Cable Forum - Coronavirus

Agreed and, if infections get out of hand, it will allow the Government to blame the public.

I suspect it won't be too long before they have no choice but to reintroduce restrictions or even a lockdown again.

This is all about Johnson wanting to appear the good guy as well as curtailing the financial cost of furlough etc.

Hugh	05-07-2021 21:08

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36085309)

No matter how the dice rolls, we'll be in lockdown again soon . . . haven't you heard of the four new variants being readied for release? ;)

You could be a virologist - the more people who get infected, the greater the likelihood of more variants appearing.

Carth

05-07-2021 21:15

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36085316)

You could be a virologist - the more people who get infected, the greater the likelihood of more variants appearing.

So why send kids back to school then, or allow fans back into sporting events, and why did we let Biden and the rest in a few weeks ago?

Oh, and what's the point of a vaccine if we can still catch and spread Covid? (careful how you answer that one) :p:

Hugh	05-07-2021 21:31

Re: Coronavirus

Because the vaccine has been proven to reduce deaths and hospitalisation - it reduces the impact, it doesn’t eliminate it.

Carth

05-07-2021 22:01

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36085318)

Because the vaccine has been proven to reduce deaths and hospitalisation - it reduces the impact, it doesn’t eliminate it.

Yes it does reduce (and has reduced) serious illness & deaths. In fact I'm sure that it's done this so effectively that 99.99% of those who were at risk are no longer at risk.

I believe most of the infections now are among the younger generation, those who are believed to be at a low risk of developing a severe bout, and 'apparently' shouldn't get vaccinated anyway.

https://www.who.int/emergencies/dise...accines/advice

Quote:

The COVID-19 vaccines are safe for most people 18 years and older

Quote:

Children and adolescents tend to have milder disease compared to adults, so unless they are part of a group at higher risk of severe COVID-19, it is less urgent to vaccinate them . . .

Quote:

Vaccine trials for children are ongoing . .

Then there are those who are unfortunate to have a condition that prevents them from being vaccinated, or introduces more risks to their health if they are. I guess 'trials' are ongoing with this group also.

Finally we have those who, for whatever reason, have decided they can't be bothered to get vaccinated, and unless it becomes mandatory they will always pose a risk . . or die trying.

So (ha) it seems to me that although the vast majority of those at risk of serious illness & death are covered, we still have the ongoing scenario of new variants because everyone - vaccinated or not - can still spread it around.

In a year or two's time, when eventually there is a safe vaccine developed for kids and those currently unable to vaccinate, we will still have the same situation . . . everyone can catch it and spread it . . more variants incoming.

Masks for life :D

Paul	05-07-2021 22:35

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36085318)

Because the vaccine has been proven to reduce deaths and hospitalisation - it reduces the impact, it doesn’t eliminate it.

So just like every other virus we live with (and always have).

So why are we still hiding, and still following pointless restrictions ?

jfman

05-07-2021 22:51

Re: Coronavirus

Who is hiding?

If anything folk are more likely to selectively withdraw their discretionary spending in the economy against a backdrop of 350,000 infections a week and knuckle draggers start burning their “muzzles”.

Carth

06-07-2021 02:03

Re: Coronavirus

*350,000 infections a week*

Are we talking world wide figures or just the UK?

and by infections, are we talking definite "oooh I'm poorly and gone to hospital" or simply "I got a text telling me I'm ill" :D

edit: as an example 'there are currently 279,000 children at home self-isolating in England because they were deemed to have close contact with an infected person at school'

jfman

06-07-2021 06:35

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36085332)

I just used the figure Boris used of 50k a day by July 19 - that figure would be a positive test not a contact of one.

Pierre

06-07-2021 07:42

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36085316)

You could be a virologist - the more people who get infected, the greater the likelihood of more variants appearing.

That position was taken on here a long time ago.

OLD BOY

06-07-2021 07:59

Re: Coronavirus

There are over 60 strains of flu virus circulating. I don't think we should be so hung up over coronavirus 'variants'. The vaccinations will be adjusted to cope with these over time, just as happens every year with flu vaccines.

jfman

06-07-2021 08:07

Re: Coronavirus

Back full circle eh Old Boy it’s just a flu?

Unfortunately due to no mitigations at all even the most competent Government with the most efficient vaccine rollout will find that (once developed) the logistics of distribution will be slower than the spread of the virus.

Get your next line ready are we going for “it’ll go away in the summer” or “just shield the vulnerable”?

Sephiroth

06-07-2021 08:49

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36085337)

Problem is, OB, that CV hits the body harder than flu.

mrmistoffelees

06-07-2021 08:54

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36085332)

How about, 'As high as 100,000 per day'

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-b1878770.html

It will be interesting to see the deaths data in a couple of weeks from the current data so a very crude extrapolation can be made

1andrew1

06-07-2021 09:01

Re: Coronavirus

Interesting write-up of yesterday's press conference on Sky News.

Quote:

So why was the usually jolly Mr Johnson sounding so downbeat? The reason for his cautious tone was either side of him: the glum faces of Professor Chris Whitty and Sir Patrick Vallance, who have been called "Glum and Glummer" during the pandemic.

This time both looked thoroughly miserable. Are we going to see a boffins' backlash from the scientific and medical communities in the coming days? Almost certainly.

Poor Prof Whitty, in particular, looked as if he wished he was somewhere else. Barely a week after the trauma of being jostled by yobs in St James's Park, he looked here like he was being paraded in a hostage video.

Asked - inevitably - if they would ditch face coverings, the emphatic answer from both top boffins was a firm no. It would be fair to say they couldn't mask their concerns.

Prof Whitty was clearly ready for the question and had a carefully thought out answer. There were three circumstances when he'd wear one, he said.

These were in crowded spaces indoors to protect other people, where it was required, and as a courtesy to people who felt uncomfortable.

That prompted the prime minister to concur, in a mumbling sort of way, before an irritated sounding Sir Patrick said the whole point of wearing a mask was preventing somebody else from catching the virus.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-...amble-12349497

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:06.

Page 419 of 569

419