• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Heading into autumn - what next?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bikeman78

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2018
Messages
4,495
They already do at school.
When did that start? I don't think I had it back in the 1990s.

The problem I suspect is that some do want such restrictions to be permanent. They like things such as pubs and museums being quieter or not having to commute.
I'll always remember the comments on the local Facebook group last summer when shops started to open up. People were outraged that they had turned up to various shops and found them to be very busy because lots of other people had gone too.
 

Jamesrob637

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2016
Messages
5,208
I'll always remember the comments on the local Facebook group last summer when shops started to open up. People were outraged that they had turned up to various shops and found them to be very busy because lots of other people had gone too.

These people need to get real. There's not liking/being afraid of crowds, which is perfectly understandable, but don't these people have family members and friends who depend on businesses being open?!
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,613
Location
First Class
How much chance is there of children with zero symptoms passing it on to vaccinated adults? How much does that reduce when the children are vaccinated? I remain to be convinced that it will make much difference. Remember at the start of the year when it was all about vaccinating the vulnerable? The goalposts haven't just moved; they've gone to another town!

An another note, how de we know that hundreds of children don't have asymptomatic flu? Are they being tested for it? Perhaps they should all have the flu vaccine too, just in case? Until Covid, I'd never really heard of people being "ill" with no symptoms, aside from HIV. If it can happen with Covid then I guess it can happen with other diseases.

Depending on who you believe, asymptomatic transmission even in adults is rare enough not to be an issue and the vaccines aren't very effective at preventing infection (don't take my word for it, Jenny Harries actually stated the latter yesterday). The vaccines primary purpose was to prevent serious illness and death, which they are demonstrably doing. Like you I'm struggling to see how vaccinating children solves anything. Who knows what to believe anymore, they appear to be making it up as they go along and contradicting themselves at every turn....
 

greyman42

Established Member
Joined
14 Aug 2017
Messages
4,894
The problem I suspect is that some do want such restrictions to be permanent. They like things such as pubs and museums being quieter or not having to commute.
I agree with you, but do these idiots not realise that if these establishments are quiet then they will not be viable and will end up closing? I also think that these people are probably the sort of people who don't like socialising and as such could not care less about the hospitality business.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
The problem I suspect is that some do want such restrictions to be permanent. They like things such as pubs and museums being quieter or not having to commute.

Judging by the number of school-age children frequenting attractions on weekdays at the moment, I’d say there’s elements of “yippee my child has to isolate, let’s get straight on the phone to work to give them the bad news I can’t come in, then it’s off to the pub/castle/museum/beauty spot/beach/whatever”.

This seems to have been another thing which has apparently come as a surprise to the government. Surely they knew there was going to be a wave of school-age infections?
 

duncanp

Established Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
4,856
The problem I suspect is that some do want such restrictions to be permanent. They like things such as pubs and museums being quieter or not having to commute.

The issue with pubs and museums being quieter is that they will receive less revenue, and some of them will become unprofitable and have to close.

Then everyone will have to go to the pubs or museums that are still open, which will make them, er, "..more crowded.."

The locktivists will then go and have a whingefest on social media complaining about how crowded everywhere is, with no social distancing and no-one wearing a mask.
 

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,382
Location
Ely
Like you I'm struggling to see how vaccinating children solves anything.

In fact, those that get heart problems or other side effects from the vaccine - which I would remind everyone is why the JCVI didn't recommend vaccinating healthy children, given the very marginal benefit they would gain from it - will *add* to the burden on the NHS. That won't help a great deal.

Who knows what to believe anymore, they appear to be making it up as they go along and contradicting themselves at every turn....

I think the main point is that it never ends, or at least not until we've all accepted a pale shadow of the life we had 'before' as a 'new normal' and that the government can do pretty much whatever it likes to us.

The slightly interesting question is why so many scientists/doctors/etc. are so keen on supporting this. I understand why the government are doing it, but I'm more baffled by the scientists etc.
 

hst43102

Member
Joined
28 May 2019
Messages
945
Location
Tyneside
Judging by the number of school-age children frequenting attractions on weekdays at the moment, I’d say there’s elements of “yippee my child has to isolate, let’s get straight on the phone to work to give them the bad news I can’t come in, then it’s off to the pub/castle/museum/beauty spot/beach/whatever”.

This seems to have been another thing which has apparently come as a surprise to the government. Surely they knew there was going to be a wave of school-age infections?
Glad it's not just me that's noticed this. If only the government would take their heads out of the sand and see it too....
 

duncanp

Established Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
4,856
Seems like Boris Johnson is hoping that the half term holiday will help to bring COVID cases down.

We won't see the impact of the half term break for a couple of weeks, so it will be the middle of November before the government decides what to do about Plan B.


October half-term: Boris Johnson is banking on the school holidays to bring Covid cases down​

It is understood that the Prime Minister has been taken aback by data suggesting a large proportion of infections are among schoolchildren​


Boris Johnson is hoping the school half-term holidays will help bring rising Covid infections back under control.

Official data showed cases rising much faster among secondary school pupils than any other age group earlier this month.

It is understood that the Prime Minister has been struck by the proportion of cases accounted for by schoolchildren.

He is hoping the week-long holiday, which begins for many in England next week, will take the sting out of rising infection rates by dramatically reducing mixing among schoolchildren.

The Government has so far resisted pressure to trigger its so-called “plan B” to reintroduce some restrictions, including mandatory mask-wearing, with cases nearly reaching 50,000 a day.

Downing Street said on Thursday neither chief medical officer Professor Chris Whitty nor chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance have “formally” requested the activation of plan B.

The PM, meanwhile, does not agree with calls from the NHS Confederation and British Medical Association to bring in more stringent measures, his official spokesman said.


“Whilst we listen to them carefully, we don’t always agree with the positions they set out,” the spokesman said.

“We listen to a range of experts – including Sage, CMO (chief medical officer) and CSA (chief scientific adviser) advice – and consider that in the whole when considering the needs to protect lives and livelihoods.”
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,613
Location
First Class
In fact, those that get heart problems or other side effects from the vaccine - which I would remind everyone is why the JCVI didn't recommend vaccinating healthy children, given the very marginal benefit they would gain from it - will *add* to the burden on the NHS. That won't help a great deal.

I came across this recently, which whilst not conclusive really shouldn't be swept under the carpet and needs further investigation in my opinion:

Recent deaths in young people in England and Wales – HART (hartgroup.org)

Recent deaths in young people in England and Wales​

October 11, 2021

Increase in male mortality in 15-19 year olds should be investigated


Direct Mortality evidence
The mortality data for England and Wales from ONS from 1 May 2021 until 17 September 2021 shows a significant excess, particularly in the 15-19 year age group. Depending on the baseline chosen, the excess for 15-19 year olds is between 16% and 47% above expected levels (see table 1 and 2). COVID-19 deaths were too small in number to account for the excess. A disproportionate number of these excess deaths were in males. A certain amount of variation by random chance would be expected but an increase of this proportion is large enough not to be dismissed without further investigation.
clare-image-1.png

Table 1 and Table 2: Mortality from 1st May 2021 to 17th September by age group. Table 1 uses a 2020 baseline and table 2 uses a mean from 2015-2019.
A clear deviation can be seen, beginning in May, for male deaths aged 15 to 19. Female mortality, on the other hand, shows a summer reduction more similar to 2020.
clare-image-2.png

clare-image-3.png

A similar magnitude of excess is seen in the 20-29 year old age groups, although background rates are higher. Comparing just deaths in males aged 15-19 year olds, there were between 52 and 87 excess deaths (depending on baseline). This clear predominance of male deaths could be in keeping with known risks of myocarditis which has a bias to men and boys. In 2015-2019 males accounted for 65% of deaths in the 15-19 year age group, rising to 70% in 20-29 year olds. If the entire excess had been due just to random variation we would have expected 65% of the excess to have been male. However, there were too many male deaths to reach that conclusion. There were 21 male deaths in excess of what would be expected with a normal male female ratio (2020 baseline) or 25 male deaths in excess (2015-2019 baseline).
Male excess deaths were calculated by subtracting male deaths from the baseline figures for male deaths. For 15-19 year olds there were 52 excess male deaths from 1 May 2021 to 17 September 2021 compared to 2015-2019 baseline, however there were only 44 excess deaths in total. This implies that there were fewer female deaths than expected in this period if using the 2015-2019 baseline.
In contrast, for the Mortality data for England and Wales from ONS from 1 January 2021 until 30 April 2021, there were only a small number of deaths above expected levels, almost all of which could be accounted for as COVID-19 deaths.
clare-image-4.png

Table 3 and Table 4: Mortality from 1st January 2021 to 30th April 2021 by age group. Table 3 uses a 2020 baseline and table 4 uses a mean from 2015-2019.
Myocarditis
Although concerns have been raised about a variety of adverse reactions to vaccination, the most serious and common thus far is the risk of myocarditis. Myocarditis is a serious condition associated acutely with fatal arrhythmias, and chronically, because myocytes are irreplaceable, with heart failure and significant associated mortality. As the aetiology of Covid-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis is new it may be unwise to extrapolate the prognosis from what is known about myocarditis due to other aetiologies. However, in the literature the overall mortality rate for myocarditis after one year is 20% and after five years 44% to 56%.
The incidence of myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination increased with decreasing age and was higher in males.
Indirect evidence of mortality signals
There has been a clear rise in ambulance cardiac and respiratory arrest calls in England and ambulance calls for people becoming unconscious starting from May 2021 (see figures 1a and 1b). There were two periods of heatwaves which may have also impacted on the rise for a short period, but in general the rise remains otherwise unexplained. The timing and extent of the heatwaves are evident in the data on ambulance calls due to the direct impact of heat (see figure 1c).
clare-image-5.png

clare-image-6.png

clare-image-7.png

Figures 1a, 1b and 1c showing ambulance calls in England for cardiac and respiratory arrests (1a), unconscious patients (1b) and those impacted by heat or cold (1c)
Correlation with vaccination rollout
It is worth noting that the vaccine rollout began for vulnerable young people in winter so there isn’t a clear start date to look for an impact. However the clear majority of vaccinations were given in the 16 to 24 year olds from 1st May 2021 until recently.
clare-image-8.png

Figure 4 Daily first doses given by age in England
clare-image-9.png

Figure 5 Daily second doses given by age in England
Ref for data to plot numbers of doses given per day by age (Fig 61 of spreadsheet):
The data from PHE used to compile the above graphs is a comprehensive national system, the National Immunisation Management System (NIMS). However, although a proportion of data is collected promptly, there is a lag of a few weeks before the whole data set is complete. This lag means that the downward sloping from the beginning of September may well be artefactual. Nevertheless, it is clear that the majority of vaccinations in this age group were given since May.
PHE collects information on the vaccination status of patients who are registered with an NHS GP as part of NIMS. ONS have this data and have linked it to their death data in order to publish their document “Deaths involving COVID-19 by vaccination status, England: deaths occurring between 2 January and 2 July 2021”.
The information linking vaccination status to the deaths data is therefore available.
In their report, the ONS did not release the raw data but instead gave mortality rates adjusted for age. In this way a death of a young person contributes more to the age-adjusted mortality rate than a death of an older person, because the background numbers of deaths in the former age group are so much smaller than in the latter. The data shared with their paper shows a dramatic rise in non-COVID-19 mortality rate in those vaccinated more than 21 days earlier with a first dose, beginning in April 2021 and escalating rapidly in May 2021. Although some 18 and 19 year olds may have received a second dose in August, the majority (78% according to week 38 reported data) of the vaccinated 12-17 year population have received only a first dose. Therefore they would be largely in the category of “vaccinated more than 21 days earlier with a first dose”. The age adjusted mortality rate for this group reached levels 60% higher than the peak mortality rate for unvaccinated people during the winter.
clare-image-10.png

Figure 7 Age adjusted non-COVID mortality rates by vaccination status as published by ONS on 13th September
Ref for figure 7 (table 5 of their spreadsheet):
Summary
Mortality has risen in younger age groups since 1st May 2021. The increase in the 15-19 year old age group is particularly noticeable, especially as deaths in this age group are uncommon. The excess deaths have a marked male predominance. An increase in ambulance call outs for patients who have had a cardiac arrest or are unconscious showed a coincidental noticeable rise from May 2021. The period also coincides with the rollout of vaccination. Finally, ONS have reported on a striking rise in age adjusted mortality rates in those with only one dose that accelerated in May 2021 to levels far exceeding those in the unvaccinated.
Although there may be a number of explanations for these findings, further investigation of the cause of these deaths is warranted. The ONS death data and NIMS vaccination data have previously been linked. Without that link ONS could not have published on deaths after vaccination. Therefore, confirming the proportion of the 15-19 year olds that had been vaccinated should be possible.

I think the main point is that it never ends, or at least not until we've all accepted a pale shadow of the life we had 'before' as a 'new normal' and that the government can do pretty much whatever it likes to us.

The slightly interesting question is why so many scientists/doctors/etc. are so keen on supporting this. I understand why the government are doing it, but I'm more baffled by the scientists etc.

I think there are a number of bit-part protagonists pursuing disparate (or should that be desperate?!) bit-part agendas to be honest. What they all have in common is a desire to see this continue in order to further their respective causes, whether that be ending capitalism or feathering their own nest through media appearances. Either way their behaviour is completely unethical, they're abusing their positions and we're paying the price.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Seems like Boris Johnson is hoping that the half term holiday will help to bring COVID cases down.

We won't see the impact of the half term break for a couple of weeks, so it will be the middle of November before the government decides what to do about Plan B.


How on earth can it have come as a surprise? You put lots of people together in a small space, and it’s pretty much inevitable infections are going to get round.

Any issue isn’t the numbers of cases, but what the consequences of those cases are. That’s what BJ should be analysing.
 

kez19

Established Member
Joined
15 May 2020
Messages
2,038
Location
Dundee
Just minor info in terms of Scotland and its vaccine passport side of things (link was updated a few days ago):



i'll just highlight this:

How to prove your vaccine status​


If you are going to any of the settings in scope you will need to be able to demonstrate you are fully vaccinated or exempt. Check the entry requirements for venues and events in advance.


You may be asked to present evidence that you meet the criteria for entry.


This is confirmation that you are:


  • fully vaccinated
  • you are medically exempt
  • on - or have participated in - a clinical trial
  • under 18 - if you are under 18 you are not required to provide a vaccination certificate or proof of exemption, but you may be asked to provide proof of your age if the venue requests this

Venues, businesses and events in the settings set out above are required to ensure there is in operation a system for checking and restricting entry to customers who are fully vaccinated or are otherwise exempt are on the premises. This includes asking for vaccine certificates to be presented earlier in an evening, for example where a late night premises is open before midnight but continues to be open beyond midnight.


Get a vaccine status certificate


If you are resident in Scotland:


  • use the NHS Scotland COVID Status App which is free to download. This will allow access to a digital copy of your vaccine record on your mobile device. You need a passport or driver’s licence to complete the identity check.
  • request a paper copy of your vaccine certificate from NHS Inform. Use this is you don’t have a passport or driver’s licence.
  • use a downloadable PDF on your phone or a printed copy (as an interim measure only)

People who live elsewhere in the UK can provide confirmation that you are fully vaccinated in one of the following ways:


  • use the NHS App (if from England or Wales)
  • use Covid NI (if from Northern Ireland)
  • use the paper letter of certification, issued by England, Wales, Northern Ireland, Jersey or Guernsey

All of these options have 2D Barcodes (commonly referred to as QR codes) which can be scanned to verify that the certificate is a genuine certificate (see section below). In addition, the apps all have security features in them that respond to movement of the phone, allowing staff responsible for checking certificates to confirm that the QR code is a ‘live’ code and not a screenshot from someone else.


The paper letters from the NHS contain special thermochromatic ink that shows as a holographic image on a genuine certificate, and changes to the word ‘copy’ on a photocopied certificate. Certificates with the word ‘copy’ on them will not be accepted.


Request an update to your vaccination record and/or if you were vaccinated abroad


If you received one of your first coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccinations outwith Scotland you can now upload your official proof of vaccination from that country to your Scottish vaccination record.


This will mean you will have a combined fully vaccinated status to show for travel or domestic purposes.


Please visit NHS Inform to request an update to your record: Request an update to your coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination record


This will also update your record for the purposes of using the app.
 

Dent

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2015
Messages
1,106
Seems like Boris Johnson is hoping that the half term holiday will help to bring COVID cases down.

We won't see the impact of the half term break for a couple of weeks, so it will be the middle of November before the government decides what to do about Plan B.


Why would anyone be "taken aback" by data suggesting a large proportion of infections are among schoolchildren? Surely it's a good thing that most infections are in the people least likely to suffer any ill effects.
 

greyman42

Established Member
Joined
14 Aug 2017
Messages
4,894
Regarding Scotland, how are you meant to present evidence that you are exempt?
 
Last edited:

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,382
Location
Ely
I came across this recently, which whilst not conclusive really shouldn't be swept under the carpet and needs further investigation in my opinion:

I agree entirely.

To be blunt, we should not be vaccinating children against a disease that is of minimal risk to them when we don't fully know or understand the short-term or long-term risks of doing so. I cannot see how it can be justified in any way. Indeed, and with all due respect to those on here that think differently on this issue, I am totally convinced that it is very clearly morally wrong to be doing so.

At this point it feels to me like throwing a few more maidens into the volcano in the hope that we will *finally* appease a mysterious being in the sky. It won't work, it achieves nothing, and some people get hurt/killed for no good reason while we continue to do so.

I think there are a number of bit-part protagonists pursuing disparate (or should that be desperate?!) bit-part agendas to be honest. What they all have in common is a desire to see this continue in order to further their respective causes, whether that be ending capitalism or feathering their own nest through media appearances. Either way their behaviour is completely unethical, they're abusing their positions and we're paying the price.

Indeed. People ('conspiracy theorists') have been telling us since summer 2020 that this will only end when we make it end. As with most of what such people have been saying, they've not been wrong.
 

adc82140

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2008
Messages
2,928
The slightly interesting question is why so many scientists/doctors/etc. are so keen on supporting this. I understand why the government are doing it, but I'm more baffled by the scientists etc.
Egos. That sums it up. For many years scientists have worked in the background. Now they have everyone's attention, and a minority are not keen on losing the limelight. When in the past has an intensive care doctor been asked for their opinion on anything by the media? When before have Imperial College had so much attention?

They are quite keen for us to keep listening to them.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
6,865
You make assumptions about my reading - and those supplements are not on my reading list. The statistics show that the risk of death from Covid rises by 12% per year, so (because this compounds) doubles for every 6 years. So that 52 year old is nearly twice as vulnerable as I am, assuming we are otherwise identical.

The age of 50 has been chosen as a cut-off for where that risk becomes particularly significant; like any threshold it is a slightly crude measure.

I'm not denying it, but it does seem incredble that during the middle period of life (let's say 30 to 65, for the sake of argument), when for most things 5 years is normally an insignificant period of time, it should make such a difference. I would always consider someone 5 years older or younger than me basically the same age as me and likely to, on average, have similar fitness. (Though I'm 'young for my age' and even though I'm now in the target group for the booster, I probably will not take it until it's rolled out to adults in general, as my body age is quite a bit lower than my chronological age; when people don't know me guess my age, they arrive at a figure 10-15 years lower than the actuality).

Does a body really change that much between 47 and 52? Or between 42 and 47? Or 52 and 57? In my experience (of people I know), serious aging does not take place until later.
 

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,382
Location
Ely
Just minor info in terms of Scotland and its vaccine passport side of things (link was updated a few days ago):

Can I suggest to everyone - respectfully - that they do not go to with any venue or location that requires this.

If you go along with it, even if only reluctantly, you're normalising it, just as with masks, lockdowns, and all the other nonsense. Please don't.

I suspect a large amount of why this hasn't been tried in England yet is that we're looking to see whether people go along with it in Scotland and Wales.

I have been very clear that I will never go along with showing 'government permission' in this way (independent of whether I eventually choose to be vaccinated, or not). If that means I have to become a hermit, so be it. But if enough people resist now, it may quickly go away. If you submit to it, it won't.
 

kez19

Established Member
Joined
15 May 2020
Messages
2,038
Location
Dundee
Can I suggest to everyone - respectfully - that they do not go to with any venue or location that requires this.

If you go along with it, even if only reluctantly, you're normalising it, just as with masks, lockdowns, and all the other nonsense. Please don't.

I suspect a large amount of why this hasn't been tried in England yet is that we're looking to see whether people go along with it in Scotland and Wales.

I have been very clear that I will never go along with showing 'government permission' in this way (independent of whether I eventually choose to be vaccinated, or not). If that means I have to become a hermit, so be it. But if enough people resist now, it may quickly go away. If you submit to it, it won't.


Don't get me wrong here I am pretty much against this - I only done this as to my own experience with it and if need be finding flaws that I can throw back at those in power with.

Its ironic for me that if you look for certain information its not provided and that you have to go look for it, I wonder why that is? I have already questioned this to Scot Gov but got a copy/paste reply.
 

NorthOxonian

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
5 Jul 2018
Messages
1,483
Location
Oxford/Newcastle
I'm not denying it, but it does seem incredble that during the middle period of life (let's say 30 to 65, for the sake of argument), when for most things 5 years is normally an insignificant period of time, it should make such a difference. I would always consider someone 5 years older or younger than me basically the same age as me and likely to, on average, have similar fitness. (Though I'm 'young for my age' and even though I'm now in the target group for the booster, I probably will not take it until it's rolled out to adults in general, as my body age is quite a bit lower than my chronological age; when people don't know me guess my age, they arrive at a figure 10-15 years lower than the actuality).

Does a body really change that much between 47 and 52? Or between 42 and 47? Or 52 and 57? In my experience (of people I know), serious aging does not take place until later.
But that isn't that different to what happens to death rates more broadly. They rise by about 8-9% per year throughout that middle period, which is equivalent to doubling every eight or nine years. Overall, 52 year olds are roughly twice as likely to die as 43 year olds, who are in turn roughly twice as likely to die as 35 year olds.

I remember seeing various graphs last spring which showed estimates of the IFR, and illustrated this idea very well - risk of death due to the virus is almost exactly proportional to overall risk of death.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
6,865
Even before covid, every single winter we were getting news stories about hospitals being overwhelmed. Before this year's summer we were getting told almost every week that hospitals were on the brink of being overwhelmed. Yet mysteriously, it never actually happened. Time and again we've seen covid predictions by so called experts be dramatically over the top. You would have thought this would cause the general public to be very sceptical of the latest round of scare stories, but sadly with the huge support for lockdowns and all the panic buying we've seen how easily spooked the public is. Support for lockdown will probably surge and we'll be back in one come December unfortunately.

I'm more hopeful that there will be much less support for lockdown this time. With the gas and food supply issues, it will be the last straw for many. And people will seriously start thinking they will become annual from now on - people will wonder when it will ever end. And that's ignoring the effect it would have on the already-battered economy and the effect that it will have on jobs and poverty. The only positive would be that I suspect this time, it would finish 'Boris' politically if implemented, and perhaps that, at the end of the day, will stop them doing it.
 

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,382
Location
Ely
Don't get me wrong here I am pretty much against this - I only done this as to my own experience with it and if need be finding flaws that I can throw back at those in power with.

I'm sure you don't agree with it - my post really was aimed at everyone who this affects :)

I don't expect they will care about flaws in the system. They want to normalise the behaviour for the majority. Then we'll never be rid of it (see masks, which in many respects were the 'trial run' for vaccine passports, though at the rate we're going it seems we'll end up with both).
 

kez19

Established Member
Joined
15 May 2020
Messages
2,038
Location
Dundee
I'm more hopeful that there will be much less support for lockdown this time. With the gas and food supply issues, it will be the last straw for many. And people will seriously start thinking they will become annual from now on - people will wonder when it will ever end. And that's ignoring the effect it would have on the already-battered economy. The only positive would be that I suspect it would finish 'Boris' politically this time if implemented, and perhaps that, at the end of the day, will stop them doing it.


Its just a pity it can't finish off the likes of Sturgeon and Drakeford who are equally as bad.

I'm sure you don't agree with it - my post really was aimed at everyone who this affects :)

I don't expect they will care about flaws in the system. They want to normalise the behaviour for the majority. Then we'll never be rid of it (see masks, which in many respects were the 'trial run' for vaccine passports, though at the rate we're going it seems we'll end up with both).


The thing is its us plebs that get the long haul why don't those people try it on themselves first? Oh wait can't do that - a law amongst themselves (media protection I gather too!)
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
2,295
A doubling of a very small risk does not represent a "dramatic" rise. For example, earlier this year the CDC in this report estimated that deaths from infections would be around 25 people in every 100,000 for 18-49 year olds, rising to 85 for the 50-64 year olds. This is not a dramatic rise in risk overall, its only when you get to the 65+ group at around 1,139 deaths per 100,000 infections do we start to see a statistically significant increase. So a healthy 52 year old has almost exactly the same chances of survival as a healthy 47 year old.
I suggested that the threshold might be up for debate. The relative risk does increase year on year for adults, as a compound effect - at 12% additional risk of death per year.

I'm not denying it, but it does seem incredble that during the middle period of life (let's say 30 to 65, for the sake of argument), when for most things 5 years is normally an insignificant period of time, it should make such a difference. I would always consider someone 5 years older or younger than me basically the same age as me and likely to, on average, have similar fitness. (Though I'm 'young for my age' and even though I'm now in the target group for the booster, I probably will not take it until it's rolled out to adults in general, as my body age is quite a bit lower than my chronological age; when people don't know me guess my age, they arrive at a figure 10-15 years lower than the actuality).

Does a body really change that much between 47 and 52? Or between 42 and 47? Or 52 and 57? In my experience (of people I know), serious aging does not take place until later.
I take the figures I've seen reported a number of times. As for why this is, I don't know - and the point of it is that it's an average across the population, not a specific about any individual. Though A&Es have had their fair share of people who thought "it won't happen to me".
 

Dent

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2015
Messages
1,106
I suggested that the threshold might be up for debate. The relative risk does increase year on year for adults, as a compound effect - at 12% additional risk of death per year.


I take the figures I've seen reported a number of times. As for why this is, I don't know - and the point of it is that it's an average across the population, not a specific about any individual. Though A&Es have had their fair share of people who thought "it won't happen to me".

Where did you get this 12% per year from? I very much doubt it actually is a uniform percentage increase every year throughout life.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
6,865
I take the figures I've seen reported a number of times. As for why this is, I don't know - and the point of it is that it's an average across the population, not a specific about any individual. Though A&Es have had their fair share of people who thought "it won't happen to me".

Not sure if it bears on anything, but another factor for my personal perceived risk is that I rarely get that ill with viral infections, and when I do get them, shake them off quickly. Last time I was ill enough to be in bed with a viral infection was in 1999, just before the millennium, when I had some particularly nasty thing - and before that 1984, though that would have been my parents' decision, not mine.

However as I said I am not sure if this train of thought is misplaced.
 

Freightmaster

Established Member
Joined
7 Jul 2009
Messages
3,471
At this point it feels to me like throwing a few more maidens into the volcano in the hope that we will *finally* appease a mysterious being in the sky. It won't work, it achieves nothing, and some people get hurt/killed for no good reason while we continue to do so.

Your comment reminds me of this cartoon I saw a while ago:

c65nlZz.png

(image is a cartoon showing children being tricked by a volcano god)
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
2,295
Where did you get this 12% per year from? I very much doubt it actually is a uniform percentage increase every year throughout life.
I checked the figure - I've heard it a number of times - from David Spiegelhalter "Covid by Numbers". That source, which I trust, is pretty emphatic that the risk in adults is on a more or less straight line.
 

adc82140

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2008
Messages
2,928
I checked the figure - I've heard it a number of times - from David Spiegelhalter "Covid by Numbers". That source, which I trust, is pretty emphatic that the risk in adults is on a more or less straight line.
There are more factors in play than just age. An obese 49 year old is far more likely to come a cropper than a fit 51 year old.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top