Re: Coronavirus
 

Absolutely no side effects, Seph.

Re: Coronavirus
 

A previous employer used to give me a flu vaccine - every year for 7 years, never had any side effects.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It must have been hell for you.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Actually, it was mostly enjoyable, as West Berlin was a showplace of freedom and Capitalism to rebut the GDR propaganda, and the locals were really pleased we were there (considering the alternative), but with the ever-present presence of an East German Armoured Guards Brigade about a kilometer from our Married Quarter, and working in the most visible target in West Berlin (NSA Teufelsberg), and being 110 kilometres from the West German border meaning in the event of conflict very little chance of getting out, which put a slight dark cloud over the experience.

But we were soldiers* once, and young... :)

*airmen, actually

Re: Coronavirus
 

Airperson :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Nah, we had airmen (who were in the RAF), and airwomen (who were in the WRAF) - there’s only the RAF now, as they merged in 1994, and now there are airmen and airwomen in the RAF. :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Ok I’ve left it 9 days more than enough.

Still.............

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths

The data hasn’t changed. Deaths and those in ICU still at 30% of the initial wave and now dropping.

No evidence at all that rates are dropping are due to this “lockdown”*. * not a lockdown at all anyway.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm not sure how that conclusion follows, but either way with a vaccination in sight the Government are simply not going to take any unnecessary risks.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well my initial point was that after more than a week, after being told that my view was potentially incorrect due to a time delay in the data being collated, that actually what I posted has stayed firm.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It has stayed firm with increasing restrictions in more areas over time.

The logical conclusion would be that not increasing restrictions, or worse easing them, would cause more cases, more hospitalisations, more ICU admission and ultimately more deaths.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Also with a vacation in sight, the Government are simply not going to take any unnecessary risks. ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

So there were no tiered restrictions in place before 5th Nov? No partial lockdowns in Scotland and Wales?
If restrictions hadn't been imposed then figures would've gone upwards.
If restrictions had been lifted the figures would've sky-rocketed and further overwhelmed the NHS etc.
Today Northamptonshire

Not a uniform picture

Doesn't sound too good
Link

Re: Coronavirus
 

In fairness to the Government, I doubt they would take significant risks anyway. Despite the "Back to the office" push from the right wing press, Graham Brady and IDS (Ian Duncan-Smith, but IDS sounds like a virus so seemed apt) the evidence has always been clear to avoid unnecessary contact with others.

How, where and when we can push the limits has, rightly, been up for question over time. However, for those who take the bury-head-in-sand approach the same decision making that forced lockdown in March has created these restrictions now. While schools are open everything else is gone.

The decision making has remained the same - therefore what has changed between March and now. If the answer is, as I have said all along, absolutely nothing. Then we see predictable outcomes and greater restrictions.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The logical conclusion would have been seeing deaths and ICU continue to rise, due to the “lag”. But the data shows them levelling off before then.

Just confirms that shutting the pubs and boutique shops (as that’s really all that has changed) was unnecessary.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I genuinely don’t see how your conclusion links with the data.