to see how your mum was doing.
Phone was screen locked, no record of any call to my mum, when she answered the call there was no one there.
The coincidence of being in my mums house for the first time in months and a phantom call being made to her mobile from my mobile just as I was saying goodbye was surreal. The look on her face as she showed me her phone with my name as the caller when I had my phone in my hand showing I was not calling her was hilarious.
So this was probably a scam call. Why they picked your number is more interesting. It could be at random, which would make this a pretty neat co-incidence. I've noticed that scammers recently seem to pick numbers *similar* to mine, which might make it more likely if hers is similar to yours (eg, because you bought them at the same time)
The other possibility would be that the scammer had obtained your contact list somehow, and was going to pull an a scam along the lines of 'I'm trapped in china without my passport, please send money'
Scam calls are often silent because they assign the call to an operator only if the victim stays on the line, and they want to max out their operators time so overbook callees.
Or to put it another way: when it comes to scams, never attribute to coincidence what can be explained by malice.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
So as little as possible means just about everything then?
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
So as little as possible means just about everything then?
It seems so. Short of injecting into his body a government-mandated substance. Not that.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
So you are doing almost everything the government is asking of you then. It's not exactly top sectret that people have been getting away with meeting people from outside their bubble hroughout this. You are one very odd character.
I see that the hysterical hyperventilation over the effects of the Indian Plague in the UK hasn't let up.
I'm fascinated to hear what logical explanation can be found to square the catastrophic predictions of hundreds of thousands of deaths, a collapsed healthcare system and yet more sodding lockdowns that we're presently hearing from some people with the facts on the ground. How are these apocalyptic scenarios consistent with the outcomes being observed in Bolton or in Bedford?
It's a good point. To be clear I do not think we will go back into another full lockdown. However the increase in cases nationally is not for shrugging at.
I disagree entirely.
Cases are not as significant a factor as they once were.
Hospitalisations (including duration of stay, as it seems to be much shorter now) are the only figures that should be influencing government in the next 10 days.
It should be especially interested in the areas around Blackburn, Bolton, Bedford etc.
I wonder what your imaginary Israeli counterpart is currently saying? Probably something like 'phew its lucky they didn't listen to my bearishness a couple of months ago when our cases rose'....
Taking the England-only figures, and hospitalisations from August onwards, and assuming a 10 day lag between cases and hospitalisations, I get:
Maximum Case Hospitalisation Rate: 12.1% (December); went over 10% again in mid-Feb Average CHR since August: 7.2% Current CHR: 4.1%
It's very crude and back-of-the-envelope, but it does indicate a significant decrease in hospitalisations against cases, even with Delta factored in.
If we get around 4% instead of close to 10%, it means that any given case rate leads to half the admissions rate as before. And that's not taking into account the reduction in time in hospital.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
So as little as possible means just about everything then?
It seems so. Short of injecting into his body a government-mandated substance. Not that.
...that while mandated by HM Government said substance(s) is(are) independently developed and declared safe and efficacious by numerous independent regulatory bodies all over the world.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
I think you would have more credibility with us all if you just admitted you are a right wing nutter that is scared of needles.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
I think you would have more credibility with us all if you just admitted you are a right wing nutter that is scared of needles.
Perhaps he thinks vaccines are the work of Satan.
Ah, indeed. As in the Christian baptismal vow to "reject Satan and all his works".
I always thought this a little unfair as I thought his earlier stuff, before he went a little too surrealist, was really rather good.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
So as little as possible means just about everything then?
It seems so. Short of injecting into his body a government-mandated substance. Not that.
...that while mandated by HM Government said substance(s) is(are) independently developed and declared safe and efficacious by numerous independent regulatory bodies all over the world.
So what? The government has told us to inject ourselves with something and some people think that crosses a line. For whatever reason. I can live with that. Very happy with it.
"250% excess mortality April-May 2021 in Delhi, India (25k absolute). A city where randomised Ab surveillance survey had found 56% previously exposed by Feb 2021.
Equivalent excess rate for UK would be 230k excess deaths over the 2 months for context of the scale of the wave."
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
I think you would have more credibility with us all if you just admitted you are a right wing nutter that is scared of needles.
Perhaps he thinks vaccines are the work of Satan.
Again, just take a step back and think about it. Vaccines are a great idea; I've had both of mine. But I can perfectly understand someone who draws a line at the government telling them what to inject into their body ffs. What if @contrarian was a 29-year old pregnant woman? There would be the same abuse aimed at him (er, her) whereas there has been found to be a small but non-zero risk of the AZN vaccine for such people.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
So as little as possible means just about everything then?
It seems so. Short of injecting into his body a government-mandated substance. Not that.
...that while mandated by HM Government said substance(s) is(are) independently developed and declared safe and efficacious by numerous independent regulatory bodies all over the world.
So what? The government has told us to inject ourselves with something and some people think that crosses a line. For whatever reason. I can live with that. Very happy with it.
They asked people to get vaccinated. Not told or mandated.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
So as little as possible means just about everything then?
It seems so. Short of injecting into his body a government-mandated substance. Not that.
...that while mandated by HM Government said substance(s) is(are) independently developed and declared safe and efficacious by numerous independent regulatory bodies all over the world.
So what? The government has told us to inject ourselves with something and some people think that crosses a line. For whatever reason. I can live with that. Very happy with it.
Well, indeed, it is good that people should have the right to make decisions for themselves, even if such a decision is monumentally dumb. It is also good that the rest of society should get maximum mileage out of taking the piss out of them for their stupidity.
"250% excess mortality April-May 2021 in Delhi, India (25k absolute). A city where randomised Ab surveillance survey had found 56% previously exposed by Feb 2021.
Equivalent excess rate for UK would be 230k excess deaths over the 2 months for context of the scale of the wave."
India has nothing like the level of vaccination as the UK, and health care is worse. Tweets like that are utterly irresponsible.
Its also deliberately misleading, as the one figure picked for the Ab survey is massive outlier, with plenty of criticism of the methodology. Others have it at 20-30% for various urban areas. They know it and choosing not to say so.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
So as little as possible means just about everything then?
It seems so. Short of injecting into his body a government-mandated substance. Not that.
...that while mandated by HM Government said substance(s) is(are) independently developed and declared safe and efficacious by numerous independent regulatory bodies all over the world.
So what? The government has told us to inject ourselves with something and some people think that crosses a line. For whatever reason. I can live with that. Very happy with it.
Well, indeed, it is good that people should have the right to make decisions for themselves, even if such a decision is monumentally dumb. It is also good that the rest of society should get maximum mileage out of taking the piss out of them for their stupidity.
It is, after all, a free country. Oh no wait....not yet...
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
So as little as possible means just about everything then?
It seems so. Short of injecting into his body a government-mandated substance. Not that.
...that while mandated by HM Government said substance(s) is(are) independently developed and declared safe and efficacious by numerous independent regulatory bodies all over the world.
So what? The government has told us to inject ourselves with something and some people think that crosses a line. For whatever reason. I can live with that. Very happy with it.
They asked people to get vaccinated. Not told or mandated.
Indeed they did. And some chose not to. Great. The NHS is safe.
"250% excess mortality April-May 2021 in Delhi, India (25k absolute). A city where randomised Ab surveillance survey had found 56% previously exposed by Feb 2021.
Equivalent excess rate for UK would be 230k excess deaths over the 2 months for context of the scale of the wave."
India has nothing like the level of vaccination as the UK, and health care is worse. Tweets like that are utterly irresponsible.
Its also deliberately misleading, as the one figure picked for the Ab survey is massive outlier, with plenty of criticism of the methodology. Others have it at 20-30% for various urban areas. They know it and choosing not to say so.
The tweet is just about the scale of devastation in India, not the UK.
I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.
I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.
That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)
I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.
Fuck them. Really. Enough
I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.
Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.
Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want
But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster
No if you are stopping me from being treated from covid then the NHS no longer free at the point of use, so I want a fully contracted out deal.
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
You can’t “contract out” of the NHS. There is no such thing as private emergency medicine or high dependency units. If you’re in a private hospital, past a certain point they’ll send you on to the NHS.
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
Ah does this mean I can ask the NHS to stop treating people who are over 25 stone for diabetes, based on the extra risk they have chosen to take relating to that disease? or stop treating smokers for lung problems on the same basis?
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Though worth remembering that sweets and almost all takeaway food is taxed whereas vegetables and almost all grocery foods are not. And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
That's a fair point.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
Forgotten now - what's your reason for not getting vaccinated?
I have been bitterly and opposed to government policy on covid since the start.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
So as little as possible means just about everything then?
It seems so. Short of injecting into his body a government-mandated substance. Not that.
...that while mandated by HM Government said substance(s) is(are) independently developed and declared safe and efficacious by numerous independent regulatory bodies all over the world.
So what? The government has told us to inject ourselves with something and some people think that crosses a line. For whatever reason. I can live with that. Very happy with it.
They asked people to get vaccinated. Not told or mandated.
I think one can argue that it was "mandated" because a govt agency (MHRA) mandated it to be safe and efficacious. We were also "told" to get vaccinated, but are not "required". There are a number of people that I would like to tell to f*** off, but they are not obliged to do so.
"250% excess mortality April-May 2021 in Delhi, India (25k absolute). A city where randomised Ab surveillance survey had found 56% previously exposed by Feb 2021.
Equivalent excess rate for UK would be 230k excess deaths over the 2 months for context of the scale of the wave."
India has nothing like the level of vaccination as the UK, and health care is worse. Tweets like that are utterly irresponsible.
Its also deliberately misleading, as the one figure picked for the Ab survey is massive outlier, with plenty of criticism of the methodology. Others have it at 20-30% for various urban areas. They know it and choosing not to say so.
The tweet is just about the scale of devastation in India, not the UK.
Comments
"We do not consider the ethical or economic implications of either strategy here, except to note that there is no easy policy decision to be made. Suppression, while successful to date in China and South Korea, carries with it enormous social and economic costs which may themselves have significant impact on health and well-being in the short and longer-term."
Who said that? Ferguson, in the introduction to his famous paper in March. Front and centre.
You've never even read it, have you?
OK I'm off to get my chipped tooth fixed
Later
No treatment. No payment. Fully private.
Look at the NHS now. For a service that has been 'protected' it is totally on its knees.
Life as normal doesn't happen in any country in a pandemic.
And polling suggests a plurality don't want restrictions lifted on June 21.
I happen to disagree. But there we are.
Tories 41%
Labour 33%
LDs 9%
Greens 6%
https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1400781950093344769?s=20h
(Possible mangled blockquotes)
So in his terms, his offer is fair - you get the full service for everything except the risk you have chosen to take on Covid.
86% of over 40s having one dose and 77% of over 30s should be giving a decent firebreak and in most of the country of course, these numbers are higher. I suspect what we'll see is some smouldering embers in the more antivax locations and groups, who are by definition less careful, but by next spring it will be hard to find any cases.
A choice all the above have made more deliberately made than the choice I made on Covid.
Especially as it wasn't me that made your freedoms based on hospital numbers.
Where?
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf
The amount of times I've heard the Tobys of the world wittering on about that, and in the actual modelling, they only go over very specific elements and in those, they make it clear that they're modelling reductions in social mixing and anything else that works for that would do as well.
So I'd like to see where they described the restrictions applied in Sweden and came out with these numbers. I really would.
The difference is that Fatty Arbuckle eating a 5kg burger isn't endangering others, while Mr Proud Libertarian Contrarian is endangering others by his bizarre refusal to accept a preemptive medical intervention, in the form of a covid vaccine.
0-14 0.00%
15-44 0.06%
45-64 0.41%
65-74 7.73%
75-84 20.29%
85+ 34.63%
Which meant that if *every single unvaccinated person* caught COVID, you would get a max of 100K deaths
And smokers are good for the Exchequer given tobacco duties and the fact they die early so don't claim pensions.
You being a twunt just because you feel it, isn't taxed.
The potential for conflict is high. Each class will contain those whose parents refuse consent, and those who don't want their kids mingling with the unvaccinated.
Plus. Presumably these will be done in school? Difficult to conceal who has and hasn't been done.
Whether we know if the newer variants are more lethal, I don't yet know, but it would be sensible to assume that they are for the purposes of modelling and planning for possible outcomes.
When setting public health policies, we've clearly learnt from the past 18 months that putting optimists in charge comes back to bite us.
Its estimated that between 700k and a million EU workers, who were here perfectly legally and should have been included in stats like NIMS, have left the country. If that's the case then how have the NIMS numbers been adjusted to take that into account? If they haven't they're the wrong denominator, whether you have an agenda or not.
"250% excess mortality April-May 2021 in Delhi, India (25k absolute). A city where randomised Ab surveillance survey had found 56% previously exposed by Feb 2021.
Equivalent excess rate for UK would be 230k excess deaths over the 2 months for context of the scale of the wave."
https://twitter.com/DevanSinha/status/1400777312522706945
Maybe 21 June isn't such a great idea?
You would think they hadn't vaccinated anybody.
I think we can be fairly sure it wasn't deliberate...
Other Ab surveysbin India had it at more like 20% in urban areas.
For hospital admission, I have haven't found a paper on this - yet. Without that probability curve, it's not really possible to do the calculation of the CHR.
To work out such a curve, you need to analyse the medical records of alot of people. Plot the graph of what happened, when and try a find a function that generates a similar curve.
Maybe we could consider an 'unvaccinated' insurance premium.....I would pay that.
I'm fascinated to hear what logical explanation can be found to square the catastrophic predictions of hundreds of thousands of deaths, a collapsed healthcare system and yet more sodding lockdowns that we're presently hearing from some people with the facts on the ground. How are these apocalyptic scenarios consistent with the outcomes being observed in Bolton or in Bedford?
If so, then yes - and that's why many of us were arguing against the doom mongers early last year, saying that these projections would never happen because they depended on no mitigation which would happen.
But how do you do a realistic model, in early 2020 on no government action, if so? Now it's a bit easier, some data, particularly thanks to Sweden. But early last year it was very hard to say if, when, in what ways and how much people would modify their behaviour. Some data from SARS1 etc, but in very different countries. Before that, you're back to Spanish flu for a really big one and that's not very applicable - most people back then if they didn't physically go out to work then they had no income.
Cases are not as significant a factor as they once were.
Hospitalisations (including duration of stay, as it seems to be much shorter now) are the only figures that should be influencing government in the next 10 days.
It should be especially interested in the areas around Blackburn, Bolton, Bedford etc.
I wonder what your imaginary Israeli counterpart is currently saying? Probably something like 'phew its lucky they didn't listen to my bearishness a couple of months ago when our cases rose'....
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins
On a serious note -
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.02090.pdf
That's why I am all for vaccinating children if the evidence is there that it is safe to do so. I just don't think with this you can just let it mingle through the populace even though the chances of hospitalisation are low for this age range.
Why Airbridge v2 is dumb....if there really is a super mutant vaccine resistant strain in Portugal, its going to be imported here.
No NHS treatment for the unvaccinated, mountain climbers, motorcyclists, 3-day eventers, flint knappers, lumberjacks, boxers and blokes who insist on going up a ladder to fix things.
Vaccines appear to be holding back a surge in hospital admissions.
But as @jasonleitch explained at today's Covid briefing, a small % will still be hospitalised... and a small % of a big number can be a big number https://twitter.com/ChrisMusson/status/1400794905375543298/photo/1
It's an approach I suppose.
Also, in this case, it's fatal infections being looked at? If treatment got a bit better, that could also shift that peak forwards a bit.
What a hard lockdown probably does is drop off the cases much more quickly, by reducing R more than the lesser measures.
So this was probably a scam call. Why they picked your number is more interesting. It could be at random, which would make this a pretty neat co-incidence. I've noticed that scammers recently seem to pick numbers *similar* to mine, which might make it more likely if hers is similar to yours (eg, because you bought them at the same time)
The other possibility would be that the scammer had obtained your contact list somehow, and was going to pull an a scam along the lines of 'I'm trapped in china without my passport, please send money'
Scam calls are often silent because they assign the call to an operator only if the victim stays on the line, and they want to max out their operators time so overbook callees.
The question now is whether justice can be dispassionately delivered, given Lord Ashcroft’s larger-than-life status in the one-time British colony, which won independence in 1981, to the displeasure of next-door Guatemala. Ashcroft is a joint UK and Belize national. He has made no comment.
It follows therefore that I am doing as little as possible on the government's command that I can get away with.
That said, I wear a mask, work from home, socially distance and almost never meet people outside my bubble.
Never happened before nor since. It was the first time I had stood in her hallway for 4 months.
https://order-order.com/2021/06/04/the-cummings-effect-tories-take-16-point-polling-lead/
Maximum Case Hospitalisation Rate: 12.1% (December); went over 10% again in mid-Feb
Average CHR since August: 7.2%
Current CHR: 4.1%
It's very crude and back-of-the-envelope, but it does indicate a significant decrease in hospitalisations against cases, even with Delta factored in.
If we get around 4% instead of close to 10%, it means that any given case rate leads to half the admissions rate as before. And that's not taking into account the reduction in time in hospital.
I always thought this a little unfair as I thought his earlier stuff, before he went a little too surrealist, was really rather good.