Re: Coronavirus
 

Ok, here’s an independent one from UNICEF, produced way back in April within weeks of the first lockdown, that references tens of pre-COVID assessments and reports.

https://www.unicef.org.uk/wp-content...Assessment.pdf


Like I say, knock yourself out.

If you’re trying to somehow spin it, that there is no detrimental impact to children or that it is being spun by government into something bigger than it’s not.

Focus your efforts elsewhere.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Helpful if you read what’s said, Old Boy rather than dive head first in. I know, reading what’s said eh? Why bother when you can keep pushing your discredited theories around letting the virus go and protecting the vulnerable.

Nowhere did I refer to the vaccine lasting that long. I was referring to those infected in the first wave. I clearly stated that in my post. That’s accepted to be the period to June 2020. 26 weeks from now is one year from then.

It’s literally in the sentence before you applied bold to my text.

I prefer you clutching at straws and posting discredited nonsense to misrepresenting my posts. Thanks.

Re: Coronavirus
 

On both sides of the argument, I would add...

By the way, this is a discussion forum, not a centre of expertise.

;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Plus it might go away by itself in the summer :rolleyes:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Really? By whom? The usual suspects who disagree with anything positive?

I’m underwhelmed! :D

---------- Post added at 20:04 ---------- Previous post was at 20:02 ----------

Typical comment from you, mate. Maximum disruption on the back of minimal evidence.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You do realise there are over 17 million British defined as ‘vulnerable’ under the COVID vaccine priority list definitions? (I only included up to Group 6 in the attached chart).

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...st-covid-when/

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...9&d=1609617698

That’s going to take more than "a few weeks", even at a million doses per week (which we are nowhere near yet)..

Re: Coronavirus
 

Risk assessment is about being realistic, not "positive" - "hope" should never be part of a plan.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Happily.

Not enough until it became a method of pushing herd immunity by the back door, sadly.
If we can find £22bn for test and trace I’m sure we could find some overtime pay for teachers.

Opening schools full time without exception leaves many areas stuck in Level 3 or 4 lockdown restrictions with no way back out and hundreds of thousands of children isolating on any given day anyway, missing weeks of the school year. It’s not a zero sum game.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well, the big question of course, is where do you find evidence that closing primary schools will help the situation? There is none, is the simple answer. You are in panic mode, my friend. We need to study the evidence rather more carefully than jumping to such conclusions.

Balance your solution with the problems we are aware of, such as denying young children the education they need at a crucial time in their lives, and how their parents will look after them if both are working full time. Is that not worthy of consideration too?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Difference being some people are quoting experts and evidence in support of their propositions, others are not... ;)

nb, the only ‘positive" the virus cares about is "COVID positive" - it doesn’t care about anyone’s "positive attitude", and a positive attitude won’t stop anyone being infected.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Don’t talk rubbish Old Boy. ONS data shows (linked by PIP) school age children as most likely to have the virus.

Now they are either catching it from their parents going to non-essential retail or schools are driving transmission. This is also the SAGE position that closing schools drives down R.

I know throughout this pandemic you have consistently been proven wrong, clinging onto false dawn after false dawn. Thankfully, our politicians, despite being somewhat incompetent and ignoring the data haven’t gone full ostrich like you Old Boy and do, often belatedly, accept what is staring them in the face. Something you haven’t yet done and not something I truly expect now.

If the vaccine doesn’t give you hope and offer realisation that there’s an end in sight without sacrificing tens of thousands of lives nothing will.

---------- Post added at 20:13 ---------- Previous post was at 20:11 ----------

:D:D:D

This simply can only be trolling. Honestly, cases increase in the school age population, in lockdown (Tier 4), but it’s not schools.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Or at any time, for that matter.

You just want to see chaos and disruption. I’m wondering if you are one of these ‘say it loud and say it proud’ anarchists. That would explain some of your outrageous views on this forum.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So still nothing in relation to "vulnerable" children, and whatever the definition of "vulnerable" is meant to be.
Link from your linked report

How is that any different from outside of school hours? The first closure was not long before the Easter holidays.
Very little of that document referred to closure of schools, and most of what it did mention, was related to ALL children(eg no exams).

Re: Coronavirus
 

Your statement is still not supported by facts, no matter how you want to spin it.

26 weeks immunity? You are having a laugh!

Re: Coronavirus
 

Somewhat ironically it’s your “open the schools at all costs” mantra here that closes everything else to keep R under control. Hugely damaging what little of the economy remained in Tier 3 restrictions and giving them absolutely no hope of Tier 2.

I’d like schools to be included in restrictions so those parents still have jobs to go to.