Coronavirus

The hospitalisation rate is starting to looking concerning. 38% in a week. That's from a low number but we can't afford for it to increase at that rate at all.

If you look at the official dashboard it's starting to show a steep incline: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

but as the restrictions are to protect people from “at risk” situations then it’s clear they aren’t designed to protect people like you.

In a fully vaccinated population, what and where are the "at risk" situations?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

In a fully vaccinated population, what and where are the "at risk" situations?

Which fully vaccinated population is this you are hypothesising about?

It’s not here, that’s for sure. I take it you still don’t want mask wearing until then? No? Vaccinating teenagers? No?

Red herring alert.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Damien

The hospitalisation rate is starting to looking concerning. 38% in a week. That's from a low number but we can't afford for it to increase at that rate at all.

If you look at the official dashboard it's starting to show a steep incline: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare

400 per day on any given week day anything between 50,000 and 60,000 people are admitted to hospital. So at that rate it accounts for 0.7% of admissions.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-45783005

---------- Post added at 18:02 ---------- Previous post was at 17:57 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

Which fully vaccinated population is this you are hypothesising about?

It’s not here, that’s for sure. I take it you still don’t want mask wearing until then? No? Vaccinating teenagers? No?

Red herring alert.

Not counting children as they rarely get seriously ill and will probably been infected and already have antibodies.

As mentioned a few posts ago. 45M have had one jab 86% of the population 34M have had 2 jabs 64% of the population. + the millions that have been infected and recovered and have antibodies.

The nation will be pretty much done in a month or two. Then the booster program starts.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

400 per day on any given week day anything between 50,000 and 60,000 people are admitted to hospital. So at that rate it accounts for 0.7% of admissions.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-45783005

Double 400 every 9 days and see where you are in 170 days.

Even if just for entertainment value.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...postcount=6293

---------- Post added at 18:07 ---------- Previous post was at 18:03 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

Not counting children

So not a fully vaccinated population then.

The nation will be pretty much done in a month or two.

No masks for a couple of months then?

Then the booster program starts.

Odd given you portray vaccination as success in such a binary fashion that you think the booster programme has any relevance at all. It’s almost as if you’re making it up as you go along as long as it suits a predetermined position you’ve held for 17 months.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by jfman

Double 400 every 9 days and see where you are in 170 days.

Even if just for entertainment value.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...postcount=6293

---------- Post added at 18:07 ---------- Previous post was at 18:03 ----------



So not a fully vaccinated population then.



No masks for a couple of months then?



Odd given you portray vaccination as success in such a binary fashion that you think the booster programme has any relevance at all. It’s almost as if you’re making it up as you go along as long as it suits a predetermined position you’ve held for 17 months.

We can never have a fully vaccinated country or world. There will also be those who cannot be vaccinated due to health reasons or those who refuse to be. As regards children there is still a risk/benefit study ongoing, until that is completed it would be wrong to offer vaccines to children.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by pip08456

We can never have a fully vaccinated country or world. There will also be those who cannot be vaccinated due to health reasons or those who refuse to be. As regards children there is still a risk/benefit study ongoing, until that is completed it would be wrong to offer vaccines to children.

The MHRA have concluded the Pfizer vaccine is safe and effective for 12-15 year olds. The JCVI are playing politics with the decision.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/t...o-15-year-olds

Dr June Raine, MHRA Chief Executive said:
“We have carefully reviewed clinical trial data in children aged 12 to 15 years and have concluded that the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is safe and effective in this age group and that the benefits of this vaccine outweigh any risk.

As I noted earlier Pierre’s use of “fully vaccinated” was a red herring. However the clear benefits at an individual and a population level of vaccine maximisation are clear.

Otherwise we just go round and round.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

Double 400 every 9 days and see where you are in 170 days.

Even if just for entertainment value.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...postcount=6293[COLOR="Silver"]

about 104 million?

So not a fully vaccinated population then.

full vaccinated adult population - there’s no evidence kids need to be vaccinated, unless they have other complications.

No masks for a couple of months then?

no masks from July 19th, I can’t wait.

Odd given you portray vaccination as success in such a binary fashion that you think the booster programme has any relevance at all.

is it not a success?

[Carth]

Originally Posted by pip08456

We can never have a fully vaccinated country or world. There will also be those who cannot be vaccinated due to health reasons or those who refuse to be. As regards children there is still a risk/benefit study ongoing, until that is completed it would be wrong to offer vaccines to children.

Pretty much what I said a few pages ago, which means it will always be here and, as such, will 'allegedly'* mutate into a much more dangerous variant and probably eventually kill us all


*by experts and a few on here

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

However the clear benefits at an individual and a population level of vaccine maximisation are clear.

Otherwise we just go round and round.

Your ability for double talk is truly breathtaking.

So you agree the vaccination programme is working and a success, and the vaccines are working as they should.

Therefore I can only think you have other reasons for not wanting to open up fully.

[jfman]

I’m not here to answer for your contradictions Pierre. On one hand people being vaccinated is absolute - they are no longer at risk, on the other you are talking up the booster programme that would be unnecessary if your first statement held true.

Fundamentally you’ve misrepresented the risks from outset because of your ideological position against state intervention. And you will continue to do so for months to come.

A mere day after the UK recorded its highest case numbers you were presenting Covid as state scaremongering.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...postcount=2722

Probably not, as that wouldn’t make it look as bad as it does, and we need to keep the country at peak fear.

At least this new variant seems to rippping through the population at a pace, vaccination + infection at this speed and we’ll all be done by spring!

60,000 cases the day before. Within 3 weeks we were averaging 1200 deaths a day (over 7 days).

If you didn’t believe the situation or risks were credible then why should anyone believe you are weighing up the evidence in a genuine or sincere manner now?

---------- Post added at 19:14 ---------- Previous post was at 19:10 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

Your ability for double talk is truly breathtaking.

So you agree the vaccination programme is working and a success, and the vaccines are working as they should.

Therefore I can only think you have other reasons for not wanting to open up fully.

A vaccine can simultaneously be of benefit and not completely eliminate risk. At a population level that aggregate benefit rises the more people are vaccinated. I’m not sure how many times you have to be told this.

I can only think you have other reasons for wanting to open up fully regardless (including removing the use of masks) of evident risks. A position you’ve held consistently.

I’ve been clear the risk of too much, too soon, is always lockdown. And we know how much you love those.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

I’m not here to answer for your contradictions Pierre. On one hand people being vaccinated is absolute - they are no longer at risk, on the other you are talking up the booster programme that would be unnecessary if your first statement held true.

given the vaccines are working, but we don’t have any real world data of how long the protection lasts a booster program contingency seems very sensible, unless like you, you are a lover of lockdowns.

Fundamentally you’ve misrepresented the risks from outset because of your ideological position against state intervention. And you will continue to do so for months to come.

I’ve told you, you can’t misrepresent facts only misinterpret them. The are, have been, and always will be low…..for the vast majority of the population, even more so now with vaccines and other treatment.

A mere day after the UK recorded its highest case numbers you were presenting Covid as state scaremongering.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...postcount=2722

60,000 cases the day before. Within 3 weeks we were averaging 1200 cases a day (over 7 days).

and by April (Spring) cases were right down again so, yeah I was pretty much correct.

If you didn’t believe the situation or risks were credible then why should anyone believe you are weighing up the evidence in a genuine or sincere manner now?

I’m not asking them to, but l’m being objective, which you certainly aren’t.

---------- Post added at 19:28 ---------- Previous post was at 19:22 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

A vaccine can simultaneously be of benefit and not completely eliminate risk.

Who said anything about “Completely Eliminating” risk. No one ever on the globe about anything ever, has ever suggested such a thing. That in the realm of insanity.

At a population level that aggregate benefit rises the more people are vaccinated. I’m not sure how many times you have to be told this.

I’m pretty sure that’s what I have been posting these last few pages? In fact it’s been me telling this to you.

I can only think you have other reasons for wanting to open up fully regardless (including removing the use of masks) of evident risks. A position you’ve held consistently.

Just a small thing called a free society.

I’ve been clear the risk of too much, too soon, is always lockdown. And we know how much you love those.

Your love of staying in them is clear, is it a fear of freedom or a love of furlough that drives you?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

given the vaccines are working, but we don’t have any real world data of how long the protection lasts a booster program contingency seems very sensible, unless like you, you are a lover of lockdowns.

It’s your misguided belief that “all is well” that leads to lockdowns.

I’ve told you, you can’t misrepresent facts only misinterpret them. The are, have been, and always will be low…..for the vast majority of the population, even more so now with vaccines and other treatment.

You’ve told me, and been consistently incorrect.

and by April (Spring) cases were right down again so, yeah I was pretty much correct.

Thanks to the emergency brake of lockdown. Not divine intervention or chance.

I’m not asking them to, but l’m being objective, which you certainly aren’t.

I’m not quite sure gleefully cheering as variants put tens of thousands to their deaths is objective Pierre to be honest.

Who said anything about “Completely Eliminating” risk. No one ever on the globe about anything ever, has ever suggested such a thing. That in the realm of insanity.

Again you’re presenting the situation is binary when it is not.

I’m pretty sure that’s what I have been posting these last few pages? In fact it’s been me telling this to you.

Just a small thing called a free society.

Alas we are back to you viewing the situation as ideological, regardless of the evidence in front of you.

Your love of staying in them is clear, is it a fear of freedom or a love of furlough that drives you?

Telling you that you are wrong offers no insight into my thoughts on lockdown. Neither does their inevitability. However they are inevitable with poor judgement and implementation of other mitigations.

I’d say it’s objective to consider things other than from my personal preference.

As opposed to being unaffected by restrictions, self-proclaimed privileged and deciding everyone else should take risks because I’m bored and ideologically driven. Death isn’t exciting for the dead.

[pip08456]

I see jfman has had his bots busy on twitter.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by pip08456

I see jfman has had his bots busy on twitter.

Haha Christmas is a bit far.

Distancing I get there’s an economic argument around. Masks less so.