Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36070597)

Raab out on the Sundays warning against setting arbitrary timetables which is understandable. They'll want to tip toe out of the restrictions at first monitoring the real world performance of the vaccine. It's not helpful to have deadlines that put political pressure on to measure success/failure of what's ultimately a scientific endeavour and there's no need for unnecessary risks at this stage so late in the day.

By May it'll have been 15 months all the while we should carrying out 8 million vaccinations a month. Paul is right about mid summer being a more realistic target for removing many/most, and at this stage it's more important (I think anyway) that it's a one way street. The time it takes for restrictions to be reintroduced if it went wrong (June), ease (July, optimistically), evaluate outcomes (end August) is months.

A little bit of hesitation and caution now should reap dividends in the long run so that every 6-8 weeks we take a meaningful step closer to normal. The school holidays impact on R will be a good point to push further.

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36070606)

All very well if you have no life and no plans, personally I've had enough of restrictions, we are going hell for leather vaccinating people time to reap the rewards, those that want to can always stay hidden under the stairs, no one will force them back into society [what's left of it] that is.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36070614)

There are no rewards to reap if we suddenly find ourselves reintroducing restrictions in June and reevaluating the whole game plan. Those who want to stay "hidden under the stairs" as you put it often cannot - they need to go out to work, care for family members, buy essential goods. The safety of which depends on prevalence of the virus and the numbers vaccinated.

If it were truly binary I'd get your point, but it isn't. There's no furlough scheme for those with a personal preference to not take the risk, and no guarantee that employers will continue to permit working from home.

I'm also sick of restrictions that's why I want them to get it right first time. Case numbers are falling though the floor, and vaccine numbers going up through the roof. If there's ever been a time to stick with it for a few weeks, that time is absolutely now. Easing restrictions will get safer and quicker the further down case numbers go and further up vaccinations go.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36070614)

There are no rewards to reap if we suddenly find ourselves reintroducing restrictions in June and reevaluating the whole game plan. Those who want to stay "hidden under the stairs" as you put it often cannot - they need to go out to work, care for family members, buy essential goods. The safety of which depends on prevalence of the virus and the numbers vaccinated.

If it were truly binary I'd get your point, but it isn't. There's no furlough scheme for those with a personal preference to not take the risk, and no guarantee that employers will continue to permit working from home.

I'm also sick of restrictions that's why I want them to get it right first time. Case numbers are falling though the floor, and vaccine numbers going up through the roof. If there's ever been a time to stick with it for a few weeks, that time is absolutely now. Easing restrictions will get safer and quicker the further down case numbers go and further up vaccinations go.

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36070651)

As long as schools go back (mine are in school anyway) and outside sports ( kids football) start again sooner rather than later, I.e. start of April. I’ll be happy.

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 36070664)

My niece is in her final year of A-Levels and had a yes from all the Universities she wanted (pending results).


I said to her that Covid permitting I am available to take her stuff to her University, (I have a Kuga so loads of room)

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36070597)

Raab out on the Sundays warning against setting arbitrary timetables which is understandable. They'll want to tip toe out of the restrictions at first monitoring the real world performance of the vaccine. It's not helpful to have deadlines that put political pressure on to measure success/failure of what's ultimately a scientific endeavour and there's no need for unnecessary risks at this stage so late in the day.

By May it'll have been 15 months all the while we should carrying out 8 million vaccinations a month. Paul is right about mid summer being a more realistic target for removing many/most, and at this stage it's more important (I think anyway) that it's a one way street. The time it takes for restrictions to be reintroduced if it went wrong (June), ease (July, optimistically), evaluate outcomes (end August) is months.

A little bit of hesitation and caution now should reap dividends in the long run so that every 6-8 weeks we take a meaningful step closer to normal. The school holidays impact on R will be a good point to push further.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36070667)

I understand your reasoning, but frankly, maintaining restrictions when the elderly and vulnerable have been inoculated is unnecessary.

I see no reason why we shouldn't lift all restrictions by Easter.

Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36070662)

My wifes school never closed, they currently get about 40 - 50% of their pupils attending.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36070669)

Because the virus would still be moving freely through the un-vaccinated half of the population. The risk of vaccine-escape mutations is higher, the more the virus reproduces. And even if the vaccine is 75% effective in vulnerable groups, 25% of that group is still vulnerable. Allowing the virus to move freely through the unvaccinated population puts vulnerable people for whom the vaccine has been ineffective, at unnecessary risk.

You see no reasons now, because you’ve barely acknowledged any reasons since day one, as your tedious forum status line has stated for months now, to the enlightenment of precisely no-one.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36070669)

Because the virus would still be moving freely through the un-vaccinated half of the population. The risk of vaccine-escape mutations is higher, the more the virus reproduces. And even if the vaccine is 75% effective in vulnerable groups, 25% of that group is still vulnerable. Allowing the virus to move freely through the unvaccinated population puts vulnerable people for whom the vaccine has been ineffective, at unnecessary risk.

You see no reasons now, because you’ve barely acknowledged any reasons since day one, as your tedious forum status line has stated for months now, to the enlightenment of precisely no-one.