Mr. kamski, was there a suggestion HM didn't like the baby's name? I thought the disagreement was whether or not Harry had consulted her.
On-topic: I hope we can unlock far more on schedule. The current situation exceeds the best case scenario when the 21 June date was named as decision day. It's more than odd to say "things far exceed our expectations, which is why we're postponing unlocking".
I do think public consent for the lockdown measures will start eroding significantly if that's the situation.
Honestly, it feels like the government, scientists and everyone else are having a nervous breakdown over the end of COVID. They've become institutionalised and are afraid of what freedom entails. Any extension to these measures will see us through to 2022. Thousands of businesses will go under and we'll never full recover. Our economy will never be as dynamic as it was as the economic boom turns into a whimper of permanent social distancing.
Players’ Tribune do have some really good writers.
The fans are still going to boo the players kneeling before the matches.
Southgate’s piece sounds like a David Cameron leadership pitch, ie empty ‘modernising’ dross.
I don’t think I’ll be booing at the matches as I’m too polite for that but you can tell from the supporters club forum he isn’t winning too many over. Ultimately though he’ll be judged by results on the pitch and I’m not overly optimistic England are in a good place on the eve of the tournament.
Mr. kamski, was there a suggestion HM didn't like the baby's name? I thought the disagreement was whether or not Harry had consulted her.
On-topic: I hope we can unlock far more on schedule. The current situation exceeds the best case scenario when the 21 June date was named as decision day. It's more than odd to say "things far exceed our expectations, which is why we're postponing unlocking".
I do think public consent for the lockdown measures will start eroding significantly if that's the situation.
If the queen likes the name then what on earth is the bleeding problem? I didn't consult my parents about my child's name - never occurred to anyone that that was bad manners.
The people who were going to set up an Independent Country in 18 months can't transfer powers they were given 5 years ago....for another 3 years:
A senior SNP minister has blamed “technical challenges” for the Scottish government’s failure to take full control over devolved benefits as she demands more powers from Westminster.
Shona Robison, who has pushed this week for Holyrood to have full command over employment rights, said that the snagging issues centred on the “safe and secure” transfer of data.
What is required up there is a proper incentive. 1. A second referendum producing a Yes vote; 2. A declaration from the remainder of the UK that we expect them to be gone in a year.
The Scottish Government can get all of this sorted out if London is no longer willing to hold its hand. And if it can't, well, quite honestly, who gives a fuck?
Repeatedly saying who gives a fuck is a notably convincing way of indicating that one doesn’t give a fuck.
Entirely accurate in this case though. You go, we're rid of each other. Scotland inside the UK has to be looked after, Scotland outside the UK is no different to Denmark. If it has issues then they're for the people who live there to sort out, ultimately.
In that case perhaps time to start criticising the lying, self serving prick who seems intent on blocking the mechanism for making this come to pass, particularly if you voted for him?
BBC R4 reporting Palace sources say the Sussexes did NOT consult the Queen over the use of Lilibet - contradicting claims from their “friends” that Harry had discussed it with her beforehand.
At some point, the Sussexes and the Palace need to decide if they want to renormalise peaceful relations, or if they'd prefer this continued low-level bickering. A third choice would be simply to STFU.
The Sussex's behaviour is bonkers. Seems therefore to use Lilibet was deeply offensive without asking first. They can call their child what they like but they lack manners in not having asked (if true)
Why would they ask? Who cares man? This is ridiculous.
Usually, unless the name in question is Adolf or Ikea, grandparents who don't like the name parents have given a child keep their opinion to themselves, unless they are arseholes. This is such an obvious rule of life it is weird how some people are siding with the grandparent on this. Meghan Derangement Syndrome?
I think it would have been courteous to have asked, not to have asked just shows a lack of manners, most especially because it is Her Majesty.
But, even if it is bad manners, which is worse manners? Not asking permission to use a name first, or letting the whole world know that you disapprove of the name the parents have given your grandchild?
They are not even in the same league.
You are misrepresenting what the Palace spokesperson said. The statement as mentioned earlier on this thread simply said the Queen had not been asked about the name as Harry and Meghan had stated. It was purely a refutal, nothing more.
Mr. kamski, was there a suggestion HM didn't like the baby's name? I thought the disagreement was whether or not Harry had consulted her.
On-topic: I hope we can unlock far more on schedule. The current situation exceeds the best case scenario when the 21 June date was named as decision day. It's more than odd to say "things far exceed our expectations, which is why we're postponing unlocking".
I do think public consent for the lockdown measures will start eroding significantly if that's the situation.
(While noting that I agree about 21 June and don't yet see good reason to delay)
Direction of travel is more important than absolue numbers - I'd rather we were where the projections said and cases still declining than at a lower base and cases rising. If cases are still declining then R<1 and you can open up more an possibly still keep R<1. With cases rising R>1 and opening up more will make R>1 by a larger amount.
That doesn't change the fact that it's not cases per se that we should be basing unlocking on, but hospitalisations and the data there are still pretty good. But if we had more cases than at present but still heading downwards then I don't think there would be an serious questioning of unlocking on 21 June.
The people who were going to set up an Independent Country in 18 months can't transfer powers they were given 5 years ago....for another 3 years:
A senior SNP minister has blamed “technical challenges” for the Scottish government’s failure to take full control over devolved benefits as she demands more powers from Westminster.
Shona Robison, who has pushed this week for Holyrood to have full command over employment rights, said that the snagging issues centred on the “safe and secure” transfer of data.
What is required up there is a proper incentive. 1. A second referendum producing a Yes vote; 2. A declaration from the remainder of the UK that we expect them to be gone in a year.
The Scottish Government can get all of this sorted out if London is no longer willing to hold its hand. And if it can't, well, quite honestly, who gives a fuck?
Repeatedly saying who gives a fuck is a notably convincing way of indicating that one doesn’t give a fuck.
Entirely accurate in this case though. You go, we're rid of each other. Scotland inside the UK has to be looked after, Scotland outside the UK is no different to Denmark. If it has issues then they're for the people who live there to sort out, ultimately.
In that case perhaps time to start criticising the lying, self serving prick who seems intent on blocking the mechanism for making this come to pass, particularly if you voted for him?
Mr. kamski, the apparent claim (not exactly keeping fully abreast of this) that she was consulted being false?
Recollections may vary is becoming something of a theme.
Well, I admit to not having followed the story very closely. I had the impression that there were stories that the queen disapproved the name, which led to the sussexes' claim that they had consulted. But in any case the queen could easily put an end to it by saying that it's a great name.
Mr. Selebian, I'd suggest serious cases are the most important metric.
If people are catching it asymptomatically or with minimal impact, that's not serious. Obviously declining rather than rising cases is preferable, but if there's a falling correlation between cases and serious symptoms/deaths that's a very good thing.
Not only is there an economic case for unlocking, those who aren't as helpfully introverted as me have, in many instances, been finding this situation very difficult to cope with.
Mr. kamski, the apparent claim (not exactly keeping fully abreast of this) that she was consulted being false?
Recollections may vary is becoming something of a theme.
Well, I admit to not having followed the story very closely. I had the impression that there were stories that the queen disapproved the name, which led to the sussexes' claim that they had consulted. But in any case the queen could easily put an end to it by saying that it's a great name.
Why should she? They have behaved despicably and deserve no such consideration.
Personally I think that we're running into trouble again - a view shared by several senior people in the borough with no axe to grind. The Surrey case rate is up 68% over last week (and nationally it's up 53%), and hospitalisations are rising too. This appears to be overwhelmingly younger, not fully vaccinated people, and a chunk of those are having serious problems. Compliance is finally crumbling as people have genuinely lost track of what the rules are.
The hard-headed answer is to wait with relaxation, in particular international travel, until the great majority of adults (and IMO children too) have been vaccinated. After a period where the authorities got serious about the situation we have relapsed into vacillation.
Those cases aren't translating into increased hospitalisations. If you get COVID, get some or no symptoms and don't need to go to hospital or use any NHS resources does it matter if you get it or not? That's the situation for 28m double jabbed people in groups 1-9 with that number growing by 450k per day on average. For groups 10-12 the risk is already extremely low (less than 1/4000) and that is reduced between 60-80% with just a single dose of Pfizer or Moderna 12 days post vaccine.
Once again, no one can answer the question - exactly who is going to overwhelm the NHS? Which group of people will present an overwhelming number of cases to the NHS? It's not the 30m vaccinated old, it's not the young because most of the cases in young people were in groups 4 and 6 who have all been double jabbed. The only group left that is at risk are vaccine refusers. National policy cannot be crafted around people who have refused to help themselves.
The risk is now all individual and we as individuals should be able to take that risk the same as someone climbing up a mountain or even just going for a drive.
If you get COVID, get some or no symptoms and don't need to go to hospital or use any NHS resources does it matter if you get it or not?
Actually this might be desirable - a soft case post virus & post vax your immunity will be up so if a nastier variant comes along then you'll have greater protection.
Haven't some knowledgeable people said that ultimately we're all going to be infected ?
Better that many do so by allowing it to seep through the country this summer than get hit by more concentrated and dangerous waves winter after winter.
Mr. kamski, was there a suggestion HM didn't like the baby's name? I thought the disagreement was whether or not Harry had consulted her.
On-topic: I hope we can unlock far more on schedule. The current situation exceeds the best case scenario when the 21 June date was named as decision day. It's more than odd to say "things far exceed our expectations, which is why we're postponing unlocking".
I do think public consent for the lockdown measures will start eroding significantly if that's the situation.
If the queen likes the name then what on earth is the bleeding problem? I didn't consult my parents about my child's name - never occurred to anyone that that was bad manners.
But did you give it your living grandmother's personal family pet name? (Actually that doesn't sound too bad either. The only thing is, if you are a Royal and public property, personal family names are probably guarded jealously. And she is The Queen).
LONDON — EU officials and diplomats are discussing an emergency plan to solve the impasse over the Brexit settlement in Northern Ireland by restricting Ireland’s access to the bloc’s single market for goods.
The idea, which is causing extreme anxiety in Dublin where officials see it as unfair punishment for its neighbor’s decision to Brexit, is meant as a backup plan to solve the conundrum of where to carry out vital checks on goods. These are designed to protect EU countries from food and plant diseases.
That issue was meant to have been solved by the Northern Ireland protocol, a key part of the Brexit deal, but London is resisting implementing this part of the agreement which it claims is unworkable.
Has 'freedom day' been put back two weeks? My news sources are still describing it as in the balance. Have I missed something?
The government are definitely preparing the ground for some kind of delay. I expect it will be a week or two weeks. Essentially 10 days after the end of the programme for groups 1-9 which will be finished in 4-8 days depending on your definition (actually groups 1-9 or 32m people double jabbed). My worry is that the same people banging the delay drum will move the goalposts again when we approach the date and it will be getting all 18+ single jabbed which won't happen until mid July. Then it's complete the programme which will take another 3-4 weeks at least. Then there'll be an interminable argument about vaccines for kids and we'll wait for that, then schools are opening so we have to wait and see whether it's safe to remove the final measures. Then it's October and we need to complete the booster programme for over 50s. Then it's the "24 hours to save the NHS" rubbish we get every year.
There's always going to be a reason to delay. We need to pull the plaster off and deal with the consequences. Would it be better if everyone was double jabbed? Of course. Is our current national vaccine profile going to lead to the NHS being overwhelmed? No. Then it's time to get on with it and call an end to COVID.
BBC R4 reporting Palace sources say the Sussexes did NOT consult the Queen over the use of Lilibet - contradicting claims from their “friends” that Harry had discussed it with her beforehand.
At some point, the Sussexes and the Palace need to decide if they want to renormalise peaceful relations, or if they'd prefer this continued low-level bickering. A third choice would be simply to STFU.
The Sussex's behaviour is bonkers. Seems therefore to use Lilibet was deeply offensive without asking first. They can call their child what they like but they lack manners in not having asked (if true)
Why would they ask? Who cares man? This is ridiculous.
Usually, unless the name in question is Adolf or Ikea, grandparents who don't like the name parents have given a child keep their opinion to themselves, unless they are arseholes. This is such an obvious rule of life it is weird how some people are siding with the grandparent on this. Meghan Derangement Syndrome?
I think it would have been courteous to have asked, not to have asked just shows a lack of manners, most especially because it is Her Majesty.
But, even if it is bad manners, which is worse manners? Not asking permission to use a name first, or letting the whole world know that you disapprove of the name the parents have given your grandchild?
They are not even in the same league.
You are misrepresenting what the Palace spokesperson said. The statement as mentioned earlier on this thread simply said the Queen had not been asked about the name as Harry and Meghan had stated. It was purely a refutal, nothing more.
tbh, I haven't seen the statements, but if "the Palace" can take the trouble to contradict the Sussexes on this, then "the Palace" could surely take the trouble to contradict all the media reports of the name being "rude" "an insult" etc if they are incorrect.
Players’ Tribune do have some really good writers.
The fans are still going to boo the players kneeling before the matches.
Southgate’s piece sounds like a David Cameron leadership pitch, ie empty ‘modernising’ dross.
I don’t think I’ll be booing at the matches as I’m too polite for that but you can tell from the supporters club forum he isn’t winning too many over. Ultimately though he’ll be judged by results on the pitch and I’m not overly optimistic England are in a good place on the eve of the tournament.
My best guess is that England will scrape second place in the group and then go down to a pathetic defeat in the first knockout game. Defeat to Poland in a penalty shootout or something like that.
Personally I think that we're running into trouble again - a view shared by several senior people in the borough with no axe to grind. The Surrey case rate is up 68% over last week (and nationally it's up 53%), and hospitalisations are rising too. This appears to be overwhelmingly younger, not fully vaccinated people, and a chunk of those are having serious problems. Compliance is finally crumbling as people have genuinely lost track of what the rules are.
The hard-headed answer is to wait with relaxation, in particular international travel, until the great majority of adults (and IMO children too) have been vaccinated. After a period where the authorities got serious about the situation we have relapsed into vacillation.
But Nick. What does “running into trouble really mean?” Yes case numbers are bound to rise to some extent across the board. Yea unfortunately some will get sick, some seriously. But that, in itself can not be used as a reason for delay - where that delay in itself has significant downsides for the economy and all that involves. Because the vaccines likely mean there is a ceiling on how bad things can get. We are seeing that in places like Bolton.
What is in danger of happening is that we are in danger of using past experience of COVID to dominate future decisions, when the situation has clearly changed.
The logic being applied, is one that, if extended to anything other than COVID, would eg. result in a national lockdown every winter. Are we/is the NHS in more “trouble” now than it would experience in an average December?
And there is the point that many are making that if we are going to have an “exit wave” then better to have it in the summer, than extending into the winter.
It’s odd phrases like “running into trouble” or “riding the rollercoaster” that are part of the problem with this debate. What do people mean when they say this?
Either vaccination works, or it doesn’t, and the vulnerable were double jabbed long ago.
My brother informs me that Brussels has reopened cinemas, restricted indoor dining, office working etc.
They seem to be three weeks behind us in terms of their re-opening schedule.
They'll be many, many months ahead of us by the end of this. What's the betting that we'll still be trudging around in these stupid bloody masks at Christmas?
BBC R4 reporting Palace sources say the Sussexes did NOT consult the Queen over the use of Lilibet - contradicting claims from their “friends” that Harry had discussed it with her beforehand.
At some point, the Sussexes and the Palace need to decide if they want to renormalise peaceful relations, or if they'd prefer this continued low-level bickering. A third choice would be simply to STFU.
The Sussex's behaviour is bonkers. Seems therefore to use Lilibet was deeply offensive without asking first. They can call their child what they like but they lack manners in not having asked (if true)
Why would they ask? Who cares man? This is ridiculous.
Usually, unless the name in question is Adolf or Ikea, grandparents who don't like the name parents have given a child keep their opinion to themselves, unless they are arseholes. This is such an obvious rule of life it is weird how some people are siding with the grandparent on this. Meghan Derangement Syndrome?
I think it would have been courteous to have asked, not to have asked just shows a lack of manners, most especially because it is Her Majesty.
My brother informs me that Brussels has reopened cinemas, restricted indoor dining, office working etc.
They seem to be three weeks behind us in terms of their re-opening schedule.
They'll be many, many months ahead of us by the end of this. What's the betting that we'll still be trudging around in these stupid bloody masks at Christmas?
Mr. kamski, the apparent claim (not exactly keeping fully abreast of this) that she was consulted being false?
Recollections may vary is becoming something of a theme.
Well, I admit to not having followed the story very closely. I had the impression that there were stories that the queen disapproved the name, which led to the sussexes' claim that they had consulted. But in any case the queen could easily put an end to it by saying that it's a great name.
Why should she? They have behaved despicably and deserve no such consideration.
Oh give over!
They named their child after the child's grandmother and greatgrandmother.
Same as millions of kids all around the globe. Its a perfectly normal and reasonable thing to do and a great grandmother who finds out that their great grandchild has been named after them should be honoured. So good for them. Stop getting your knickers in a twist, its ridiculous.
Mr. kamski, the apparent claim (not exactly keeping fully abreast of this) that she was consulted being false?
Recollections may vary is becoming something of a theme.
Well, I admit to not having followed the story very closely. I had the impression that there were stories that the queen disapproved the name, which led to the sussexes' claim that they had consulted. But in any case the queen could easily put an end to it by saying that it's a great name.
There has been no comment from the palace or "sources" on the queen's opinion of the name.
The Sussex's story has evolved from "asked the queen before the birth" to "told the queen before the public announcement".
BBC R4 reporting Palace sources say the Sussexes did NOT consult the Queen over the use of Lilibet - contradicting claims from their “friends” that Harry had discussed it with her beforehand.
At some point, the Sussexes and the Palace need to decide if they want to renormalise peaceful relations, or if they'd prefer this continued low-level bickering. A third choice would be simply to STFU.
The Sussex's behaviour is bonkers. Seems therefore to use Lilibet was deeply offensive without asking first. They can call their child what they like but they lack manners in not having asked (if true)
Why would they ask? Who cares man? This is ridiculous.
Usually, unless the name in question is Adolf or Ikea, grandparents who don't like the name parents have given a child keep their opinion to themselves, unless they are arseholes. This is such an obvious rule of life it is weird how some people are siding with the grandparent on this. Meghan Derangement Syndrome?
I think it would have been courteous to have asked, not to have asked just shows a lack of manners, most especially because it is Her Majesty.
No it doesn't.
Completely agreed. Its perfectly normal for parents to inform, not ask, their own parents or if they're still alive their grandparents (now great grandparents) what the name is. And its perfectly normal to name a baby after a loved one. And its perfectly normal that to be informed, not asked, that its the name to be honoured as a result.
Some people really have an unhealthy obsession with this couple and their baby child. Its really creepy.
Personally I think that we're running into trouble again - a view shared by several senior people in the borough with no axe to grind. The Surrey case rate is up 68% over last week (and nationally it's up 53%), and hospitalisations are rising too. This appears to be overwhelmingly younger, not fully vaccinated people, and a chunk of those are having serious problems. Compliance is finally crumbling as people have genuinely lost track of what the rules are.
The hard-headed answer is to wait with relaxation, in particular international travel, until the great majority of adults (and IMO children too) have been vaccinated. After a period where the authorities got serious about the situation we have relapsed into vacillation.
Those cases aren't translating into increased hospitalisations. If you get COVID, get some or no symptoms and don't need to go to hospital or use any NHS resources does it matter if you get it or not? That's the situation for 28m double jabbed people in groups 1-9 with that number growing by 450k per day on average. For groups 10-12 the risk is already extremely low (less than 1/4000) and that is reduced between 60-80% with just a single dose of Pfizer or Moderna 12 days post vaccine.
Once again, no one can answer the question - exactly who is going to overwhelm the NHS? Which group of people will present an overwhelming number of cases to the NHS? It's not the 30m vaccinated old, it's not the young because most of the cases in young people were in groups 4 and 6 who have all been double jabbed. The only group left that is at risk are vaccine refusers. National policy cannot be crafted around people who have refused to help themselves.
The risk is now all individual and we as individuals should be able to take that risk the same as someone climbing up a mountain or even just going for a drive.
If you get COVID, get some or no symptoms and don't need to go to hospital or use any NHS resources does it matter if you get it or not?
Actually this might be desirable - a soft case post virus & post vax your immunity will be up so if a nastier variant comes along then you'll have greater protection.
Haven't some knowledgeable people said that ultimately we're all going to be infected ?
Better that many do so by allowing it to seep through the country this summer than get hit by more concentrated and dangerous waves winter after winter.
Most people. The sterilisation efficacy of the Astra vaccine against the indian variant looks like it may well be too low to prevent most cases (Just make them mild). Is this the fundamental problem ? I think it's serendipitous that under 40s are on mRNA to be perfectly frank.
We need to start vilifying and sanctioning antivaxxers and those too lazy to get vaccinated. Also those who needlessly went overseas.
A special circle of hell needs to be created for them.
Exile them in Middlesbrough and no NHS access for them.
These tossers are holding the country back, chuck in Boris Johnson for the fannying about he did and delaying the adding India to the red list.
Hartlepool would be more appropriate
Middlesbrough is much worse.
If a nuclear strike hit 'Boro it would improve the place.
That’s what they always said about Manchester. The IRA bombed the Arndale and caused £1bn of improvements.
They weren't wrong. The IRA bomb prompted a huge wave of redevelopment. The Arndale Centre had just finished a refit that kept its delightful 1970s public toilet beige tiles. The IRA blew them off, and the area is now fabulous.
Mr. kamski, was there a suggestion HM didn't like the baby's name? I thought the disagreement was whether or not Harry had consulted her.
On-topic: I hope we can unlock far more on schedule. The current situation exceeds the best case scenario when the 21 June date was named as decision day. It's more than odd to say "things far exceed our expectations, which is why we're postponing unlocking".
I do think public consent for the lockdown measures will start eroding significantly if that's the situation.
If the queen likes the name then what on earth is the bleeding problem? I didn't consult my parents about my child's name - never occurred to anyone that that was bad manners.
But did you give it your living grandmother's personal family pet name? (Actually that doesn't sound too bad either. The only thing is, if you are a Royal and public property, personal family names are probably guarded jealously. And she is The Queen).
No, and thanks for reminding me that Elizabeth is the great-grandmother, not the grandmother, duh. Shows how much I know!
The problem is obviously the breakdown in relations in the family, but a wise and gracious response to the choice of name would be to take it as an olive branch, even if that wasn't the intention, or even if it was but you think it was a very clumsy olive branch!
Personally I think that we're running into trouble again - a view shared by several senior people in the borough with no axe to grind. The Surrey case rate is up 68% over last week (and nationally it's up 53%), and hospitalisations are rising too. This appears to be overwhelmingly younger, not fully vaccinated people, and a chunk of those are having serious problems. Compliance is finally crumbling as people have genuinely lost track of what the rules are.
The hard-headed answer is to wait with relaxation, in particular international travel, until the great majority of adults (and IMO children too) have been vaccinated. After a period where the authorities got serious about the situation we have relapsed into vacillation.
Those cases aren't translating into increased hospitalisations. If you get COVID, get some or no symptoms and don't need to go to hospital or use any NHS resources does it matter if you get it or not? That's the situation for 28m double jabbed people in groups 1-9 with that number growing by 450k per day on average. For groups 10-12 the risk is already extremely low (less than 1/4000) and that is reduced between 60-80% with just a single dose of Pfizer or Moderna 12 days post vaccine.
Once again, no one can answer the question - exactly who is going to overwhelm the NHS? Which group of people will present an overwhelming number of cases to the NHS? It's not the 30m vaccinated old, it's not the young because most of the cases in young people were in groups 4 and 6 who have all been double jabbed. The only group left that is at risk are vaccine refusers. National policy cannot be crafted around people who have refused to help themselves.
The risk is now all individual and we as individuals should be able to take that risk the same as someone climbing up a mountain or even just going for a drive.
If you get COVID, get some or no symptoms and don't need to go to hospital or use any NHS resources does it matter if you get it or not?
Actually this might be desirable - a soft case post virus & post vax your immunity will be up so if a nastier variant comes along then you'll have greater protection.
Haven't some knowledgeable people said that ultimately we're all going to be infected ?
Better that many do so by allowing it to seep through the country this summer than get hit by more concentrated and dangerous waves winter after winter.
Most people. The sterilisation efficacy of the Astra vaccine against the indian variant looks like it may well be too low to prevent most cases (Just make them mild). Is this the fundamental problem ? I think it's serendipitous that under 40s are on mRNA to be perfectly frank.
Yes, on the latter it's actually a huge national benefit as Pfizer and Moderna are better at preventing the spread and under 40s are much likelier to spread the virus. The cumulative risk reduction from that decision is massive as transmission chains simply don't exist.
Personally I think that we're running into trouble again - a view shared by several senior people in the borough with no axe to grind. The Surrey case rate is up 68% over last week (and nationally it's up 53%), and hospitalisations are rising too. This appears to be overwhelmingly younger, not fully vaccinated people, and a chunk of those are having serious problems. Compliance is finally crumbling as people have genuinely lost track of what the rules are.
The hard-headed answer is to wait with relaxation, in particular international travel, until the great majority of adults (and IMO children too) have been vaccinated. After a period where the authorities got serious about the situation we have relapsed into vacillation.
But Nick. What does “running into trouble really mean?” Yes case numbers are bound to rise to some extent across the board. Yea unfortunately some will get sick, some seriously. But that, in itself can not be used as a reason for delay - where that delay in itself has significant downsides for the economy and all that involves. Because the vaccines likely mean there is a ceiling on how bad things can get. We are seeing that in places like Bolton.
What is in danger of happening is that we are in danger of using past experience of COVID to dominate future decisions, when the situation has clearly changed.
The logic being applied, is one that, if extended to anything other than COVID, would eg. result in a national lockdown every winter. Are we/is the NHS in more “trouble” now than it would experience in an average December?
And there is the point that many are making that if we are going to have an “exit wave” then better to have it in the summer, than extending into the winter.
It’s odd phrases like “running into trouble” or “riding the rollercoaster” that are part of the problem with this debate. What do people mean when they say this?
Either vaccination works, or it doesn’t, and the vulnerable were double jabbed long ago.
This binary of “either the vaccination works or it doesn’t” is also a large part of the problem with this debate. In this case it is clear that, unlike Alpha, Delta works far better with two shots, so the single dose strategy that worked for Alpha must be superseded, which obviously is going to take a bit more time than envisaged in February.
@ydoethur I think @Dura_Ace is a misanthrope who loves animals but hates people.
I like some people (Greta, Bielsa, AOC, Mrs DA, that XF Motorsports guy on YouTube) I just hate tories, cultural conservatives and rich people with shit cars.
Players’ Tribune do have some really good writers.
The fans are still going to boo the players kneeling before the matches.
Southgate’s piece sounds like a David Cameron leadership pitch, ie empty ‘modernising’ dross.
I don’t think I’ll be booing at the matches as I’m too polite for that but you can tell from the supporters club forum he isn’t winning too many over. Ultimately though he’ll be judged by results on the pitch and I’m not overly optimistic England are in a good place on the eve of the tournament.
My best guess is that England will scrape second place in the group and then go down to a pathetic defeat in the first knockout game. Defeat to Poland in a penalty shootout or something like that.
No doubt getting booed by their own knuckle-dragging supporters will give the England players the extra edge they need.
Personally I think that we're running into trouble again - a view shared by several senior people in the borough with no axe to grind. The Surrey case rate is up 68% over last week (and nationally it's up 53%), and hospitalisations are rising too. This appears to be overwhelmingly younger, not fully vaccinated people, and a chunk of those are having serious problems. Compliance is finally crumbling as people have genuinely lost track of what the rules are.
The hard-headed answer is to wait with relaxation, in particular international travel, until the great majority of adults (and IMO children too) have been vaccinated. After a period where the authorities got serious about the situation we have relapsed into vacillation.
Those cases aren't translating into increased hospitalisations. If you get COVID, get some or no symptoms and don't need to go to hospital or use any NHS resources does it matter if you get it or not? That's the situation for 28m double jabbed people in groups 1-9 with that number growing by 450k per day on average. For groups 10-12 the risk is already extremely low (less than 1/4000) and that is reduced between 60-80% with just a single dose of Pfizer or Moderna 12 days post vaccine.
Once again, no one can answer the question - exactly who is going to overwhelm the NHS? Which group of people will present an overwhelming number of cases to the NHS? It's not the 30m vaccinated old, it's not the young because most of the cases in young people were in groups 4 and 6 who have all been double jabbed. The only group left that is at risk are vaccine refusers. National policy cannot be crafted around people who have refused to help themselves.
The risk is now all individual and we as individuals should be able to take that risk the same as someone climbing up a mountain or even just going for a drive.
If you get COVID, get some or no symptoms and don't need to go to hospital or use any NHS resources does it matter if you get it or not?
Actually this might be desirable - a soft case post virus & post vax your immunity will be up so if a nastier variant comes along then you'll have greater protection.
Haven't some knowledgeable people said that ultimately we're all going to be infected ?
Better that many do so by allowing it to seep through the country this summer than get hit by more concentrated and dangerous waves winter after winter.
Most people. The sterilisation efficacy of the Astra vaccine against the indian variant looks like it may well be too low to prevent most cases (Just make them mild). Is this the fundamental problem ? I think it's serendipitous that under 40s are on mRNA to be perfectly frank.
Yes, on the latter it's actually a huge national benefit as Pfizer and Moderna are better at preventing the spread and under 40s are much likelier to spread the virus. The cumulative risk reduction from that decision is massive as transmission chains simply don't exist.
This isn't an argument against reopening, but it will need some time to work through though.
I'm not arguing for indefinite delay, and I agree that vaccination is largely effective, so it makes sense to relax when the overwhelming majority of adults (and IMO children of school age, but there's a debate on that) have been vaccinated. We can then relax and have a durable exit. But obsessing about a particular date is not sensible, any more than the ambiguity of international travel policy. Let's get the vaccination job largely finished, and then relax properly - otherwise we'll just go round in circles with a fresh lockdown in winter, with all the effects on economic activity and confidence which that would involve.
Would you put a rough number on that, @NickPalmer?
The numbers from yesterday are that 78% of UK adults have dose 1, and 53.6% have both doses. The latter number is going up at about (roughly) 5.5% a week, the former at ~2.5% per week.
So by 21 June it will be, assuming current rather slow rates, roughly at 64% of adults with both jabs, and 82% with 1 dose. Or a 2 week delay until 5 July would give 86-87% with one dose, and 74-75% with both doses.
I would suggest that at least some, particularly European and perhaps African, countries, will top out at 75-80%, or less. And perhaps also the US - if Smokin' Joe Biden does not make his 70/70 target for adults, I think it will be as much reluctance as delivery capability that will have done it.
(Numbers not taking time-to-activate into account)
What is an "overwhelming majority" of adults?
I'm quite inclined to be cautious - but we very nearly there. I don't see how a delay beyond say 75/75 would be defensible.
@ydoethur I think @Dura_Ace is a misanthrope who loves animals but hates people.
I like some people (Greta, Bielsa, AOC, Mrs DA, that XF Motorsports guy on YouTube) I just hate tories, cultural conservatives and rich people with shit cars.
That is an admirable list of targets for your opprobrium. I do worry that I could edge into your final category, though, depending on where you set the bar.
Explanation from R4 "More or Less" on why the vaccination rate for England is greater than for any individual English region.
Reason is two different population estimates.
Regions use the "National Immunisation Management Service" NIMS - NHS numbers - likely overestimate because people may have registered at two GPs or not de-registered when they move.
The English total uses ONS - 2019 population - likely underestimate - but comparable with other countries in UK which don't have NIMS equivalent
For example, in Cambridge the ONS reckons there are 125,000, eligible, while NIMS reckons its 182,000 - likely largely due to departed students.
This may explain why many big cities with mobile populations are showing lower vaccination rates
I see the papers have finally clicked about the upcoming disaster over weddings, that I have been banging on about on here.
Mirror’s front page: Bride and Doom.
Remember, brides were promised a decision on 24 May. The government temporised. Now many have had to pay their final nonrefundable deposits and face cancelling their weddings with just days’ notice without any chance of rebooking this summer because everywhere is block booked. Thousands potentially affected.
Rather gives the lie to the Nick Palmer “just a few more weeks” brigade, who want us to believe delays will be harmless.
So 70% have had their first jabs and almost half have had both jabs.
Given vaccination is not compulsory and so we will never reach 100% having had both jabs if we do not unlock on June 21st when will it ever be acceptable to unlock, 80%, 90%, 99% jabbed?
The people who were going to set up an Independent Country in 18 months can't transfer powers they were given 5 years ago....for another 3 years:
A senior SNP minister has blamed “technical challenges” for the Scottish government’s failure to take full control over devolved benefits as she demands more powers from Westminster.
Shona Robison, who has pushed this week for Holyrood to have full command over employment rights, said that the snagging issues centred on the “safe and secure” transfer of data.
What is required up there is a proper incentive. 1. A second referendum producing a Yes vote; 2. A declaration from the remainder of the UK that we expect them to be gone in a year.
The Scottish Government can get all of this sorted out if London is no longer willing to hold its hand. And if it can't, well, quite honestly, who gives a fuck?
Repeatedly saying who gives a fuck is a notably convincing way of indicating that one doesn’t give a fuck.
Entirely accurate in this case though. You go, we're rid of each other. Scotland inside the UK has to be looked after, Scotland outside the UK is no different to Denmark. If it has issues then they're for the people who live there to sort out, ultimately.
In that case perhaps time to start criticising the lying, self serving prick who seems intent on blocking the mechanism for making this come to pass, particularly if you voted for him?
Yet just last month the Scottish Conservatives got 23.5% of the vote on the regional list at Holyrood, the highest Scottish Conservative voteshare on either the constituency or regional list vote at Holyrood since it was founded in 1999
Personally I think that we're running into trouble again - a view shared by several senior people in the borough with no axe to grind. The Surrey case rate is up 68% over last week (and nationally it's up 53%), and hospitalisations are rising too. This appears to be overwhelmingly younger, not fully vaccinated people, and a chunk of those are having serious problems. Compliance is finally crumbling as people have genuinely lost track of what the rules are.
The hard-headed answer is to wait with relaxation, in particular international travel, until the great majority of adults (and IMO children too) have been vaccinated. After a period where the authorities got serious about the situation we have relapsed into vacillation.
But Nick. What does “running into trouble really mean?” Yes case numbers are bound to rise to some extent across the board. Yea unfortunately some will get sick, some seriously. But that, in itself can not be used as a reason for delay - where that delay in itself has significant downsides for the economy and all that involves. Because the vaccines likely mean there is a ceiling on how bad things can get. We are seeing that in places like Bolton.
What is in danger of happening is that we are in danger of using past experience of COVID to dominate future decisions, when the situation has clearly changed.
The logic being applied, is one that, if extended to anything other than COVID, would eg. result in a national lockdown every winter. Are we/is the NHS in more “trouble” now than it would experience in an average December?
And there is the point that many are making that if we are going to have an “exit wave” then better to have it in the summer, than extending into the winter.
It’s odd phrases like “running into trouble” or “riding the rollercoaster” that are part of the problem with this debate. What do people mean when they say this?
Either vaccination works, or it doesn’t, and the vulnerable were double jabbed long ago.
This binary of “either the vaccination works or it doesn’t” is also a large part of the problem with this debate. In this case it is clear that, unlike Alpha, Delta works far better with two shots, so the single dose strategy that worked for Alpha must be superseded, which obviously is going to take a bit more time than envisaged in February.
Which, as @MaxPB correctly observes, is probably the line that the lockdown ultras will adopt. Once the first delay happens, the argument will then be pushing Step 4 all the way back until the Autumn whilst we wait for the entire adult population to be double jabbed, and then the arguments about schools reopening, vaccines for kids, the flu season and booster jabs will all be deployed.
In short, if we're not terribly careful then we'll be stuck with restrictions right the way through until Easter 2022 for a disease that is killing almost nobody. And even then the Taliban wing of the public health establishment won't be willing to let go. I think that some of them would like to force us into mask wearing forever, TBH.
Personally I think that we're running into trouble again - a view shared by several senior people in the borough with no axe to grind. The Surrey case rate is up 68% over last week (and nationally it's up 53%), and hospitalisations are rising too. This appears to be overwhelmingly younger, not fully vaccinated people, and a chunk of those are having serious problems. Compliance is finally crumbling as people have genuinely lost track of what the rules are.
The hard-headed answer is to wait with relaxation, in particular international travel, until the great majority of adults (and IMO children too) have been vaccinated. After a period where the authorities got serious about the situation we have relapsed into vacillation.
But Nick. What does “running into trouble really mean?” Yes case numbers are bound to rise to some extent across the board. Yea unfortunately some will get sick, some seriously. But that, in itself can not be used as a reason for delay - where that delay in itself has significant downsides for the economy and all that involves. Because the vaccines likely mean there is a ceiling on how bad things can get. We are seeing that in places like Bolton.
What is in danger of happening is that we are in danger of using past experience of COVID to dominate future decisions, when the situation has clearly changed.
The logic being applied, is one that, if extended to anything other than COVID, would eg. result in a national lockdown every winter. Are we/is the NHS in more “trouble” now than it would experience in an average December?
And there is the point that many are making that if we are going to have an “exit wave” then better to have it in the summer, than extending into the winter.
It’s odd phrases like “running into trouble” or “riding the rollercoaster” that are part of the problem with this debate. What do people mean when they say this?
Either vaccination works, or it doesn’t, and the vulnerable were double jabbed long ago.
This binary of “either the vaccination works or it doesn’t” is also a large part of the problem with this debate. In this case it is clear that, unlike Alpha, Delta works far better with two shots, so the single dose strategy that worked for Alpha must be superseded, which obviously is going to take a bit more time than envisaged in February.
Nope. One dose still reduces risk of hospitalisation by at least 60% (and rising as more stats come through). Again, the aim of the vaccines is to stop people from going to hospital and dying there. They are not going to eliminate COVID. We're going to be living with it for the foreseeable future.
The at risk groups are all almost double jabbed, in 4 days they will all be double jabbed. 14 days later they'll all have reached maximum immunity. That's 18 days to cover all of groups 1-9 with two doses including the 14 days for it to take effect.
Players’ Tribune do have some really good writers.
The fans are still going to boo the players kneeling before the matches.
Southgate’s piece sounds like a David Cameron leadership pitch, ie empty ‘modernising’ dross.
I don’t think I’ll be booing at the matches as I’m too polite for that but you can tell from the supporters club forum he isn’t winning too many over. Ultimately though he’ll be judged by results on the pitch and I’m not overly optimistic England are in a good place on the eve of the tournament.
At the WC, I think Waistcoats "conservative" approach got the best result out of the limited talent available. Now England are blessed with some of the best attacking talent in Europe and he appears clueless how to use them.
I can well see him again going 5 at the back, then Henderson and Rice, then Sterling, Kane and Rashford.
Mr. kamski, was there a suggestion HM didn't like the baby's name? I thought the disagreement was whether or not Harry had consulted her.
On-topic: I hope we can unlock far more on schedule. The current situation exceeds the best case scenario when the 21 June date was named as decision day. It's more than odd to say "things far exceed our expectations, which is why we're postponing unlocking".
I do think public consent for the lockdown measures will start eroding significantly if that's the situation.
If the queen likes the name then what on earth is the bleeding problem? I didn't consult my parents about my child's name - never occurred to anyone that that was bad manners.
But did you give it your living grandmother's personal family pet name? (Actually that doesn't sound too bad either. The only thing is, if you are a Royal and public property, personal family names are probably guarded jealously. And she is The Queen).
I'm not arguing for indefinite delay, and I agree that vaccination is largely effective, so it makes sense to relax when the overwhelming majority of adults (and IMO children of school age, but there's a debate on that) have been vaccinated. We can then relax and have a durable exit. But obsessing about a particular date is not sensible, any more than the ambiguity of international travel policy. Let's get the vaccination job largely finished, and then relax properly - otherwise we'll just go round in circles with a fresh lockdown in winter, with all the effects on economic activity and confidence which that would involve.
Would you put a rough number on that, @NickPalmer?
The numbers from yesterday are that 78% of UK adults have dose 1, and 53.6% have both doses. The latter number is going up at about (roughly) 5.5% a week, the former at ~2.5% per week.
So by 21 June it will be, assuming current rather slow rates, roughly at 64% of adults with both jabs, and 82% with 1 dose. Or a 2 week delay until 5 July would give 86-87% with one dose, and 74-75% with both doses.
I would suggest that at least some, particularly European and perhaps African, countries, will top out at 75-80%, or less. And perhaps also the US - if Smokin' Joe Biden does not make his 70/70 target for adults, I think it will be as much reluctance as delivery capability that will have done it.
What is an "overwhelming majority" of adults?
While I don't think the UK should remain locked down, the one difference between the UK and the USA is that in the USA anyone (regardless of age) who wants a vaccine can get one. So if people are unvaccinated its because they've chosen not to get one.
In the UK million of people are still eagerly waiting for their vaccine but aren't eligible for it yet.
That's not a reason to keep locked down, but there's a big difference between someone getting infected because they refused the vaccine (USA) and because they've been told they can't yet get it (UK).
BBC R4 reporting Palace sources say the Sussexes did NOT consult the Queen over the use of Lilibet - contradicting claims from their “friends” that Harry had discussed it with her beforehand.
At some point, the Sussexes and the Palace need to decide if they want to renormalise peaceful relations, or if they'd prefer this continued low-level bickering. A third choice would be simply to STFU.
The Sussex's behaviour is bonkers. Seems therefore to use Lilibet was deeply offensive without asking first. They can call their child what they like but they lack manners in not having asked (if true)
Why would they ask? Who cares man? This is ridiculous.
Usually, unless the name in question is Adolf or Ikea, grandparents who don't like the name parents have given a child keep their opinion to themselves, unless they are arseholes. This is such an obvious rule of life it is weird how some people are siding with the grandparent on this. Meghan Derangement Syndrome?
I think it would have been courteous to have asked, not to have asked just shows a lack of manners, most especially because it is Her Majesty.
No it doesn't.
Completely agreed. Its perfectly normal for parents to inform, not ask, their own parents or if they're still alive their grandparents (now great grandparents) what the name is. And its perfectly normal to name a baby after a loved one. And its perfectly normal that to be informed, not asked, that its the name to be honoured as a result.
Some people really have an unhealthy obsession with this couple and their baby child. Its really creepy.
Yep. We did the same with the middle names of both of our children. It was considered a compliment and not something that required permission.
So 70% have had their first jabs and almost half have had both jabs.
Given vaccination is not compulsory and so we will never reach 100% having had both jabs if we do not unlock on June 21st when will it ever be acceptable to unlock, 80%, 90%, 99% jabbed?
For the health fascists, it will never be the right time. There'll always be another excuse.
BBC R4 reporting Palace sources say the Sussexes did NOT consult the Queen over the use of Lilibet - contradicting claims from their “friends” that Harry had discussed it with her beforehand.
At some point, the Sussexes and the Palace need to decide if they want to renormalise peaceful relations, or if they'd prefer this continued low-level bickering. A third choice would be simply to STFU.
The Sussex's behaviour is bonkers. Seems therefore to use Lilibet was deeply offensive without asking first. They can call their child what they like but they lack manners in not having asked (if true)
Why would they ask? Who cares man? This is ridiculous.
Usually, unless the name in question is Adolf or Ikea, grandparents who don't like the name parents have given a child keep their opinion to themselves, unless they are arseholes. This is such an obvious rule of life it is weird how some people are siding with the grandparent on this. Meghan Derangement Syndrome?
I think it would have been courteous to have asked, not to have asked just shows a lack of manners, most especially because it is Her Majesty.
But, even if it is bad manners, which is worse manners? Not asking permission to use a name first, or letting the whole world know that you disapprove of the name the parents have given your grandchild?
They are not even in the same league.
You are misrepresenting what the Palace spokesperson said. The statement as mentioned earlier on this thread simply said the Queen had not been asked about the name as Harry and Meghan had stated. It was purely a refutal, nothing more.
tbh, I haven't seen the statements, but if "the Palace" can take the trouble to contradict the Sussexes on this, then "the Palace" could surely take the trouble to contradict all the media reports of the name being "rude" "an insult" etc if they are incorrect.
The Royal Family in situ is not going to enter into a verbal brawl with a disaffected member of said family. Refute the lies is the best course of action, nothing more is necessary nor advised.
Explanation from R4 "More or Less" on why the vaccination rate for England is greater than for any individual English region.
Reason is two different population estimates.
Regions use the "National Immunisation Management Service" NIMS - NHS numbers - likely overestimate because people may have registered at two GPs or not de-registered when they move.
The English total uses ONS - 2019 population - likely underestimate - but comparable with other countries in UK which don't have NIMS equivalent
For example, in Cambridge the ONS reckons there are 125,000, eligible, while NIMS reckons its 182,000 - likely largely due to departed students.
This may explain why many big cities with mobile populations are showing lower vaccination rates
Hurrah for the BBC.
I was starting to get perplexed by this discrepancy and it would even explain why older age groups are at a lower percentage.
Boris seems to listen to whoever talks to him last, whether it's an Indian travel agency rep or a zero covid enthusiast. Does he not have any friends who run indoor live music or nightclubs ?
Personally I think that we're running into trouble again - a view shared by several senior people in the borough with no axe to grind. The Surrey case rate is up 68% over last week (and nationally it's up 53%), and hospitalisations are rising too. This appears to be overwhelmingly younger, not fully vaccinated people, and a chunk of those are having serious problems. Compliance is finally crumbling as people have genuinely lost track of what the rules are.
The hard-headed answer is to wait with relaxation, in particular international travel, until the great majority of adults (and IMO children too) have been vaccinated. After a period where the authorities got serious about the situation we have relapsed into vacillation.
But Nick. What does “running into trouble really mean?” Yes case numbers are bound to rise to some extent across the board. Yea unfortunately some will get sick, some seriously. But that, in itself can not be used as a reason for delay - where that delay in itself has significant downsides for the economy and all that involves. Because the vaccines likely mean there is a ceiling on how bad things can get. We are seeing that in places like Bolton.
What is in danger of happening is that we are in danger of using past experience of COVID to dominate future decisions, when the situation has clearly changed.
The logic being applied, is one that, if extended to anything other than COVID, would eg. result in a national lockdown every winter. Are we/is the NHS in more “trouble” now than it would experience in an average December?
And there is the point that many are making that if we are going to have an “exit wave” then better to have it in the summer, than extending into the winter.
It’s odd phrases like “running into trouble” or “riding the rollercoaster” that are part of the problem with this debate. What do people mean when they say this?
Either vaccination works, or it doesn’t, and the vulnerable were double jabbed long ago.
This binary of “either the vaccination works or it doesn’t” is also a large part of the problem with this debate. In this case it is clear that, unlike Alpha, Delta works far better with two shots, so the single dose strategy that worked for Alpha must be superseded, which obviously is going to take a bit more time than envisaged in February.
Vulnerable groups are double jabbed. More than 50% of adults are.
P.S. this healthy fortysomething gets his second jab tomorrow. Who are these over-50s not double jabbed?
I'm down to London next week for a couple of days - for the first time in over 15 months. (An in-the-room meeting with the animators for the first time.) Dinner booked at Hide.
Is there anything on that is must-see at the mo?
I'd enjoy a report on Hide.
To each their own, of course. I love my fine dining, but judging by the pics I might privately go Jeremy Clarkson on them.
To me the presentation has a for-instagram feel to it - like the shift from 'stripped out scandi' to 'urban hipster with textures' we have seen in interior decor over the last few years.
Wife loves it, I've never been. She's taking me for my birthday, so hey, I can't complain!
Personally I think that we're running into trouble again - a view shared by several senior people in the borough with no axe to grind. The Surrey case rate is up 68% over last week (and nationally it's up 53%), and hospitalisations are rising too. This appears to be overwhelmingly younger, not fully vaccinated people, and a chunk of those are having serious problems. Compliance is finally crumbling as people have genuinely lost track of what the rules are.
The hard-headed answer is to wait with relaxation, in particular international travel, until the great majority of adults (and IMO children too) have been vaccinated. After a period where the authorities got serious about the situation we have relapsed into vacillation.
Those cases aren't translating into increased hospitalisations. If you get COVID, get some or no symptoms and don't need to go to hospital or use any NHS resources does it matter if you get it or not? That's the situation for 28m double jabbed people in groups 1-9 with that number growing by 450k per day on average. For groups 10-12 the risk is already extremely low (less than 1/4000) and that is reduced between 60-80% with just a single dose of Pfizer or Moderna 12 days post vaccine.
Once again, no one can answer the question - exactly who is going to overwhelm the NHS? Which group of people will present an overwhelming number of cases to the NHS? It's not the 30m vaccinated old, it's not the young because most of the cases in young people were in groups 4 and 6 who have all been double jabbed. The only group left that is at risk are vaccine refusers. National policy cannot be crafted around people who have refused to help themselves.
The risk is now all individual and we as individuals should be able to take that risk the same as someone climbing up a mountain or even just going for a drive.
If you get COVID, get some or no symptoms and don't need to go to hospital or use any NHS resources does it matter if you get it or not?
Actually this might be desirable - a soft case post virus & post vax your immunity will be up so if a nastier variant comes along then you'll have greater protection.
Haven't some knowledgeable people said that ultimately we're all going to be infected ?
Better that many do so by allowing it to seep through the country this summer than get hit by more concentrated and dangerous waves winter after winter.
Most people. The sterilisation efficacy of the Astra vaccine against the indian variant looks like it may well be too low to prevent most cases (Just make them mild). Is this the fundamental problem ? I think it's serendipitous that under 40s are on mRNA to be perfectly frank.
Yes, on the latter it's actually a huge national benefit as Pfizer and Moderna are better at preventing the spread and under 40s are much likelier to spread the virus. The cumulative risk reduction from that decision is massive as transmission chains simply don't exist.
This isn't an argument against reopening, but it will need some time to work through though.
12 days with a single dose of either prevents spread by about 50%. The study is ongoing for two doses but estimates based on antibody prevalence modelling puts Pfizer at about 70% and Moderna at about 75% with AZ at about 60%.
The best thing about moving younger cohorts to Pfizer and Moderna is that they are very fast acting and cumulate into a huge reduction in the spread of the virus. AZ provides better long term protection and gets really wide t-cell immunity so is actually probably a better fit for groups 1, 3, 5, 7, 8 and 9.
Explanation from R4 "More or Less" on why the vaccination rate for England is greater than for any individual English region.
Reason is two different population estimates.
Regions use the "National Immunisation Management Service" NIMS - NHS numbers - likely overestimate because people may have registered at two GPs or not de-registered when they move.
The English total uses ONS - 2019 population - likely underestimate - but comparable with other countries in UK which don't have NIMS equivalent
For example, in Cambridge the ONS reckons there are 125,000, eligible, while NIMS reckons its 182,000 - likely largely due to departed students.
This may explain why many big cities with mobile populations are showing lower vaccination rates
Hurrah for the BBC.
I was starting to get perplexed by this discrepancy and it would even explain why older age groups are at a lower percentage.
Panic assauged.
Also there's been some people here using NIMS numbers as a denominator to calculate how many unvaccinated people there are across the nation. Long suspected NIMS was an overestimate, but now its officially confirmed those numbers can go out of the window.
@ydoethur I think @Dura_Ace is a misanthrope who loves animals but hates people.
I like some people (Greta, Bielsa, AOC, Mrs DA, that XF Motorsports guy on YouTube) I just hate tories, cultural conservatives and rich people with shit cars.
That is an admirable list of targets for your opprobrium. I do worry that I could edge into your final category, though, depending on where you set the bar.
Ditto. I definitely qualify under the shit car category without doubt. I suspect I fail the rich category, but it is all relative.
I'm down to London next week for a couple of days - for the first time in over 15 months. (An in-the-room meeting with the animators for the first time.) Dinner booked at Hide.
Is there anything on that is must-see at the mo?
I'd enjoy a report on Hide.
To each their own, of course. I love my fine dining, but judging by the pics I might privately go Jeremy Clarkson on them.
To me the presentation has a for-instagram feel to it - like the shift from 'stripped out scandi' to 'urban hipster with textures' we have seen in interior decor over the last few years.
Wife loves it, I've never been. She's taking me for my birthday, so hey, I can't complain!
Will report back.
What are the odds that there will be a model of your favourite moth on it?
Hampden Park has the softest Euro 2020 Covid safety regime of any host stadium in the continent, with fans told there is no need for negative test or proof of vaccination
I still find it weird to see the contrasting perceptions of many European countries and America that the pandemic is largely over, whilst the U.K. has got a real problem - and reconcling that with stats on hospitalisations and deaths where the U.K. is clearly running at an order of 5-10 times lower than many other countries.
Remember that deaths, especially, are a lagging indicator- they reflect the situation about a month ago.
Also remember that direction not travel matters- high and falling is in some ways better than low and rising.
Not really that lagging. It's about 4-7 days for a symptomatic case to show up in the stats, another 5-8 days for that to develop into s hospitalisation and a further 8-20 days for that person to die or be discharged. On average, for older people, the average length of infection from detection to death was about 20 days and for younger people about 30 days.
We're well past the stage where we'd be seeing that early case growth from Bolton spill over into hospitalisation and death rates, especially in older adults. It hasn't.
The vaccines are doing their job and the alarmists and doom mongers are shifting the goal posts from needing lockdown measures to prevent an NHS catastrophe to eliminating COVID. The latter is simply not realistic but the former has already been achieved. There are just not enough unvaccinated over 50s to clog up hospitals now and those who haven't taken the vaccine chose not to. We can't make decisions based on vaccine refusers, they've made their decision and must live with the consequences.
The vast majority of virologists are pretty sure that this coronavirus won't be eliminated - and will eventually add to the list of 'common cold' coronaviruses.
As an aside, it does give you an idea of what happened to the indigenous Americans when they encountered a dozen or so novel to them (and their immune systems) viruses from the Old World... All at once.
novel That's the key word here. Why it is such a danger pre vax and so not post vax.
That's the point. What were likely fairly harmless common cold bugs to Europeans probably killed large numbers of indigenous Americans post Columbus.
Surely now we have to start looking at charging anyone for Covid treatment if they have had the opportunity to book a vaccine appointment and failed to do so?
Because that’s almost the whole of the problem and would I guess go a long way towards solving it. Sure, you will always have principled refusers like Dura Ace, but for nutters like Contrarian, bleating about lockdown while forcing us into more of it, need to be warned that their stupidity and selfishness has real world consequences.
@contrarian has not had the vaccine because he disagrees, on principle, with the state pressurising its citizens into a medical intervention (especially when the vaccines are so new). @Dura_Ace has not been vaccinated because he distrusts, and doesn't want to support, "Big Pharma".
Just different principles surely? Are you sure that these two guys have fewer principles than the masses who have eagerly and meekly done what they have been told?
No, Dura Ace hasn’t been vaccinated because the vaccine was tested on animals. That’s a perfectly valid stance, consistent with his longstanding veganism, and though I disagree with his conclusions I respect his consistency.
The issue with Contrarian (well, among many other issues) is that he says nobody should be pressured to take the vaccine and then says nobody should have to lockdown, and lectures the rest of us on how he alone is standing up for our freedoms when taking the very action that’s making it impossible to get them back.
Well, newsflash, it’s one or the other. His position is as grotesque and inconsistent as the Catholic ban on both contraception and abortion. And, further newsflash, it shows he’s not a principled person but a selfish prick (or perhaps, lack of prick ).
Have a good morning.
I'm sorry, but this is bollocks on stilts. Vegans refusing to get the COVID jab are just as bad as the Bill Gates conspiracy nut jobs.
I still find it weird to see the contrasting perceptions of many European countries and America that the pandemic is largely over, whilst the U.K. has got a real problem - and reconcling that with stats on hospitalisations and deaths where the U.K. is clearly running at an order of 5-10 times lower than many other countries.
Remember that deaths, especially, are a lagging indicator- they reflect the situation about a month ago.
Also remember that direction not travel matters- high and falling is in some ways better than low and rising.
Not really that lagging. It's about 4-7 days for a symptomatic case to show up in the stats, another 5-8 days for that to develop into s hospitalisation and a further 8-20 days for that person to die or be discharged. On average, for older people, the average length of infection from detection to death was about 20 days and for younger people about 30 days.
We're well past the stage where we'd be seeing that early case growth from Bolton spill over into hospitalisation and death rates, especially in older adults. It hasn't.
The vaccines are doing their job and the alarmists and doom mongers are shifting the goal posts from needing lockdown measures to prevent an NHS catastrophe to eliminating COVID. The latter is simply not realistic but the former has already been achieved. There are just not enough unvaccinated over 50s to clog up hospitals now and those who haven't taken the vaccine chose not to. We can't make decisions based on vaccine refusers, they've made their decision and must live with the consequences.
The vast majority of virologists are pretty sure that this coronavirus won't be eliminated - and will eventually add to the list of 'common cold' coronaviruses.
As an aside, it does give you an idea of what happened to the indigenous Americans when they encountered a dozen or so novel to them (and their immune systems) viruses from the Old World... All at once.
novel That's the key word here. Why it is such a danger pre vax and so not post vax.
That's the point. What were likely fairly harmless common cold bugs to Europeans probably killed large numbers of indigenous Americans post Columbus.
One thing I've never understood is that this is extremely commonly reported, that Europeans introduced viruses to the native Americans post Columbus. But how come its not commonly reported that the same happened in reverse?
Shouldn't the native Americans have had all their own coronaviruses etc that were novel to the settlers and traders, who would have carried them back to the old world and let to outbreaks in the old world?
Unless I've missed it, I can't think of major European pandemics from meeting the native Americans that match in scale those reported for the native Americans from meeting Europeans.
In general the stats are good, I would say. Death rates massively down. Vaccines doing a great job of substituting for non medical interventions. Flies in the statistical ointment are case rates and hospitalisation rates. Case rates are tracking previous waves, which wouldn't matter if they were all mild or aymptomatic. Hospitalisation rates are currently about half the previous waves, which is a big improvement, but a half rate on exponentially growing case numbers is still a potentially high number of hospitalisations. Particularly given the healthcare system is now in an even more fragile state.
For England the doubling time for cases is 30 days. For Scotland it is 15.
Cases on May 1st: 1,353 Cases on June 1st: 5,238
Hospital patients on May 1st: 1,283 Hospital patients on June 1st: 922
Deaths on May 1st: 8 Deaths on June 1st: 4
The link between cases and serious illness is kaput, and the disease has long since reached the point where the mortality rate is trundling along at about one in a million per week. With the huge, huge majority of all the most vulnerable people already having been vaccinated (nearly all of those being double-jabbed to boot,) no plausible mechanism exists by which Delta can cause another tsunami of death. Now, can we please finally stop the trouser wetting over the bloody cases?
Let’s stick with the over 50s as the data is more complete.
In the three weeks between 9th May and 30th May (ref NIMS population data), the proportional increase in first dose vaccination uptake was:
50-59: 1.2% 60-69: 0.7% 70-79: 0.1%
So broadly speaking, uptake will likely settle at 95% for the 70s, something like 91-92% for the 60s and perhaps just shy of 90% for the 50s. Which leaves 1.6 million courageous contrarians aged over 50.
Assume uniform acquired infection of 40% to date across all age groups and that knocks you down to about a million people over 50 with no immunity.
It will be put to the PM that the new variant eventually puts [x%] of these people in hospital. The key will be understanding from those god awful modellers how many at one time. And then politically, what if anything is to be done about it.
This population of a million (plus whatever the 40s cohort settles at (currently 1.6m unvaxxed) risk being the new bed blockers for the next couple of winters, preventing the clearing of the nhs backlog. They are also this government’s voting coalition.
My expectation is no stern words or measures at all will be levelled at them, and it’s then down to how reliable the herd effect is against whatever variant is most prevalent in November on whether we avoid new “non pharmaceutical interventions” this winter. By 2022 the scandal engulfing the government will not be covid deaths but missed cancer diagnoses.
I still find it weird to see the contrasting perceptions of many European countries and America that the pandemic is largely over, whilst the U.K. has got a real problem - and reconcling that with stats on hospitalisations and deaths where the U.K. is clearly running at an order of 5-10 times lower than many other countries.
Remember that deaths, especially, are a lagging indicator- they reflect the situation about a month ago.
Also remember that direction not travel matters- high and falling is in some ways better than low and rising.
Not really that lagging. It's about 4-7 days for a symptomatic case to show up in the stats, another 5-8 days for that to develop into s hospitalisation and a further 8-20 days for that person to die or be discharged. On average, for older people, the average length of infection from detection to death was about 20 days and for younger people about 30 days.
We're well past the stage where we'd be seeing that early case growth from Bolton spill over into hospitalisation and death rates, especially in older adults. It hasn't.
The vaccines are doing their job and the alarmists and doom mongers are shifting the goal posts from needing lockdown measures to prevent an NHS catastrophe to eliminating COVID. The latter is simply not realistic but the former has already been achieved. There are just not enough unvaccinated over 50s to clog up hospitals now and those who haven't taken the vaccine chose not to. We can't make decisions based on vaccine refusers, they've made their decision and must live with the consequences.
The vast majority of virologists are pretty sure that this coronavirus won't be eliminated - and will eventually add to the list of 'common cold' coronaviruses.
As an aside, it does give you an idea of what happened to the indigenous Americans when they encountered a dozen or so novel to them (and their immune systems) viruses from the Old World... All at once.
novel That's the key word here. Why it is such a danger pre vax and so not post vax.
That's the point. What were likely fairly harmless common cold bugs to Europeans probably killed large numbers of indigenous Americans post Columbus.
One thing I've never understood is that this is extremely commonly reported, that Europeans introduced viruses to the native Americans post Columbus. But how come its not commonly reported that the same happened in reverse?
Shouldn't the native Americans have had all their own coronaviruses etc that were novel to the settlers and traders, who would have carried them back to the old world and let to outbreaks in the old world?
Unless I've missed it, I can't think of major European pandemics from meeting the native Americans that match in scale those reported for the native Americans from meeting Europeans.
IT question. If I wish to follow a link posted on here I right click it and select open in new tab.
Today, the new tab opens with a warning headed Leaving, which says You are now leaving politicalbetting. Click the link to continue to... and I then have to click the link a second time to reach the intended page.
It's happening in Firefox and Chrome. Possibly could be explained by a windows update has occurred in the last 24 hours, which audaciously added a News and Interests to my task bar.
The “leaving” page is a Vanilla Forums change, that happened a couple of days ago. Yes it’s annoying, and hopefully there’s a setting that @rcs1000 can change to make it go away.
Thank you! I suspected it might be that, but couldn't find a setting. Hopefully Robert can fix it.
Tbh, after a couple of days, I think I prefer the new system with the "leaving" page.
Have got some strong pushback from EU sources to Politico story that EU diplomats mulling emergency plan to introduce border checks between Ireland and rest of EU if London and Brussels talks over Northern Ireland Protocol ultimately fail.
I'm down to London next week for a couple of days - for the first time in over 15 months. (An in-the-room meeting with the animators for the first time.) Dinner booked at Hide.
Is there anything on that is must-see at the mo?
I'd enjoy a report on Hide.
To each their own, of course. I love my fine dining, but judging by the pics I might privately go Jeremy Clarkson on them.
To me the presentation has a for-instagram feel to it - like the shift from 'stripped out scandi' to 'urban hipster with textures' we have seen in interior decor over the last few years.
Frankly I would punch someone in the face who served me such pretentious shite.
Have you been there and done that ?
I was once taken into a restaurant in Strasbourg (iirc) for a dinner meeting where I saw plates with such rubbish on. I walked out. Food is for eating. It is for sustenance, not for some clown to tell you how clever he is whilst picking your pocket.
It was only relatively recently that I worked out that "fine dining" is a euphemism for "tiny portions".
Surely now we have to start looking at charging anyone for Covid treatment if they have had the opportunity to book a vaccine appointment and failed to do so?
Because that’s almost the whole of the problem and would I guess go a long way towards solving it. Sure, you will always have principled refusers like Dura Ace, but for nutters like Contrarian, bleating about lockdown while forcing us into more of it, need to be warned that their stupidity and selfishness has real world consequences.
@contrarian has not had the vaccine because he disagrees, on principle, with the state pressurising its citizens into a medical intervention (especially when the vaccines are so new). @Dura_Ace has not been vaccinated because he distrusts, and doesn't want to support, "Big Pharma".
Just different principles surely? Are you sure that these two guys have fewer principles than the masses who have eagerly and meekly done what they have been told?
No, Dura Ace hasn’t been vaccinated because the vaccine was tested on animals. That’s a perfectly valid stance, consistent with his longstanding veganism, and though I disagree with his conclusions I respect his consistency.
The issue with Contrarian (well, among many other issues) is that he says nobody should be pressured to take the vaccine and then says nobody should have to lockdown, and lectures the rest of us on how he alone is standing up for our freedoms when taking the very action that’s making it impossible to get them back.
Well, newsflash, it’s one or the other. His position is as grotesque and inconsistent as the Catholic ban on both contraception and abortion. And, further newsflash, it shows he’s not a principled person but a selfish prick (or perhaps, lack of prick ).
Have a good morning.
I'm sorry, but this is bollocks on stilts. Vegans refusing to get the COVID jab are just as bad as the Bill Gates conspiracy nut jobs.
I still find it weird to see the contrasting perceptions of many European countries and America that the pandemic is largely over, whilst the U.K. has got a real problem - and reconcling that with stats on hospitalisations and deaths where the U.K. is clearly running at an order of 5-10 times lower than many other countries.
Remember that deaths, especially, are a lagging indicator- they reflect the situation about a month ago.
Also remember that direction not travel matters- high and falling is in some ways better than low and rising.
Not really that lagging. It's about 4-7 days for a symptomatic case to show up in the stats, another 5-8 days for that to develop into s hospitalisation and a further 8-20 days for that person to die or be discharged. On average, for older people, the average length of infection from detection to death was about 20 days and for younger people about 30 days.
We're well past the stage where we'd be seeing that early case growth from Bolton spill over into hospitalisation and death rates, especially in older adults. It hasn't.
The vaccines are doing their job and the alarmists and doom mongers are shifting the goal posts from needing lockdown measures to prevent an NHS catastrophe to eliminating COVID. The latter is simply not realistic but the former has already been achieved. There are just not enough unvaccinated over 50s to clog up hospitals now and those who haven't taken the vaccine chose not to. We can't make decisions based on vaccine refusers, they've made their decision and must live with the consequences.
The vast majority of virologists are pretty sure that this coronavirus won't be eliminated - and will eventually add to the list of 'common cold' coronaviruses.
As an aside, it does give you an idea of what happened to the indigenous Americans when they encountered a dozen or so novel to them (and their immune systems) viruses from the Old World... All at once.
novel That's the key word here. Why it is such a danger pre vax and so not post vax.
That's the point. What were likely fairly harmless common cold bugs to Europeans probably killed large numbers of indigenous Americans post Columbus.
One thing I've never understood is that this is extremely commonly reported, that Europeans introduced viruses to the native Americans post Columbus. But how come its not commonly reported that the same happened in reverse?
Shouldn't the native Americans have had all their own coronaviruses etc that were novel to the settlers and traders, who would have carried them back to the old world and let to outbreaks in the old world?
Unless I've missed it, I can't think of major European pandemics from meeting the native Americans that match in scale those reported for the native Americans from meeting Europeans.
Syphilis.
Trickier to catch than a cold, flu or covid though.
I still find it weird to see the contrasting perceptions of many European countries and America that the pandemic is largely over, whilst the U.K. has got a real problem - and reconcling that with stats on hospitalisations and deaths where the U.K. is clearly running at an order of 5-10 times lower than many other countries.
Remember that deaths, especially, are a lagging indicator- they reflect the situation about a month ago.
Also remember that direction not travel matters- high and falling is in some ways better than low and rising.
Not really that lagging. It's about 4-7 days for a symptomatic case to show up in the stats, another 5-8 days for that to develop into s hospitalisation and a further 8-20 days for that person to die or be discharged. On average, for older people, the average length of infection from detection to death was about 20 days and for younger people about 30 days.
We're well past the stage where we'd be seeing that early case growth from Bolton spill over into hospitalisation and death rates, especially in older adults. It hasn't.
The vaccines are doing their job and the alarmists and doom mongers are shifting the goal posts from needing lockdown measures to prevent an NHS catastrophe to eliminating COVID. The latter is simply not realistic but the former has already been achieved. There are just not enough unvaccinated over 50s to clog up hospitals now and those who haven't taken the vaccine chose not to. We can't make decisions based on vaccine refusers, they've made their decision and must live with the consequences.
The vast majority of virologists are pretty sure that this coronavirus won't be eliminated - and will eventually add to the list of 'common cold' coronaviruses.
As an aside, it does give you an idea of what happened to the indigenous Americans when they encountered a dozen or so novel to them (and their immune systems) viruses from the Old World... All at once.
novel That's the key word here. Why it is such a danger pre vax and so not post vax.
That's the point. What were likely fairly harmless common cold bugs to Europeans probably killed large numbers of indigenous Americans post Columbus.
One thing I've never understood is that this is extremely commonly reported, that Europeans introduced viruses to the native Americans post Columbus. But how come its not commonly reported that the same happened in reverse?
Shouldn't the native Americans have had all their own coronaviruses etc that were novel to the settlers and traders, who would have carried them back to the old world and let to outbreaks in the old world?
Unless I've missed it, I can't think of major European pandemics from meeting the native Americans that match in scale those reported for the native Americans from meeting Europeans.
Syphilis.
That's an excellent example, though an STD rather than an eg common cold coronavirus so not really a pandemic in the same way.
Surely the native Americans should have had their own coronaviruses that would have been novel to Europeans and not just STDs?
We've reached the why do Jocks hate the English stage of an international tournament. Thankfully this time the violent end of England fandom is too busy hating on their own team to issue fatwas on anyone being less than enthusiastic about 'ar boys'.
I still find it weird to see the contrasting perceptions of many European countries and America that the pandemic is largely over, whilst the U.K. has got a real problem - and reconcling that with stats on hospitalisations and deaths where the U.K. is clearly running at an order of 5-10 times lower than many other countries.
Remember that deaths, especially, are a lagging indicator- they reflect the situation about a month ago.
Also remember that direction not travel matters- high and falling is in some ways better than low and rising.
Not really that lagging. It's about 4-7 days for a symptomatic case to show up in the stats, another 5-8 days for that to develop into s hospitalisation and a further 8-20 days for that person to die or be discharged. On average, for older people, the average length of infection from detection to death was about 20 days and for younger people about 30 days.
We're well past the stage where we'd be seeing that early case growth from Bolton spill over into hospitalisation and death rates, especially in older adults. It hasn't.
The vaccines are doing their job and the alarmists and doom mongers are shifting the goal posts from needing lockdown measures to prevent an NHS catastrophe to eliminating COVID. The latter is simply not realistic but the former has already been achieved. There are just not enough unvaccinated over 50s to clog up hospitals now and those who haven't taken the vaccine chose not to. We can't make decisions based on vaccine refusers, they've made their decision and must live with the consequences.
The vast majority of virologists are pretty sure that this coronavirus won't be eliminated - and will eventually add to the list of 'common cold' coronaviruses.
As an aside, it does give you an idea of what happened to the indigenous Americans when they encountered a dozen or so novel to them (and their immune systems) viruses from the Old World... All at once.
novel That's the key word here. Why it is such a danger pre vax and so not post vax.
That's the point. What were likely fairly harmless common cold bugs to Europeans probably killed large numbers of indigenous Americans post Columbus.
One thing I've never understood is that this is extremely commonly reported, that Europeans introduced viruses to the native Americans post Columbus. But how come its not commonly reported that the same happened in reverse?
Shouldn't the native Americans have had all their own coronaviruses etc that were novel to the settlers and traders, who would have carried them back to the old world and let to outbreaks in the old world?
Unless I've missed it, I can't think of major European pandemics from meeting the native Americans that match in scale those reported for the native Americans from meeting Europeans.
Syphilis.
That's an excellent example, though an STD rather than an eg common cold coronavirus so not really a pandemic in the same way.
Surely the native Americans should have had their own coronaviruses that would have been novel to Europeans and not just STDs?
Personally I think that we're running into trouble again - a view shared by several senior people in the borough with no axe to grind. The Surrey case rate is up 68% over last week (and nationally it's up 53%), and hospitalisations are rising too. This appears to be overwhelmingly younger, not fully vaccinated people, and a chunk of those are having serious problems. Compliance is finally crumbling as people have genuinely lost track of what the rules are.
The hard-headed answer is to wait with relaxation, in particular international travel, until the great majority of adults (and IMO children too) have been vaccinated. After a period where the authorities got serious about the situation we have relapsed into vacillation.
Those cases aren't translating into increased hospitalisations. If you get COVID, get some or no symptoms and don't need to go to hospital or use any NHS resources does it matter if you get it or not? That's the situation for 28m double jabbed people in groups 1-9 with that number growing by 450k per day on average. For groups 10-12 the risk is already extremely low (less than 1/4000) and that is reduced between 60-80% with just a single dose of Pfizer or Moderna 12 days post vaccine.
Once again, no one can answer the question - exactly who is going to overwhelm the NHS? Which group of people will present an overwhelming number of cases to the NHS? It's not the 30m vaccinated old, it's not the young because most of the cases in young people were in groups 4 and 6 who have all been double jabbed. The only group left that is at risk are vaccine refusers. National policy cannot be crafted around people who have refused to help themselves.
The risk is now all individual and we as individuals should be able to take that risk the same as someone climbing up a mountain or even just going for a drive.
If you get COVID, get some or no symptoms and don't need to go to hospital or use any NHS resources does it matter if you get it or not?
Actually this might be desirable - a soft case post virus & post vax your immunity will be up so if a nastier variant comes along then you'll have greater protection.
Haven't some knowledgeable people said that ultimately we're all going to be infected ?
Better that many do so by allowing it to seep through the country this summer than get hit by more concentrated and dangerous waves winter after winter.
Most people. The sterilisation efficacy of the Astra vaccine against the indian variant looks like it may well be too low to prevent most cases (Just make them mild). Is this the fundamental problem ? I think it's serendipitous that under 40s are on mRNA to be perfectly frank.
Yes, on the latter it's actually a huge national benefit as Pfizer and Moderna are better at preventing the spread and under 40s are much likelier to spread the virus. The cumulative risk reduction from that decision is massive as transmission chains simply don't exist.
This isn't an argument against reopening, but it will need some time to work through though.
12 days with a single dose of either prevents spread by about 50%. The study is ongoing for two doses but estimates based on antibody prevalence modelling puts Pfizer at about 70% and Moderna at about 75% with AZ at about 60%.
The best thing about moving younger cohorts to Pfizer and Moderna is that they are very fast acting and cumulate into a huge reduction in the spread of the virus. AZ provides better long term protection and gets really wide t-cell immunity so is actually probably a better fit for groups 1, 3, 5, 7, 8 and 9.
I presume the PHE study that said either were only 30% effective after one jab will be banded about as another reason for not opening up. Personally I am very sceptical of those numbers, if it was that low, we would have seen an even bigger outbreak and already have hospitals jammed in places like Bolton, and we haven't.
I honestly don't understand why a delay is even being considered. People act as though the vaccine programme will just cease on the 21st and on the 22nd everyone who hasn't been vaccinated will be simultaneously infected.
I still find it weird to see the contrasting perceptions of many European countries and America that the pandemic is largely over, whilst the U.K. has got a real problem - and reconcling that with stats on hospitalisations and deaths where the U.K. is clearly running at an order of 5-10 times lower than many other countries.
Remember that deaths, especially, are a lagging indicator- they reflect the situation about a month ago.
Also remember that direction not travel matters- high and falling is in some ways better than low and rising.
Not really that lagging. It's about 4-7 days for a symptomatic case to show up in the stats, another 5-8 days for that to develop into s hospitalisation and a further 8-20 days for that person to die or be discharged. On average, for older people, the average length of infection from detection to death was about 20 days and for younger people about 30 days.
We're well past the stage where we'd be seeing that early case growth from Bolton spill over into hospitalisation and death rates, especially in older adults. It hasn't.
The vaccines are doing their job and the alarmists and doom mongers are shifting the goal posts from needing lockdown measures to prevent an NHS catastrophe to eliminating COVID. The latter is simply not realistic but the former has already been achieved. There are just not enough unvaccinated over 50s to clog up hospitals now and those who haven't taken the vaccine chose not to. We can't make decisions based on vaccine refusers, they've made their decision and must live with the consequences.
The vast majority of virologists are pretty sure that this coronavirus won't be eliminated - and will eventually add to the list of 'common cold' coronaviruses.
As an aside, it does give you an idea of what happened to the indigenous Americans when they encountered a dozen or so novel to them (and their immune systems) viruses from the Old World... All at once.
novel That's the key word here. Why it is such a danger pre vax and so not post vax.
That's the point. What were likely fairly harmless common cold bugs to Europeans probably killed large numbers of indigenous Americans post Columbus.
One thing I've never understood is that this is extremely commonly reported, that Europeans introduced viruses to the native Americans post Columbus. But how come its not commonly reported that the same happened in reverse?
Shouldn't the native Americans have had all their own coronaviruses etc that were novel to the settlers and traders, who would have carried them back to the old world and let to outbreaks in the old world?
Unless I've missed it, I can't think of major European pandemics from meeting the native Americans that match in scale those reported for the native Americans from meeting Europeans.
Syphilis.
That's an excellent example, though an STD rather than an eg common cold coronavirus so not really a pandemic in the same way.
Surely the native Americans should have had their own coronaviruses that would have been novel to Europeans and not just STDs?
Indeed but that matches what I was saying, 80% to 95% of indigenous Americans are believed to have died due to novel (to them) pandemics like smallpox.
If Columbus and those that followed had brought back to Europe diseases that had wiped out 80 to 95% of Europeans then history would have been very different!
Surely now we have to start looking at charging anyone for Covid treatment if they have had the opportunity to book a vaccine appointment and failed to do so?
Because that’s almost the whole of the problem and would I guess go a long way towards solving it. Sure, you will always have principled refusers like Dura Ace, but for nutters like Contrarian, bleating about lockdown while forcing us into more of it, need to be warned that their stupidity and selfishness has real world consequences.
@contrarian has not had the vaccine because he disagrees, on principle, with the state pressurising its citizens into a medical intervention (especially when the vaccines are so new). @Dura_Ace has not been vaccinated because he distrusts, and doesn't want to support, "Big Pharma".
Just different principles surely? Are you sure that these two guys have fewer principles than the masses who have eagerly and meekly done what they have been told?
No, Dura Ace hasn’t been vaccinated because the vaccine was tested on animals. That’s a perfectly valid stance, consistent with his longstanding veganism, and though I disagree with his conclusions I respect his consistency.
The issue with Contrarian (well, among many other issues) is that he says nobody should be pressured to take the vaccine and then says nobody should have to lockdown, and lectures the rest of us on how he alone is standing up for our freedoms when taking the very action that’s making it impossible to get them back.
Well, newsflash, it’s one or the other. His position is as grotesque and inconsistent as the Catholic ban on both contraception and abortion. And, further newsflash, it shows he’s not a principled person but a selfish prick (or perhaps, lack of prick ).
Have a good morning.
I'm sorry, but this is bollocks on stilts. Vegans refusing to get the COVID jab are just as bad as the Bill Gates conspiracy nut jobs.
Comments
Mr. kamski, was there a suggestion HM didn't like the baby's name? I thought the disagreement was whether or not Harry had consulted her.
On-topic: I hope we can unlock far more on schedule. The current situation exceeds the best case scenario when the 21 June date was named as decision day. It's more than odd to say "things far exceed our expectations, which is why we're postponing unlocking".
I do think public consent for the lockdown measures will start eroding significantly if that's the situation.
I don’t think I’ll be booing at the matches as I’m too polite for that but you can tell from the supporters club forum he isn’t winning too many over. Ultimately though he’ll be judged by results on the pitch and I’m not overly optimistic England are in a good place on the eve of the tournament.
I didn't consult my parents about my child's name - never occurred to anyone that that was bad manners.
Recollections may vary is becoming something of a theme.
Direction of travel is more important than absolue numbers - I'd rather we were where the projections said and cases still declining than at a lower base and cases rising. If cases are still declining then R<1 and you can open up more an possibly still keep R<1. With cases rising R>1 and opening up more will make R>1 by a larger amount.
That doesn't change the fact that it's not cases per se that we should be basing unlocking on, but hospitalisations and the data there are still pretty good. But if we had more cases than at present but still heading downwards then I don't think there would be an serious questioning of unlocking on 21 June.
https://twitter.com/thetimesscot/status/1402524304881995777?s=21
If people are catching it asymptomatically or with minimal impact, that's not serious. Obviously declining rather than rising cases is preferable, but if there's a falling correlation between cases and serious symptoms/deaths that's a very good thing.
Not only is there an economic case for unlocking, those who aren't as helpfully introverted as me have, in many instances, been finding this situation very difficult to cope with.
Better that many do so by allowing it to seep through the country this summer than get hit by more concentrated and dangerous waves winter after winter.
I have no idea and I suspect neither has most everyone else
Never mind, only 5 more days to wait
You’ve started on the crackpipe early, Charles.
There's always going to be a reason to delay. We need to pull the plaster off and deal with the consequences. Would it be better if everyone was double jabbed? Of course. Is our current national vaccine profile going to lead to the NHS being overwhelmed? No. Then it's time to get on with it and call an end to COVID.
They seem to be three weeks behind us in terms of their re-opening schedule.
Either vaccination works, or it doesn’t, and the vulnerable were double jabbed long ago.
They named their child after the child's grandmother and greatgrandmother.
Same as millions of kids all around the globe. Its a perfectly normal and reasonable thing to do and a great grandmother who finds out that their great grandchild has been named after them should be honoured. So good for them. Stop getting your knickers in a twist, its ridiculous.
The Sussex's story has evolved from "asked the queen before the birth" to "told the queen before the public announcement".
And he is not saying something new or enlightening to be fair
Some people really have an unhealthy obsession with this couple and their baby child. Its really creepy.
Is this the fundamental problem ?
I think it's serendipitous that under 40s are on mRNA to be perfectly frank.
The problem is obviously the breakdown in relations in the family, but a wise and gracious response to the choice of name would be to take it as an olive branch, even if that wasn't the intention, or even if it was but you think it was a very clumsy olive branch!
The numbers from yesterday are that 78% of UK adults have dose 1, and 53.6% have both doses. The latter number is going up at about (roughly) 5.5% a week, the former at ~2.5% per week.
So by 21 June it will be, assuming current rather slow rates, roughly at 64% of adults with both jabs, and 82% with 1 dose.
Or a 2 week delay until 5 July would give 86-87% with one dose, and 74-75% with both doses.
I would suggest that at least some, particularly European and perhaps African, countries, will top out at 75-80%, or less. And perhaps also the US - if Smokin' Joe Biden does not make his 70/70 target for adults, I think it will be as much reluctance as delivery capability that will have done it.
(Numbers not taking time-to-activate into account)
What is an "overwhelming majority" of adults?
I'm quite inclined to be cautious - but we very nearly there. I don't see how a delay beyond say 75/75 would be defensible.
Reason is two different population estimates.
Regions use the "National Immunisation Management Service" NIMS - NHS numbers - likely overestimate because people may have registered at two GPs or not de-registered when they move.
The English total uses ONS - 2019 population - likely underestimate - but comparable with other countries in UK which don't have NIMS equivalent
For example, in Cambridge the ONS reckons there are 125,000, eligible, while NIMS reckons its 182,000 - likely largely due to departed students.
This may explain why many big cities with mobile populations are showing lower vaccination rates
Mirror’s front page: Bride and Doom.
Remember, brides were promised a decision on 24 May. The government temporised. Now many have had to pay their final nonrefundable deposits and face cancelling their weddings with just days’ notice without any chance of rebooking this summer because everywhere is block booked. Thousands potentially affected.
Rather gives the lie to the Nick Palmer “just a few more weeks” brigade, who want us to believe delays will be harmless.
Given vaccination is not compulsory and so we will never reach 100% having had both jabs if we do not unlock on June 21st when will it ever be acceptable to unlock, 80%, 90%, 99% jabbed?
Somebody make it stop.
In short, if we're not terribly careful then we'll be stuck with restrictions right the way through until Easter 2022 for a disease that is killing almost nobody. And even then the Taliban wing of the public health establishment won't be willing to let go. I think that some of them would like to force us into mask wearing forever, TBH.
The at risk groups are all almost double jabbed, in 4 days they will all be double jabbed. 14 days later they'll all have reached maximum immunity. That's 18 days to cover all of groups 1-9 with two doses including the 14 days for it to take effect.
There's simply no reason to delay.
I can well see him again going 5 at the back, then Henderson and Rice, then Sterling, Kane and Rashford.
So no Foden, Grealish, Mount, Sancho...
In the UK million of people are still eagerly waiting for their vaccine but aren't eligible for it yet.
That's not a reason to keep locked down, but there's a big difference between someone getting infected because they refused the vaccine (USA) and because they've been told they can't yet get it (UK).
I was starting to get perplexed by this discrepancy and it would even explain why older age groups are at a lower percentage.
Panic assauged.
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1402344032165040129?s=20
Does he not have any friends who run indoor live music or nightclubs ?
P.S. this healthy fortysomething gets his second jab tomorrow. Who are these over-50s not double jabbed?
Will report back.
The best thing about moving younger cohorts to Pfizer and Moderna is that they are very fast acting and cumulate into a huge reduction in the spread of the virus. AZ provides better long term protection and gets really wide t-cell immunity so is actually probably a better fit for groups 1, 3, 5, 7, 8 and 9.
Hampden Park has the softest Euro 2020 Covid safety regime of any host stadium in the continent, with fans told there is no need for negative test or proof of vaccination
https://twitter.com/DSanderson_85/status/1402376494429753355?s=20
Meanwhile:
Passengers on a cruise ship touring the UK have been told they will not be allowed to disembark in Scotland.
The MSC Virtuosa's operator says Scottish government Covid rules block it from entering the port of Greenock.
The government has said domestic cruises can only restart when restrictions in all of Scotland reach level one.
It insisted the decision was based on the risks "between both cruises and the wider travel context".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-57406705
What were likely fairly harmless common cold bugs to Europeans probably killed large numbers of indigenous Americans post Columbus.
Denmark, Austria, Czechia, Luxembourg are the comparable nations in terms of that.
Denmark probably has the most honest figures in the world, everyone has been tested ten times on average.
Many things are discussed on PB, if it doesn't interest you just scroll by..
Shouldn't the native Americans have had all their own coronaviruses etc that were novel to the settlers and traders, who would have carried them back to the old world and let to outbreaks in the old world?
Unless I've missed it, I can't think of major European pandemics from meeting the native Americans that match in scale those reported for the native Americans from meeting Europeans.
Cases on June 1st: 5,238
Hospital patients on May 1st: 1,283
Hospital patients on June 1st: 922
Deaths on May 1st: 8
Deaths on June 1st: 4
The link between cases and serious illness is kaput, and the disease has long since reached the point where the mortality rate is trundling along at about one in a million per week. With the huge, huge majority of all the most vulnerable people already having been vaccinated (nearly all of those being double-jabbed to boot,) no plausible mechanism exists by which Delta can cause another tsunami of death. Now, can we please finally stop the trouser wetting over the bloody cases?
Since when has a great grandchild being named after a great grandparent anything other than an honour for the great grandparent?
In the three weeks between 9th May and 30th May (ref NIMS population data), the proportional increase in first dose vaccination uptake was:
50-59: 1.2%
60-69: 0.7%
70-79: 0.1%
So broadly speaking, uptake will likely settle at 95% for the 70s, something like 91-92% for the 60s and perhaps just shy of 90% for the 50s. Which leaves 1.6 million courageous contrarians aged over 50.
Assume uniform acquired infection of 40% to date across all age groups and that knocks you down to about a million people over 50 with no immunity.
It will be put to the PM that the new variant eventually puts [x%] of these people in hospital. The key will be understanding from those god awful modellers how many at one time. And then politically, what if anything is to be done about it.
This population of a million (plus whatever the 40s cohort settles at (currently 1.6m unvaxxed) risk being the new bed blockers for the next couple of winters, preventing the clearing of the nhs backlog. They are also this government’s voting coalition.
My expectation is no stern words or measures at all will be levelled at them, and it’s then down to how reliable the herd effect is against whatever variant is most prevalent in November on whether we avoid new “non pharmaceutical interventions” this winter. By 2022 the scandal engulfing the government will not be covid deaths but missed cancer diagnoses.
https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1402544313209339913
https://thecritic.co.uk/rob-hutton-hasnt-a-clue-what-hes-doing/
But, what is the least disruptive for peace in N Ireland:
Checks on goods between—
1. GB and NI
2. NI and ROI
3. ROI and Rest EU
https://twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1402547983619661828?s=20
Have got some strong pushback from EU sources to Politico story that EU diplomats mulling emergency plan to introduce border checks between Ireland and rest of EU if London and Brussels talks over Northern Ireland Protocol ultimately fail.
https://twitter.com/JamesCrisp6/status/1402541739584405510?s=20
Surely the native Americans should have had their own coronaviruses that would have been novel to Europeans and not just STDs?
https://twitter.com/SCMPNews/status/1402505967716036616
(Imagine the nasal swabs...)
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01529-3
A useful article which might help sift @Leon 's occasional nuggets from his copious dross, if you're interested.
If Columbus and those that followed had brought back to Europe diseases that had wiped out 80 to 95% of Europeans then history would have been very different!