19th July Lockdown Easing - Observations and Compliance

[Green tractor]

So in other words you have not got a clue.

Nor has anybody else, but i'm all in favour of avoiding having to re impose restrictions if it can be avoided.

People who don't want to have to return to the office.

Many of those will be for reasons other than covid. They will simply of found working from home more convenient. Whether their employers have found it more or equally productive is a different matter. You also have to take into account the cost of office space too.

 

[3rd rail land]

Seems like more and more people are ignoring Sadiq Khan's mask byelaw. I went on 2 :London Overground trains today and saw quite a few people not wearing masks. even less people were wearing masks on the platforms. As expected no staff member is trying to enforce them, it's not worth the hassle.

That said quite a few people are wearing masks on non TFL trains.

 

[island]

Are masks still “compulsory” on the Underground and/or the DLR?

I’ve made a couple of journeys tonight and I’ve seen hardly anybody wearing one.

Notionally yes, but there is no penalty for not wearing one save being told to either put one on or leave the network; as there is no enforcement, there is no effective requirement.

Seems like more and more people are ignoring Sadiq Khan's mask byelaw.

Just to note it isn’t a byelaw. Byelaws require a 28 day consultation and the consent of the Secretary of State, the former of which has not been done and the latter of which will not be given.

 

[HST274]

People who don't want to have to return to the office

It's can be more convenient to work from home- no commute, a bit more sleep, perhaps you work a solo role with little interaction where you don't need to be around people. This doesn't mean you like covid or lockdown.

 

[greyman42]

Many of those will be for reasons other than covid. They will simply of found working from home more convenient. Whether their employers have found it more or equally productive is a different matter. You also have to take into account the cost of office space too.

From my experience, companies have been using people working from home as a reason for poor service.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Its a bit difficult, we don't know how things are going to pan out this winter, cases are about to massively rise with the return to school in England. Quite what that will do to hospital admissions in a couple of months time remains to be seen. The virus might now reach some sort of natural peak before Christmas, or it might not.

We are in a vastly different place to where we were last year.

We cannot keep going into lockdown just because there’s a few cases.

To put it simply we just have to get on and deal with Covid now and move on.

Nor has anybody else, but i'm all in favour of avoiding having to re impose restrictions if it can be avoided.

If restrictions have to be reimposed then the vaccines haven’t done the job they were supposed to do and therefore rendered redundant ergo same with vaccine passports but that for a different thread.

 

[Green tractor]

We are in a vastly different place to where we were last year.

We cannot keep going into lockdown just because there’s a few cases.

To put it simply we just have to get on and deal with Covid now and move on.



If restrictions have to be reimposed then the vaccines haven’t done the job they were supposed to do and therefore rendered redundant ergo same with vaccine passports but that for a different thread.

Case numbers are not the issue. It is the number of people in hospital at any time, and we simply do not know what is going to happen. I did read that is is estimated that up to 50% of children may already of been infected, obviously that will have a major impact on how fast it spreads.

 

[43066]

Screens and masks are not economically damaging, closing things is.

Screens and masks used on the scale we have seen over the last eighteen months also have a huge economic cost (and an environmental cost in the case of single use plastic masks - although nobody seems to care about that). Billions have been spent on “PPE” alone. This cost is not on the scale of full lockdowns admittedly, but still something we cannot ignore.

Jacinda Adern's policy has proved to be the right one for her country (assuming they deal with the current outbreak) She has never said it is the long term policy, vaccination is.

I think it’s a little early to conclude that. If vaccination is their exit strategy then they’ve made a pretty poor job of things. Their strategy was really just: “shut ourselves off for the world until someone else develops a vaccine (and then do a poor job of getting the jab into peoples’ arms)”.

Its a bit difficult, we don't know how things are going to pan out this winter, cases are about to massively rise with the return to school in England. Quite what that will do to hospital admissions in a couple of months time remains to be seen. The virus might now reach some sort of natural peak before Christmas, or it might not.

I appreciate you’ve said you do want to back to normal, but exactly do you think we should be waiting for? We knew cases would rise when we came out of restrictions, and we know they will rise further going into winter.

The majority of population is double jabbed; you’re never going to get a situation where 100% of the population is vaccinated. That state of affairs will exist next year, and every year onwards.

So arguing as you did before that restrictions should continue until spring is surely an argument for restrictions every winter?? That’s hardly getting back to normal.

Surely at this stage the NHS needs to build capacity to deal with seasonal Covid cases (as with flu cases). Do you agree it is lunacy to shut our economy and way of life down in order to “protect the NHS”, when it’s meant to be there to serve us!

 

[NorthKent1989]

Case numbers are not the issue. It is the number of people in hospital at any time, and we simply do not know what is going to happen. I did read that is is estimated that up to 50% of children may already of been infected, obviously that will have a major impact on how fast it spreads.

Is there a source for that?

Children are the least effected by covid.

Quite frankly The NHS has to learn how to deal with patients again and do what we taxpayers fund it to do, I for one have wasted enough of my life putting it on hold for an organisation that’s supposed to serve us.

 

[Green tractor]

Screens and masks used on the scale we have seen over the last eighteen months also have a huge economic cost (and an environmental cost in the case of single use plastic masks - although nobody seems to care about that). Billions have been spent on “PPE” alone. This cost is not on the scale of full lockdowns admittedly, but still something we cannot ignore.




I think it’s a little early to conclude that. If vaccination is their exit strategy then they’ve made a pretty poor job of things. Their strategy was really just: “shut ourselves off for the world until someone else develops a vaccine (and then do a poor job of getting the jab into peoples’ arms)”.



I appreciate you’ve said you do want to back to normal, but exactly do you think we should be waiting for? We knew cases would rise when we came out of restrictions, and we know they will rise further going into winter.

The majority of population is double jabbed; you’re never going to get a situation where 100% of the population is vaccinated. That state of affairs will exist next year, and every year onwards.

So arguing as you did before that restrictions should continue until spring is surely an argument for restrictions every winter?? That’s hardly getting back to normal.

Surely at this stage the NHS needs to build capacity to deal with seasonal Covid cases (as with flu cases). Do you agree it is lunacy to shut our economy and way of life down in order to “protect the NHS”, when it’s meant to be there to serve us!

Building NHS capacity can not happen in a matter of months, we just do not know what the situation will be this winter. Another factor to take into consideration is that NHS capacity will be higher due to vaccinated staff not having to self isolate when they have been in contact with a case, I was only in favour of the non economically damaging restrictions remaining just as a sensible precaution until spring. I remember how many times we were told that foot and mouth disease was under control etc when it was far from the truth.

Is there a source for that?

Children are the least effected by covid.

Quite frankly The NHS has to learn how to deal with patients again and do what we taxpayers fund it to do, I for one have wasted enough of my life putting it on hold for an organisation that’s supposed to serve us.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58450524 12-15 year olds

Ministers have let it be known they are keen on getting this age group vaccinated - both through public pronouncements and privately behind the scenes.
The argument is that it could reduce school disruption and keep infection levels low.
But there's still plenty to consider. Giving this age group jabs would mean time out of class and possibly off school recovering from common side effects such as a mild fever.
This is not like the flu jab, which is a simple nasal spray.
Its ability to curb spread may be less than first assumed too. It is thought about half of this age group may have been infected already and therefore have natural immunity.
The emergence of the Delta variant also means the vaccine is less effective at stopping infection than previously - its main benefit is to prevent serious disease and as these healthy children are at incredibly low risk of that the benefits, as the JCVI points out, are marginal.
It is worth remembering that there are six million adults - twice the number in this age group - who still remain completely unvaccinated.
Perhaps there's a disproportionate amount of attention given to children?

Presumably if around half of 12-15 year olds have already been infected, that will reduce the spread considerably.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Building NHS capacity can not happen in a matter of months, we just do not know what the situation will be this winter. Another factor to take into consideration is that NHS capacity will be higher due to vaccinated staff not having to self isolate when they have been in contact with a case, I was only in favour of the non economically damaging restrictions remaining just as a sensible precaution until spring. I remember how many times we were told that foot and mouth disease was under control etc when it was far from the truth.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58450524 12-15 year olds


Presumably if around half of 12-15 year olds have already been infected, that will reduce the spread considerably.

But very few I children have died of Covid, and again Covid will have to be treated like cold and flu.

JCVI doesn’t even recommend vaccinating this age group unless they are in the vulnerable category.

Covid Scotland: Vaccines for all children aged 12 to 15 not recommended by government's JCVI advisers

Covid-19 vaccines for healthy children aged between 12 and 15 are not being recommended by the UK Government’s vaccine advisers, dealing a blow to Scottish plans to roll out the jabs in a bid to tackle rising case numbers.

www.scotsman.com

 

[Green tractor]

But very few I children have died of Covid, and again Covid will have to be treated like cold and flu.

JCVI doesn’t even recommend vaccinating this age group unless they are in the vulnerable category.

Covid Scotland: Vaccines for all children aged 12 to 15 not recommended by government's JCVI advisers

Covid-19 vaccines for healthy children aged between 12 and 15 are not being recommended by the UK Government’s vaccine advisers, dealing a blow to Scottish plans to roll out the jabs in a bid to tackle rising case numbers.

www.scotsman.com

I more referring to the effect on transmission of the virus. Presumably if you have immunity from infection (and I might be completely wrong here) you are less likely to catch and spread it yourself. What I'm saying is those children who have immunity from previous infection may act as a firewall to slow the spread.

 

[bramling]

Is there a source for that?

Children are the least effected by covid.

Quite frankly The NHS has to learn how to deal with patients again and do what we taxpayers fund it to do, I for one have wasted enough of my life putting it on hold for an organisation that’s supposed to serve us.

Yes the “save the NHS” message is wearing very thin now. Time for people to start asking serious questions as to why there are continuing concerns about NHS capacity, and if there are then what is being done to address it.

Banging pots and old people doing laps of a garden weren’t the solution.

I more referring to the effect on transmission of the virus. Presumably if you have immunity from infection (and I might be completely wrong here) you are less likely to catch and spread it yourself. What I'm saying is those children who have immunity from previous infection may act as a firewall to slow the spread.

One thing which seems to be very clear is that the vaccine does not prevent transmission. Whether it reduces transmission seems more open to debate, but it does seem to be increasingly the view that the reduction in transmission was probably overstated.

It may act as a comfort blanket to some to believe that being in a place with vaccinated people is safe, or clean to use a term some people are rather distastefully using (given the implication of others being dirty), however we should not be doing things simply to falsely comfort-blanket others.

The government could have distributed a month’s supply of toilet rolls to every household last March. Evidently some people would have found this reassuring, but it would have achieved nothing practical at all.

 

[Green tractor]

Yes the “save the NHS” message is wearing very thin now. Time for people to start asking serious questions as to why there are continuing concerns about NHS capacity, and if there are then what is being done to address it.

Banging pots and old people doing laps of a garden weren’t the solution.



One thing which seems to be very clear is that the vaccine does not prevent transmission. Whether it reduces transmission seems more open to debate, but it does seem to be increasingly the view that the reduction in transmission was probably overstated.

It may act as a comfort blanket to some to believe that being in a place with vaccinated people is safe, or clean to use a term some people are rather distastefully using (given the implication of others being dirty), however we should not be doing things simply to falsely comfort-blanket others.

The government could have distributed a month’s supply of toilet rolls to every household last March. Evidently some people would have found this reassuring, but it would have achieved nothing practical at all.

I'm not talking about vaccines, I'm talking about children who have immunity from a previous natural infection.

Case numbers are not the issue. It is the number of people in hospital at any time, and we simply do not know what is going to happen. I did read that is is estimated that up to 50% of children may already of been infected, obviously that will have a major impact on how fast it spreads.

I more referring to the effect on transmission of the virus. Presumably if you have immunity from infection (and I might be completely wrong here) you are less likely to catch and spread it yourself. What I'm saying is those children who have immunity from previous infection may act as a firewall to slow the spread.

 

[Yew]

Nor has anybody else, but i'm all in favour of avoiding having to re impose restrictions if it can be avoided.

So you're avoiding restrictions, by introducing restrictions?

 

[bramling]

I'm not talking about vaccines, I'm talking about children who have immunity from a previous natural infection.

It’s interesting that the idea of herd immunity now seems to have gone completely out the window, which presumably is simply because this virus has spread too far now. In terms of natural immunity this seems to be another one of the unknowns. I continue to be unsettled by how much is still unknown considering how far in to this we now are. Even how it spreads is still slightly mysterious.

 

[Green tractor]

It’s interesting that the idea of herd immunity now seems to have gone completely out the window, which presumably is simply because this virus has spread too far now. In terms of natural immunity this seems to be another one of the unknowns. I continue to be unsettled by how much is still unknown considering how far in to this we now are. Even how it spreads is still slightly mysterious.

That's odd, because I thought that was now the policy (although not publicly stated) We have vaccinated the vulnerable groups, now we have opened up and we are letting the disease spread among the healthy population.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I'm not talking about vaccines, I'm talking about children who have immunity from a previous natural infection.

So what you’re saying is that with children having a natural immunity, this could mean there is no reason to impose restrictions now, if children can deal with then adults have to as well

Yes the “save the NHS” message is wearing very thin now. Time for people to start asking serious questions as to why there are continuing concerns about NHS capacity, and if there are then what is being done to address it.

Banging pots and old people doing laps of a garden weren’t the solution.

Yes I am tired of this near cult like obsession and devotion with the NHS, it’s certainly not worth giving up our lives for.

 

[Green tractor]

So what you’re saying is that with children having a natural immunity, this could mean there is no reason to impose restrictions now, if children can deal with then adults have to as well

What I'm saying is that with possibly 50% of children having what may be sterilising immunity from a previous infection, it might naturally slow the spread of the virus and bring the natural R0 down in schools, slowing the spread to the adult population and eventually meaning the pressures on the NHS might be lower than we would expect in previous waves, even taking into account the vaccination rate, we just don't know.

Yes I am tired of this near cult like obsession and devotion with the NHS, it’s certainly not worth giving up our lives for.

But if the NHS can't cope, what should we do? How do we deicide who gets treatment, because that is what it boils down to if you have an overwhelming number of people in hospital with covid.

 

[NorthKent1989]

What I'm saying is that with possibly 50% of children having what may be sterilising immunity from a previous infection, it might naturally slow the spread of the virus and bring the natural R0 down in schools, slowing the spread to the adult population and eventually meaning the pressures on the NHS might be lower than we would expect in previous waves, even taking into account the vaccination rate, we just don't know.


But if the NHS can't cope, what should we do? How do we deicide who gets treatment, because that is what it boils down to if you have an overwhelming number of people in hospital with covid.

The NHS has just got to get on with it quite frankly, if it can’t handle a virus with a 99% survival rate then it’s unfit for purpose, we have lives to lead, money to earn in order to live and pay our basic bills, enough is enough

I think you need to stop finding excuses to keep restrictions going

 

[Green tractor]

The NHS has just got to get on with it quite frankly, if it can’t handle a virus with a 99% survival rate then it’s unfit for purpose, we have lives to lead, money to earn in order to live and pay our basic bills, enough is enough

I think you need to stop finding excuses to keep restrictions going

But how do you decide who does and doesnt get treatment, which is what it boils down to in the end. Do we stop cancer treatment? Not treat the unvaccinated, those over a certain age?

You talk about the NHS not being worth giving up our lives for, but over 100,000 have lost their lives, most of us have just been massively inconvenienced.

What I dont get about many people on this forum is that of you dont share their zero rules now line, you are instantly a 'lockavist' and want permanent restrictions as if you enjoy that. It is not black and white, we have just lived through the biggest domestic crisis in most of our lifetimes.

 

[RPI]

But how do you decide who does and doesnt get treatment, which is what it boils down to in the end. Do we stop cancer treatment? Not treat the unvaccinated, those over a certain age?

You talk about the NHS not being worth giving up our lives for, but over 100,000 have lost their lives, most of us have just been massively inconvenienced.

What I dont get about many people on this forum is that of you dont share their zero rules now line, you are instantly a 'lockavist' and want permanent restrictions as if you enjoy that. It is not black and white, we have just lived through the biggest domestic crisis in most of our lifetimes.

I agree with the gist of this but I think the point is that hospital numbers are not anywhere near what they were and at the moment are nowhere near swamping the NHS, the only time any other restrictions should be considered are at a time when the NHS is at real risk of being overwhelmed and not just when Fergusson comes up with some other ridiculous model. Its quite clear that Covid is just becoming an endemic seasonal illness on top of Flu so consideration should now be given to increasing hospital infrastructure to cope with this, but I also believe this should have been the case for Flu where some winters the numbers are quite shocking! But as we are now there is no need for any restrictions at all!

 

[Yew]

But how do you decide who does and doesnt get treatment, which is what it boils down to in the end. Do we stop cancer treatment? Not treat the unvaccinated, those over a certain age?

You talk about the NHS not being worth giving up our lives for, but over 100,000 have lost their lives, most of us have just been massively inconvenienced.

What I dont get about many people on this forum is that of you dont share their zero rules now line, you are instantly a 'lockavist' and want permanent restrictions as if you enjoy that. It is not black and white, we have just lived through the biggest domestic crisis in most of our lifetimes.

What evidence makes you think we would get to the situation of prioritising care in a post-vaccine world?

 

[Green tractor]

What evidence makes you think we would get to the situation of prioritising care in a post-vaccine world?

Can You provide any evidence that it wont come to that? We just don't know.

I agree with the gist of this but I think the point is that hospital numbers are not anywhere near what they were and at the moment are nowhere near swamping the NHS, the only time any other restrictions should be considered are at a time when the NHS is at real risk of being overwhelmed and not just when Fergusson comes up with some other ridiculous model. Its quite clear that Covid is just becoming an endemic seasonal illness on top of Flu so consideration should now be given to increasing hospital infrastructure to cope with this, but I also believe this should have been the case for Flu where some winters the numbers are quite shocking! But as we are now there is no need for any restrictions at all!

Hospital infrastructure can not just be increased instantly, or at least the staff required can't. I did suggest that as a long term solution on here a while ago and got shouted down for it.

 

[Domh245]

What I dont get about many people on this forum is that of you dont share their zero rules now line, you are instantly a 'lockavist' and want permanent restrictions as if you enjoy that.

The main issue is that there are no more obvious 'breakpoints' left. If restrictions are not removed now that we've achieved all we realistically can in terms of vaccination, when do you remove them? Particularly as there is no intention and frankly no possibility of "suppressing" covid to minimal levels, either locally or globally. If conditions now are sufficient for restrictions, then they will always be sufficient for restrictions, hence the view that anyone who still wants restrictions imposed is a "locktavist"

the only time any other restrictions should be considered are at a time when the NHS is at real risk of being overwhelmed and not just when Fergusson comes up with some other ridiculous model

Agreed, although when it becomes apparent that the NHS is at real risk of being overwhelmed, it'd be too late to realistically do anything about it. You can try and act earlier, though this brings up the issue of people going "the NHS didn't even hit 200% ICU occupancy, why the restrictions" (eg, etc)

 

[Yew]

Can You provide any evidence that it wont come to that? We just don't know.

It is impossible to prove a negative, you obviously don't understand how science works.

 

[big_rig]

It is impossible to prove a negative, you obviously don't understand how science works.

Science denial is the go-to for selfish hypochondriacs, isn’t it. Picking and choosing what ‘science’ to ‘follow’ much like the recent JCVI decision on children - people who are terrified of the virus and want to be protected no matter the cost to anybody else didn’t like that science funnily enough but they like the ‘science’ which says nobody should be allowed near them (except delivery drivers).

 

[Cdd89]

The JCVI’s recommendation to allow uncontrolled spread among children by virtue of their not being vaccinated (which I don’t disagree with!) is totally incompatible with other continuing restrictions/NPIs such as masks.

 

[bramling]

But how do you decide who does and doesnt get treatment, which is what it boils down to in the end. Do we stop cancer treatment? Not treat the unvaccinated, those over a certain age?

You talk about the NHS not being worth giving up our lives for, but over 100,000 have lost their lives, most of us have just been massively inconvenienced.

What I dont get about many people on this forum is that of you dont share their zero rules now line, you are instantly a 'lockavist' and want permanent restrictions as if you enjoy that. It is not black and white, we have just lived through the biggest domestic crisis in most of our lifetimes.

Okay this is all reasonable stuff. However anyone making a case for a lockdown at this point needs to provide a very good explanation as to why the NHS is still unable to cope two years down the line, and if not then what on earth is planned to be done about that unsatisfactory situation. There's already whisperings about some tax rises being predicated on a "save the NHS" line, yet some of us have memories long enough to remember the amount of money poured into the NHS during the Blair/Brown years. It seems quite apparent Covid is going to be an issue for some time to come, so how about the government and NHS leaders explain how they plan to meet that challenge?

Another thing which gets my back up are the ones calling for restrictions so they can get out of returning to their substantive workplace. Likewise there's people who still cling to the notion of "I don't want to catch Covid" and seem to think they can somehow dodge it forever - this might have been a viable proposition last Spring, but things have gone way beyond that with the virus now endemic, and I can't see this being remotely possible whilst at the same time leading anything resembling a normal life.

 

[big_rig]

Okay this is all reasonable stuff. However anyone making a case for a lockdown at this point needs to provide a very good explanation as to why the NHS is still unable to cope two years down the line, and if not then what on earth is planned to be done about that unsatisfactory situation. There's already whisperings about some tax rises being predicated on a "save the NHS" line, yet some of us have memories long enough to remember the amount of money poured into the NHS during the Blair/Brown years. It seems quite apparent Covid is going to be an issue for some time to come, so how about the government and NHS leaders explain how they plan to meet that challenge?

Another thing which gets my back up are the ones calling for restrictions so they can get out of returning to their substantive workplace. Likewise there's people who still cling to the notion of "I don't want to catch Covid" and seem to think they can somehow dodge it forever - this might have been a viable proposition last Spring, but things have gone way beyond that with the virus now endemic, and I can't see this being remotely possible whilst at the same time leading anything resembling a normal life.

My (railway) workplace has also had issues with what boils down to the ‘well I don’t want to catch covid’ excuse and it has become seriously heated at times. There is a fundamental and I think deliberate refusal to understand than coronavirus will be here forever, everybody will catch it many times during their lives, and more specifically for those of us working in the railway, if even our workforce steadfastly refuses to return to work then there will be a hell of a lot less of us employed than there was before. If I was in charge I would send the forthcoming redundancy notices first to people who refuse to use the service we gain our livelihoods from other people paying money to use