Re: Coronavirus
 

Oh, we’re stooping to that level now, are we? I notice you haven’t commented on the graphs.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Models have been wrong before.

I’m not stooping anywhere - essentially the recommendation overruled by the CMOs was for mass infection. Which has consequences.

We are back to where you’ve always been that deaths and hospitalisations are a price worth paying for the pipe dream of a return to 2019. Despite widespread availability of highly effective (and safe) vaccines for children.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Except….oh, never mind. The words hind legs and donkeys flashed into my head.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not your most insightful post, I’ll be honest, OB.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Strange fantasy, but each to their own, I suppose… :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm old enough to remember something called 'Muffin the Mule' :erm:

I highly doubt it would get aired today :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

16 in 2020 and only 1 under the age of nine, and even then you don't know if they had co-morbidity issues.

17 so far in 2021 under the age of 14, again with not knowing other health factors.

only around 33 for the whole pandemic.

I'd like to see how those numbers stack up against all other causes of child death.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/trans...covid19intheuk

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...nglandandwales

As usual JFmans attempt to take a higher moral stance is mute.

Still

Those recent comments haven't aged well.

No doubt, when a new strain appears in 2027 and measures have to be taken, he'll claim he was right. There's no time frame with "inevitable" is there?

Re: Coronavirus
 

It’s early days for Plan B, Pierre I’d not count your chickens as you did with the schools reopening in January so your point is moot.

A number of deaths that are avoidable through vaccination, plus the implications for wider spread of community transmission. I’d certainly prefer to have my moral stance than indifference to the long term health impacts and deaths resulting from Covid-19.

I don’t think anyone would credibly claim 2027 is Plan B from 2021. It’s clearly a reference to winter. School mid-term offers some respite, but that will not last.

Re: Coronavirus
 

This depends though surely. Ministers, the new health body, Whitty/Vallance etc will all be looking at the data.


If a measure is likely to have an impact on the virus and is not likely to have other effects which are disproportionate to it, it's likely it will get invoked either in a local/targeted way or on everyone - for example it would be difficult to lock down businesses and the country for the sake of infections which could be controlled more specifically e.g. restrictions in a local area.


I don't think we're looking yet at saying that Plan B will either happen or that we will be fine sticking to the current measures. Most schools have had either this last week, the week before, or both off, and that appears to be the age group and environment which is worst affected. As we have already seen before whenever the schools are open it spreads and whenever they are not it goes down. So the effect of this continuing depends on how many schoolkids are already immune to covid. Once it reaches the threshold it will slow down and stop spreading but this figure isn't going to be known due to the asymptomatic spread more early in the pandemic and also that testing has not until recently been widely available. I do think that a while back Whitty did say around half secondary age kids had already had it and that the remaining half will do. Given that it's now relatively easier to get a vaccine (they are allowing 12+ to book nationally finally) this will probably pinch that age group further. That's still Plan A.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The models show Plan B would make the number of infections worse, so I don’t understand why you are willing us all to go to Plan B. Where is your source for this belief of yours?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Covid has evolved into a religion, all it's followers need is faith.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m not willing anything - I’m telling you it’s inevitable there’s a nuanced difference.

Considering the amount of deeply held (and inaccurate) beliefs you’ve spouted through this thread it’s somewhat ironic that you ask others to evidence theirs.

Hospitalisations continue to rise, deaths continue to rise. That has an inevitable outcome.

A model (I note you say “models” but you have only sourced one) is just a prediction - without knowing how their inputs align with the real world (waning efficacy, reinfections, booster efficacy and rollout) it’s impossible to have one held up as sacrosanct.

I think according to the models in the Spectator we’ve hit herd immunity three times now.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Probably would have without the Delta variant and maybe even without Alpha before it.


When it's more transmissible, and has a higher R number, you need more people for herd immunity.


Delta does seem to be very good at seeking out unvaccinated and people who haven't had the virus.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Sounds like the British Exceptionalism that got us into this mess.

It’ll go away in the summer, being my favourite.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Hospitalisations are no higher than they were on "Freedom Day".

Deaths are up from that date but neither metric is showing an exponential upturn that would scream action.