|
Originally Posted by KARFA
(Post 33387016)
I have to say, vaccinating children now when they are extremely unlikely to get any significant symptoms seems morally questionable when many countries haven’t even got any vaccine to use for their most vulnerable.
But certainly, some throttling-back of the vaccination rate when we get to children, in favour of allowing supplies to reach others, is probably defensible. |
I fully understand that there comes a point where the economic and psychological cost of continued restrictions surpasses the benefit in terms of reduction in deaths and hospitalisations. I also can see that it is probably preferable to accept the next wave now rather then push it into winter running alongside the expected giant flu epidemic.
But what I can’t understand is the position taken on masks. Unlike social distancing and other restrictions, it is pretty much zero cost. After all many Asians seem to manage fine masking up during winter year after year without their economies crumbling and their personal sense of freedom being decimated. Which leaves me to conclude that this is simply more culture wars from a Government that seems to have little else in the way of policies. |
Originally Posted by Kgmm77
(Post 33389126)
After all many Asians seem to manage fine masking up during winter year after year without their economies crumbling and their personal sense of freedom being decimated.
However, this "freedom" wouldn't necessarily be my main argument, and I personally don't like this description of 19 July as "Freedom day". Instead I would argue the role of masks is changing with regard to stopping the spread. Previously the masks were one of the few layers which might stop passing of the virus from one person to another. If you were in proximity with someone else there really wasn't much else stopping the spread otherwise. Things have progressed and there are many more layers of protection now as those vaccinated are much less likely to become infected, and if they do are much less likely to transmit it on, and those they encounter who are much less likely to become infected etc. Quite simply masks are becoming much less important than they were before. I note that no one seemed to get that excited about masks when school children no longer had to wear them back in May - even though schools have consistently been one of the top places for spread of the virus and a way to enable transmission between households so I really do not see why the change post 19 July has to be any more controversial. |
i agree that, unsurprisingly, the branding of FREEDOM DAY is yet another absolutely idiotic framing of what is actually happening and only threatens to truly dent any supposed behavioral tendencies or altruism the govt is wanting to rely on from the people.
you cannot say FREEDOM DAY means paying how many hundred quid on return testing if fully vaccinated, or FREEDOM DAY if you must isolate when pinged if fully vaccinated, or FREEDOM DAY if you still must rely on a notion of personal responsibility or FREEDOM DAY if covid is "far from over" in their words. if anything, this week has been another pointless branding exercise to distract from the latest round of BJs failures. |
Originally Posted by KARFA
(Post 33389154)
Things have progressed and there are many more layers of protection now.
|
Originally Posted by Kgmm77
(Post 33389174)
There is one layer of protection, namely vaccinations. All the other layers such as social distancing and masks have been removed. The Swiss cheese model of risk mitigation is gone.
If you want to rely on your swiss cheese model, why are you not worried about all the other layers of protection which have been gradually removed since the end of March? There are many settings for weeks/months where you can mix with multiple households without face masks, and yet no one seems remotely bothered about that. As noted children have been mask free for nearly two months and no one seems to think that is terrible. This change from 19 July really isn't as controversial as a few people seem to think. I am sure they will not just disappear completely overnight, but people will exercise some judgement about perhaps where they feel they want to wear them - as they have done historically in Asia which you noted originally. |
Originally Posted by Kgmm77
(Post 33389174)
There is one layer of protection, namely vaccinations. All the other layers such as social distancing and masks have been removed. The Swiss cheese model of risk mitigation is gone.
The "personal choice", "Good British common sense" and so on are utter nonsense. We've gone down that route before and it's been utter carnage. Mask wearing is a proven, effective way to keep the virus at bay. There's still a lot of it circulating, thanks to HMG's ineptitude with regards to India. There's still a large % of people with no vaccination, partial vaccination or relatively less effective vaccines with regards to the Delta variant. The current system on mask-wearing is not enforced and full of loopholes, circumventable simply by buying a sunflower lanyard and lying.... and they're making it less stringent. Why? For what reason? We'll pay for this. |
The BBC are now reporting that Shapps will make a statement this morning on travel changes for fully vaccinated. The Telegraph is saying the day 2 test will still be needed. Children will be exempt from quarantine though irrespective of vaccination status.
Also in the same Telegraph story it says the next traffic light review is due on the 31st July which is rather late. |
Originally Posted by DaveS
(Post 33389769)
The BBC are now reporting that Shapps will make a statement this morning on travel changes for fully vaccinated. The Telegraph is saying the day 2 test will still be needed. Children will be exempt from quarantine though irrespective of vaccination status.
Also in the same Telegraph story it says the next traffic light review is due on the 31st July which is rather late. |
1. First a practical topic. There will be a new health guidance coming soon (hopefully for the week-end or early next week) for immunocompromised and CEV for them to know what to do at step 4. Most likely this will be a new shielding order for a minimum of 500 000 people (or a recommendation, there are uncertainties). There was a meeting yesterday between major charity groups and some government officials where HMG admitted they have not "thought" of those people in the context of step 4. The charities (representing cancer and transplant patients, autoimmune support groups were apparently not part of that meeting) were very angry as the patient community is afraid and are expressing signs of panic (I can vouch for that, in the charity I work with the mood is the same). since the current research shows that the vaccines have close to null to a reduced efficiency for those people (depending on various factors - mostly type of immunosuppression). HMG admitted they dropped the ball and more should be done for those patients this week.
2. I am going to quote the CEO of NHS Providers, he express more eloquently what I am trying to convey since yesterday (emphasis mine): 1/27 Lots of current focus on interaction between increasing levels of COVID-19 cases and NHS, in the context of relaxing restrictions on 19 July. New thread follows. Key questions to answer: what's the likely impact on NHS, can it cope and what does this mean for 19 July? 2/27 As we said a few weeks ago, vaccines have severely weakened the link between covid-19 infection and hospitalisation / mortality. Or, as we put it, for this set of variants, vaccines have broken link between infections and previously high hospitalisation/mortality rates. 3/27 So, there’s high confidence amongst trust leaders that increasing community infection rates, even to the levels we saw in January, will not translate into the levels of hospitalisation and mortality we saw in that peak. A peak that brought extreme pressure to the NHS. But… 4/27 …There clearly will be higher levels of hospitalisations than we are seeing at the moment. And trust leaders are worried that public commentary is just focussing on potential levels of covid-19 admissions in isolation, not looking at NHS demand & capacity as a whole. 5/27 Vital to look at full NHS demand/capacity picture over next few months to get a sense of what the pressure on NHS will be like. You need to look at total planned, urgent, and covid-19 care demand as well as NHS staff/bed capacity, not just likely covid-19 admission rates! 6/27 So here, in four parts, is what full demand / capacity picture is likely to look like July-September. A. Trusts going full pelt, flat out, to recover care backlogs. Rightly so, given issues involved for patients. This is putting huge pressure on staff, services and beds. 7/27 Very important to remember this isn’t just about elective and cancer backlogs and acute hospital services. There are significant backlogs and huge pressures in community and mental health services too. For example children and young people crisis/eating disorder services. 8/27 B. Trusts reporting worryingly high levels of urgent & emergency care demand, as today's NHS stats should show. Striking how many hospital & ambulance CEOs saying they recorded highest ever levels of daily urgent care demand in June. (Note from me: several A&E broke this week their all time records for admission in 24 hours - in June !!) This also brings huge pressure on trusts. 9/27 It’s worth remembering that, over the last few years before covid-19, we’ve definitely seen a heightened summer effect in urgent & emergency care with trusts reporting “winter like” levels of pressure. Every reason to believe this phenomenon will occur again this summer. 10/27 C. The NHS is currently operating with significant capacity constraints. “Long term lost beds” due to infection control measures. But also “temporary void” beds that can’t be used as covid patient numbers rise. EG 2 covid patients in an 8 bed ward takes out 6 other beds… 11/27 …The number of void beds will, by definition, increase as community infections, and therefore hospitalisation rates, rise. Striking how many smaller hospitals are saying current urgent care pressure and small covid-19 increases now impacting speed of elective recovery. 12/27 D. Real pressure on staffing levels given numbers of staff having to self isolate – widespread concerns over last fortnight here. This will get worse after 19 July as covid infection rates rise. But better post 16 August given isolation policy changes announced recently?... 13/27 ..But, we’re also about to enter peak leave season, with many NHS staff about to take much needed and awaited leave. The impact of summer leave will be bigger than normal given how much leave had to be held over from earlier this year & last year due to covid-19 pressures. 14/27 …CEOs have been clear for weeks that the speed of backlog recovery, which has been incredibly fast over last three months, was going to dip over the summer given the levels of leave that will be taken. Trust leaders adamant staff need their leave given wellbeing concerns. 15/27 So the issue for NHS pressure here is not, as most are implying, the likely absolute level of covid-19 hospital admissions. All the current evidence suggests that, due to the vaccines, the number of covid-19 hospital admissions will be much lower than in previous waves…. 16/27 …And that covid-19 patients will, in general, have lower levels of acuity and they will benefit from the new treatments NHS has developed. For example dexamethasone and remdesivir. The issue for NHS pressure is the cumulative impact of all above different elements…. 17/27 …It’s the combination of the likely higher level of demand across the totality of urgent, planned and covid care. With the significant impact of reduced bed and staff capacity which higher levels of covid-19 will significantly exacerbate as community infections rise. 18/27 The NHS will come under significant extra pressure. When that happens, acute hospitals would have to dial back speed of elective recovery – the element they can control out of urgent, covid-19 and elective care. So, a clear & important trade off to recognise here. 19/27 Good illustrative anecdote from an acute hospital CEO this week. “The problem is the overall level of demand coming at us from all sides. Add in current staff and bed pressures and just a few extra covid-19 patients means we have to start slowing elective recovery down”. 20/27 But CEOs recognise it’s their job to perform this complicated juggling act as well as possible. They know their trust’s task is to provide the best possible care to all who need it, prioritising on basis of clinical need if prioritisation between patients is needed…. 21/27 …Trust CEO community is keen, understandably, for everyone to realise the scale of the challenge their trusts are currently having to manage. It’s not just a simple question of low rates of covid-19 hospitalisations = low levels of NHS pressure and all will be well. 22/27 What does all this mean for July 19 relaxation of rules? Trust leader views broadly as follows. A. Government should continue to monitor evidence between now and 12th to ensure no significant changes on hospitalisation/mortality rates that alter current calculations. 23/27 B. Trust leaders can see the strong logic of “if not now, when” and the need for the nation to learn to live with covid-19. But they want everyone to be clear about the risks being run by relaxing restrictions. We can’t be sure what those risks are or how big they are. 24/27 They include higher hospitalisation and mortality, albeit at much lower levels than previous waves. The risk of new, more dangerous, variants emerging given the width of spread. And the potential impact for those who develop longer term health complications… 25/27 …In the words of one CEO today “We are really worried in our system about the number of unvaccinated young people we are seeing with mild covid-19 disease who are then developing serious long covid type symptoms shortly after. Not just a few, a significant number” 26/27 C. And trust leaders want the explicit trade off set out above to be recognised. Relaxing restrictions will lead to more pressure on the NHS. This will, by definition, mean that something has to give. Most likely, in most places, speed of care backlog recovery. 27/27 Trust leaders obviously have a mission to avoid any unnecessary harm. So they are, instinctively, uneasy about potential harm to any patient. But they also recognise wider issues at stake here. They will do all they can, as they always do, to provide best care to all. |
Originally Posted by KARFA
(Post 33389191)
No, as noticed vaccinations comprise several layers of protection, including resistance to infection, resistance to getting ill once infected, and resistance to transmission - the latter was one we were not sure about at the start of the program but has subsequently been show to be very effective with the vaccines.
If you want to rely on your swiss cheese model, why are you not worried about all the other layers of protection which have been gradually removed since the end of March? There are many settings for weeks/months where you can mix with multiple households without face masks, and yet no one seems remotely bothered about that. As noted children have been mask free for nearly two months and no one seems to think that is terrible. This change from 19 July really isn't as controversial as a few people seem to think. I am sure they will not just disappear completely overnight, but people will exercise some judgement about perhaps where they feel they want to wear them - as they have done historically in Asia which you noted originally. And as for the 19 July changes not being “as controversial as a few people think”, I think that’s somewhat of an understatement. I’ll leave with the WHOs view on the complete rollback of restrictions as “moral emptiness and epidimiological stupidity”. |
I absolutely feel for the most vulnerable people and for those you support in your charity, fransknorge, but what I don't understand is: what's the alternative?
I went to a dinner yesterday evening at a friend's house. There was a doctor, and my friend's wife who is a school teacher in a comprehensive (I think, 10+ years in this country and I still don't understand schools). The doctor was arguing for a return to lockdowns and to isolate children, remote learning and so on. After she made her point my friend's wife pointed out that of the 30 kids in her class half are from ethnic minorities, live in council homes or are in conditions of poverty (the catchment area covers the Grenfell estate and the roughest parts of Ladbroke Grove). Since last year she's lost a third of those kids and she knows that at least two are now working for the biggest employers in the area, i.e. gangs. We need to consider these kids. The damage that has been done so far to the younger generation is enormous and it's not just intangible. In London we've had, what, 18 under-18 die since January 1st? I live in Ealing and I've seen a big increase in violence amongst youngsters as schools have been closed and the few remaining youth centres have been shuttered too by the pandemic. Gangs are just sweeping 'em up. |
Just to correct some posts I've put here and elsewhere: Grant Shapps is shown on the order paper as making a statement at approx 11:30 hrs, the key 12:30 hrs slot is allocated to the Prime Minister who is making a (rare for him) statement on Afghanistan. These times are approximate since there is a section before for "business questions", meaning the internal business of the Houses of Parliament. That can be very short or quite long since it's a way of an MP asking "Can we please have a debate on X which is so important for my long sufferring constituents in Lower Beeding in the Marsh". Some weeks this just doesn't happen.
|
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave
(Post 33389972)
Just to correct some posts I've put here and elsewhere: Grant Shapps is shown on the order paper as making a statement at approx 11:30 hrs, the key 12:30 hrs slot is allocated to the Prime Minister who is making a (rare for him) statement on Afghanistan. These times are approximate since there is a section before for "business questions", meaning the internal business of the Houses of Parliament. That can be very short or quite long since it's a way of an MP asking "Can we please have a debate on X which is so important for my long sufferring constituents in Lower Beeding in the Marsh". Some weeks this just doesn't happen.
|
Originally Posted by HB7
(Post 33389988)
So just record the parliament section on BBC Parliament from 11 am to 12 pm and fast forward until Shapps is on? :)
Or wait for the summaries here from the forum regulars, they are usually as good as the journalists' reports. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:11 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.