Should restrictions be eased fully if Indian Variant case rates do not decline before June 21st?

[MikeWM]

I am still going to get a second dose, but mainly because it lowers my personal risk.

Which is the correct, and only, reason to be vaccinated, and the only factor I considered in deciding whether to get vaccinated.

I do feel somewhat cheated given the government has specially being telling people to get vaccinated to avoid the restrictions (I have seen adverts specially saying this).

Which is very much not the correct reason to be vaccinated. I've seen those adverts too, and they have a strong whiff of protection racket about them, as many of the adverts have been all along ('nice country you once had, now undergo this medical treatment and we may let you have it back').

In any event, not only were those adverts ethically wrong, they were also clearly yet another lie, because we're now going to be under more restrictions this July than last, when no-one had been vaccinated.

 

[Darandio]

Sadly we need a whole week to have a good understanding of the trend.

We already have trends to look at, in particular the areas that were hit first with the Delta variant. There is now a downward trend.

I'm fairly certain that last week we were told that any decision wouldn't be based on the number of rising cases yet i'm convinced that will form part of the reasoning on todays decision.

 

[chris11256]

We already have trends to look at, in particular the areas that were hit first with the Delta variant. There is now a downward trend.

I'm fairly certain that last week we were told that any decision wouldn't be based on the number of rising cases yet i'm convinced that will form part of the reasoning on todays decision.

Pretty much, I think it's the fear that so far hospital admissions have been roughly 5% of cases and so allowing cases to get very high could then 'overwhelm' hospitals.

It'd be good if there is a two week review on the 5th, we'll know then how closely hospital admisisons are following cases. The problem is that delaying too much now will push the reopening peak into Autum & Winter. So despite scaremongering, it really is a case of reopen before August or not until Spring.

 

[VauxhallandI]

Why should he have "the answers" to such a hypothetical scenario. What do you think the scientists and their scientific advice are there for.

The problem with this thread is that the majority of posters on this website and on this thread in particular, are taking the opportunity to grind a few political proverbial axes, which a reading of this thread reveals only too well.

Political axes?

I disagree; I believe a majority of people on here that were opposed politically before this started are now together in their dislike for both Conservative and Labour.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

He should have the answers, because the scientists and advisors should have provided the answers when he asked the questions. And he should have asked the questions because the answer should be a very important factor when deciding what to do next.

Too many uses of the word "should". How many different questions covering a whole range of Covid-19 related topics can be expected to be asked.

 

[Darandio]

Too many uses of the word "should". How many different questions covering a whole range of Covid-19 related topics can be expected to be asked.

All of them, it's his job.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Political axes?

I disagree; I believe a majority of people on here that were opposed politically before this started are now together in their dislike for both Conservative and Labour.

The last time that I saw Sir Keir Starmer asked what was his view on extending the lockdown(he if the Leader of the Opposition), he felt it was necessary to be on the side of caution.

I am more likely to believe what learned scientists have to say about medically related matters than what any "armchair critic" on this particular thread has to say. I venture if some of our resident "armchair critics" on this thread suddenly find they are in desperate need of medical help, it would be to "medical professionals" they would go. When that Danish footballer collapsed in the match against Finland, it was medically trained staff who quickly attended and gave the required treatment that made the difference between life and death, rather that the so-called "football-pundit commentary staff".

All of them, it's his job.

To know the answer to questions not yet discussed? Would you be able to do this, because I certainly could not.

Is mind-reading now to be an essential role of a Prime Minister?

 

[Dent]

I am more likely to believe what learned scientists have to say about medically related matters than what any "armchair critic" on this particular thread has to say. I venture if some of our resident "armchair critics" on this thread suddenly find they are in desperate need of medical help, it would be to "medical professionals" they would go. When that Danish footballer collapsed in the match against Finland, it was medically trained staff who quickly attended and gave the required treatment that made the difference between life and death, rather that the so-called "football-pundit commentary staff".

So basically you are trying to deride anyone who does any research or applies any critical thinking. I for one an glad that there are at least some people smart enough to think or themselves, though sadly there are still far too many who don't and who will blindly swallow whatever the "experts" feed them.

 

[londonteacher]

Are you sure about that? The so called elites made a show of the elbow bump and then half an hour later they were hugging and patting each other on the back, I doubt they quarantined either, so considering that we are looking at a four week delay to getting back our freedoms that really wasn’t the politicians to take away in the first place, I find it pretty distasteful that they disregarded the rules in a blatant way, I’m certainly not going to follow the rules after the 21st

Well whether we agree with it or not diplomatic missions have always been exempt from the rules since the beginning of the pandemic.

The rules do also allow for up to 30 people to meet outside unless for the purposes of work where there is no limit.

 

[Freightmaster]

The problem with this thread is that the majority of posters on this website and on this thread in particular, are taking the opportunity to grind a few political proverbial axes, which a reading of this thread reveals only too well.

Image shows an irony meter, with the level set to maximum ('extraordinary')

 

[NorthKent1989]

The last time that I saw Sir Keir Starmer asked what was his view on extending the lockdown(he if the Leader of the Opposition), he felt it was necessary to be on the side of caution.

I am more likely to believe what learned scientists have to say about medically related matters than what any "armchair critic" on this particular thread has to say. I venture if some of our resident "armchair critics" on this thread suddenly find they are in desperate need of medical help, it would be to "medical professionals" they would go. When that Danish footballer collapsed in the match against Finland, it was medically trained staff who quickly attended and gave the required treatment that made the difference between life and death, rather that the so-called "football-pundit commentary staff".


To know the answer to questions not yet discussed? Would you be able to do this, because I certainly could not.

Is mind-reading now to be an essential role of a Prime Minister?

Not being funny but armchair critics have been fairly spot on so far on where this is going, weeks “armchair critics” as you call them said that Boris would extend restrictions because of the Indian variant.

It would be great to see medical experts if only they weren’t so hung up on covid

Well whether we agree with it or not diplomatic missions have always been exempt from the rules since the beginning of the pandemic.

The rules do also allow for up to 30 people to meet outside unless for the purposes of work where there is no limit.

They should be setting an example, especially if restrictions continue, this isn’t exactly good for morale is it, not to mention it reeks of one rule for them another rule for us, it’s pretty distasteful at this point and I don’t agree with it, is the G7 meeting even necessary to do in person this year?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

So basically you are trying to deride anyone who does any research or applies any critical thinking. I for one an glad that there are at least some people smart enough to think or themselves, though sadly there are still far too many who don't and who will blindly swallow whatever the "experts" feed them.

I will remember your words the next time I am supposed to see my consultant who annually monitors my post-stroke condition (suffered in July 2012) and wonder if I should let his medical secretary give me her considered view instead.

My younger brother was for forty years, the medical head of the path-labs at North Manchester General Hospital and the Royal Oldham Hospital before recently retiring from that role. I venture if any medical samples needed evaluation, it would be to his department that these would be forwarded, not to the hospital porters.

 

[NorthOxonian]

I will remember your words the next time I am supposed to see my consultant who annually monitors my post-stroke condition (suffered in July 2012) and wonder if I should let his medical secretary give me her considered view instead.

My younger brother was for forty years, the medical head of the path-labs at North Manchester General Hospital and the Royal Oldham Hospital before recently retiring from that role. I venture if any medical samples needed evaluation, it would be to his department that these would be forwarded, not to the hospital porters.

There is a difference between an objective assessment like you describe, and something which is inherently more indeterminate like modelling the progress of the virus. That is all about assumptions, and if you make the wrong assumptions then your model will be wrong regardless of how good a scientist you are. On the flipside, even an "armchair critic" like me would be able to make a fairly accurate prediction, provided they had the right assumptions - the differential equations we're dealing with here are as straightforward as they come.

And of course, even if we assume scientists make flawless models that get everything right, there's a further difference between that and policy. Politicians need to weigh up all of the consequences, both intended and unintended, and then decide what they think is the best course. You have to take a broad view, and scientists might not do this.

 

[DelayRepay]

This article contains a quote from an advisor:

Delaying England’s Covid reopening ‘could keep thousands out of hospital’

Research backs four-week delay on lifting restrictions to allow more people to get jabs

www.theguardian.com

Graham Medley, professor of infectious disease modelling at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and a member of Sage, said: “The evidence has all gone into government, and I don’t want to comment as anything I say will be seen as a preference or a steer for the decision.

“It’s a government decision, quite rightly, how to balance the health and healthcare outcomes with all the other harms that Covid-19 and restrictions bring. The evidence from the epidemiology will all be published and open to scrutiny.”

That is how advisors should behave, not turning up in the Sky studios every five minutes.

 

[Dent]

I will remember your words the next time I am supposed to see my consultant who annually monitors my post-stroke condition (suffered in July 2012) and wonder if I should let his medical secretary give me her considered view instead.

Remember whatever you like, but it doesn't change my point that critical thinking is something that society needs, and your attempts to ridicule anyone who applies any is unhelpful to a rational discussion.

 

[VauxhallandI]

Remember whatever you like, but it doesn't change my point that critical thinking is something that society needs, and your attempts to ridicule anyone who applies any is unhelpful to a rational discussion.

Yep and this mythical religious bowing to Dr's isn't a good thing. You know they can be terribly wrong?

I go and see my cardiologist every year too, but he is a cardiology expert through years of continuous study and practice.

You are putting your hands in mathematical models and qualified dentists in a situation that is unprecedented - quite quite different

 

[NorthOxonian]

This article contains a quote from an advisor:

Delaying England’s Covid reopening ‘could keep thousands out of hospital’

Research backs four-week delay on lifting restrictions to allow more people to get jabs

www.theguardian.com

That is how advisors should behave, not turning up in the Sky studios every five minutes.

The thing which shocks me about that article is the idea that putting our lives on hold for another month is worth it to prevent thousands of hospitalisations.

Not hundreds of thousands. Not tens of thousands (which is the scale of previous waves, so the NHS would cope, just about). But thousands.

At what point would these scientists not consider it justifiable? Hundreds of hospitalisations? Dozens?

 

[DelayRepay]

The thing which shocks me about that article is the idea that putting our lives on hold for another month is worth it to prevent thousands of hospitalisations.

Not hundreds of thousands. Not tens of thousands (which is the scale of previous waves, so the NHS would cope, just about). But thousands.

At what point would these scientists not consider it justifiable? Hundreds of hospitalisations? Dozens?

I don't like most of the article! Just the bit I quoted, which you have to read to the end to find.

 

[NorthOxonian]

I don't like most of the article! Just the bit I quoted, which you have to read to the end to find.

I apologise - I wasn't saying you like the rest of it! It was just a general point.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I will remember your words the next time I am supposed to see my consultant who annually monitors my post-stroke condition (suffered in July 2012) and wonder if I should let his medical secretary give me her considered view instead.

My younger brother was for forty years, the medical head of the path-labs at North Manchester General Hospital and the Royal Oldham Hospital before recently retiring from that role. I venture if any medical samples needed evaluation, it would be to his department that these would be forwarded, not to the hospital porters.

You miss the point the medical professionals are clearly the ones that need to be consulted only they can explain what the prognosis is but the issue is what government chooses to do with that advice is the issue at hand. Governments clear role is to take a balanced view of all the consequences of their actions so as weigh up whether the downside of not opening up in a weeks time will offset the risks now being presented. Of course they won't and furthermore the reason they are in this predicament is because they failed to act in good time to minimise the number of imported cases of the delta variant when they've been barking on about variants being the main threat to our progress. Its absolutely disgraceful they don't accept responsibility for this situation and even more pitiful is the inept media and opposition not calling them out for this failure. By and large everybody rolls over including CRG who have already reset their bar to the 19th July. This government will now be able to do whatever it wants going forward.

 

[initiation]

are taking the opportunity to grind a few political proverbial axes,

Eh... against who? I voted Conservative at the last general election but utterly despite what they are doing.

I am more likely to believe what learned scientists have to say about medically related matters than what any "armchair critic" on this particular thread has to say.#

And here is the fundamental issue. Lockdown is not just a medical issue. It is a political decision that has an impact over all aspects of our lives.

To turn your point around, why should I trust a medic to have a say on things like the economy and on less tangible things like freedom? Or do you want zero-Covid?

I'm sure a medic would also probably say you should avoid drinking entirely, not play high impact sports or whatever other activity you enjoy. Does that mean you have to stop? No you make a judgement about the risks/benefit.

The problem with 'following the science' is that you ask how to slow the spread of a virus, they will tell you, but not having considered all other impacts. It is the politicians job to weigh up the pros/cons of each measure; this has clearly not been done.

 

[MikeWM]

The thing which shocks me about that article is the idea that putting our lives on hold for another month is worth it to prevent thousands of hospitalisations.

Not hundreds of thousands. Not tens of thousands (which is the scale of previous waves, so the NHS would cope, just about). But thousands.

At what point would these scientists not consider it justifiable? Hundreds of hospitalisations? Dozens?

And of course the logical conclusion from that is that we'll have to lockdown every autumn/winter, because covid/flu/whatever. And maybe spring and summer too, if variants or whatever come along. For the rest of our lives.

The genie is well and truly out of the bottle. I'm not sure it will be possible to ever get it back in. Our society has gone very badly wrong.

 

[ainsworth74]

You need to ask the Labour Party that question as they have always believed in magical money trees.

Spot the Labour governments

Public sector net debt expressed as a percentage of gross domestic product in the United Kingdom from 1920/21 to 2021/22



Source

(Bar chart showing peak of Debt to GDP ratio in 1946/47 of 249.1% trending downwards through to the lowest level 1990/91 at 24.2%. Increased in the mid-90s/early-00s but still at levels lower than the 1980s before a significant uptick in 2008/09 to 48.7% and continuing to steadily rise to 84.4% in 2019/20 and jumping to nearly 100% by 2020/21)

There are of course other measures which can be applied but let's not pretend one party is the party of fiscal responsibility and the other are profligate wasters.

And of course the logical conclusion from that is that we'll have to lockdown every autumn/winter, because covid/flu/whatever.

I'd suggest that the logical conclusion is that we barely had sufficient capacity within the NHS to cope with season variations in demand on it's services so adding even a few extra straws (to borrow a metaphor) represents an intolerable additional stress. Might have been a good idea to spend some money on addressing that shortfall than spraying £37bn on a test and trace system that doesn't appear to work, further billions on PPE contracts to Tory friends, donors, etc and so on and so on.

 

[Purple Orange]

That graph needs posting more frequently @ainsworth74

 

[Darandio]

That graph needs posting more frequently @ainsworth74

I'd say it's a topic that deserves it's own thread. Not only that it needs to be a sticky for easy referral!

 

[MikeWM]

I'd suggest that the logical conclusion is that we barely had sufficient capacity within the NHS to cope with season variations in demand on it's services so adding even a few extra straws (to borrow a metaphor) represents an intolerable additional stress. Might have been a good idea to spend some money on addressing that shortfall than spraying £37bn on a test and trace system that doesn't appear to work, further billions on PPE contracts to Tory friends, donors, etc and so on and so on.

That's very much one very important conclusion, yes, and one that certainly doesn't get enough attention.

But even if we all acknowledge that we were in a very bad place going into this, with no 'breathing room' of potential extra capacity, I find it impossible to believe we can't have done something about capacity in 15 months. As it is, we're going to go even into next winter with no more capacity than previously (actually probably less, once they roll out compulsory vaccination for healthcare professionals, which will mean some will leave or be fired).

 

[35B]

So basically you are trying to deride anyone who does any research or applies any critical thinking. I for one an glad that there are at least some people smart enough to think or themselves, though sadly there are still far too many who don't and who will blindly swallow whatever the "experts" feed them.

I see a lot of people, here and elsewhere, defining "critical thinking" in way that questions whether they understand the meaning of either word.

 

[island]

I'm not aware of anything official or quasi-official that is planned (I got Telegram because that's where the groups are, and there are no announcements of anything before the 26th), but I would expect that a lot of people would be heading to their nearest city centre to express their displeasure. The potential for something bad to happen spontaneously is there, due to the weather (assuming that the forecast holds), as you said in a previous post. Interesting would be an understatement.

This forum has repeatedly over the last year or so predicted widespread civil unrest against COVID-19 restrictions, little or none of which has materialized.

If restrictions aren’t eased as planned on June 21st on the basis that more adults need to be vaccinated, I think it would make sense to allow under-40s to be offered the Oxford AZ jab again, on the basis that blood clotting poses less of a risk than the impact of continued restrictions and the Indian variant. Considering that Moderna has barely taken off, Pfizer is expecting a delay in supplies and Janssen availability is some weeks off yet, there’s not much choice available for the younger population desperate to get back to normal.

Is vaccine availability the limiting factor, though? I thought it was staff/venues

Parkrun: Free weekly 5k events set to return in over 500 locations on 26 June

Parkrun events set to return in over 500 locations on 26 June after gaining approval from a large number of local authorities.

www.bbc.co.uk

The Parkrun thread is locked so I thought I’d post here instead. A new date of June 26th has been confirmed for resumption of all events, but ONLY if the June 21st easing goes ahead…

… which I think is bizarre to say the least. Organised outdoor sport has been allowed since March 29th and Parkrun were initially planning to resume events two weeks before stage 4 anyway. While planning application delays have pushed this date back, why they would now choose to delay in the event of stage 4 easing not going ahead on the 21st is beyond me, particularly as nothing in the regulations will further affect organised outdoor sport at that point.

I understood the issue with ParkRun was they were only prepared to open if they could open more or less the full network in one go, as if they only opened (say) half of the venues, then the normal number of people would show up and just go to a different venue if their usual one was closed, resulting in major overcrowding.

Fairly sure it was table service only - at least it was where I went. And masks may not have been mandatory till the end of the month, but everywhere I went people were wearing them!

Memories are a funny thing. Masks and table service did not in fact become required in all pubs/restaurants in England until late September.

Last summer from what I recall about half of pubs were doing table service, the other half where doing bar service. About half you seemed to have fill in the test and trace form, the other half you did not.

Table service and T&T were not required during the summer.

It will come to the point where the restrictions become illegal, especially given the current enabling act. Anything that has the look-and-feel of a requirement to be vaccinated is enough to invalidate the enabling act. I'm not sure if the Uncivil Service Civil Service are imaginative enough to use another enabling act.

You’ve repeatedly posted various assertions on various threads claiming that certain rules would “become illegal” due to a prohibition on regulations requiring mandatory vaccinations in the Public Health Act 1984. But “you must be vaccinated to do X” is not a mandatory vaccination provision, unless perhaps X is something so basic that absolutely everyone does it, such as buying food.

In any event, such a provision could be implemented in primary legislation if the government really wanted to do so, which it doesn’t.

Ironically, WFH means you can covertly be in touch with alternative employers without being conspicuous in your absence from the office (for an interview) or mysteriously come in dressed up smarter than usual one day...

I got a new job last June in just this manner.

I am still going to get a second dose, but mainly because it lowers my personal risk. I do feel somewhat cheated given the government has specially being telling people to get vaccinated to avoid the restrictions (I have seen adverts specially saying this).

If the restrictions are not eased significantly on the 19th July, I am seriously considering moving abroad, at least temporarily while the UK government returns to it’s senses.

I do not rate my personal risk very high but I am getting my second dose as soon as I can as it will inevitably be necessary for the overseas travel that I sorely miss.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

And of course the logical conclusion from that is that we'll have to lockdown every autumn/winter, because covid/flu/whatever. And maybe spring and summer too, if variants or whatever come along. For the rest of our lives.

The genie is well and truly out of the bottle. I'm not sure it will be possible to ever get it back in. Our society has gone very badly wrong.

There are a fair few politicians from all sides who recognise what's going on here but don't have the bottle to use there vote accordingly when options are presented in parliament when the regulations were last extended. What we are witnessing is a constant undermining of the foundations of our democracy and we all know where that leads.

 

[MikeWM]

There are a fair few politicians from all sides who recognise what's going on here but don't have the bottle to use there vote accordingly when options are presented in parliament when the regulations were last extended. What we are witnessing is a constant undermining of the foundations of our democracy and we all know where that leads.

Yes, we're in a very troubling place, and I really don't like where we're going. The checks-and-balances aren't working anymore.