• 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!

Vaccine Progress, Approval, and Deployment

Status
Not open for further replies.

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,636
A person offered the vaccine should be considered equivalent to a person receiving the vaccine for the purposes of deciding when restrictions are released.

If an over 65 year old decides not to be vaccinated, that is there decision, but the rest of the country should not be held ransom to them.
If they catch it they catch it and if they die they die, society will have discharged their responsibility to them at that point.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,680
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
And now there are reports that being vaccinated won't free you from the need to self isolate if you come into contact with someone who has COVID-19.

This is because scientists don't yet know the effect of the vaccine on transmission. ie. After being vaccinated, you won't get COVID-19 yourself, but you could still pass it on to someone else.

But I suppose that once the most vulnerable people have been vaccinated, it won't matter as much if there is an increase in cases, as younger people are statistically less likely to be hospitalised.

And once a significant proportion of the population have been vaccinated, we will be approaching herd immunity.


I hope this isn't true. It seems whatever happens some people want to keep restrictions in place as something might happen. You really would think this is the most deadly virus ever.
This is what I feared might happen. For most of the year we have been told that restrictions will be around until we can start to vaccinate. Then when the vaccine arrives, the experts suddenly start to dial back and tell us vaccines aren't the be all & end all.

I think two problems cause this. Firstly it seems that almost no-one, either in scientific / medical or political spheres wants to be the person that says "Right, let's get back to it". Doubtless this is an example of self preservation, sticking one's head above the trenches to make a final decision is something few seem to have the stomach to do. The second problem is more concerning, and that is that some of these experts are getting extraordinary exposure and they are enjoying it, perhaps even benefitting from it. When the very first government briefings started I felt reassured that they were part of them, it felt at the time like a rational & pragmatic approach was being taken. However as time has gone on the experts seem to have become as slippery as any politician, constantly shifting the goalposts, being utterly noncommittal, always using worst case scenarios (often using very questionable modelling) & even as seen recently going beyond the PM. With hindsight I think the politicians should have always been the ones in front of the press, and the experts left in the committee rooms.

I have said it before and I stand by it, as the most vulnerable & those that care for them are offered the vaccine, so restrictions should be lifted accordingly. These first vaccines may not be so successful in reducing transmission, but they are not meant to be. They are meant to protect those people who have had it, and so transmission is much less of a concern.
 

birchesgreen

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2020
Messages
5,045
Location
Birmingham
The second problem is more concerning, and that is that some of these experts are getting extraordinary exposure and they are enjoying it, perhaps even benefitting from it.

You arn't the only one who thinks Van Tam will sooner or later end up on Strictly.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,284
It's quite telling that doctors are cautious...

It depends on their reasoning for not wishing to have the vaccine, as being cautious is only one such reason. Others may include wanting those at a higher risk to be able to have the vaccine first, especially if the doctor in question is aware that they interact with individual patients for a fairly short period at any given time.

This is confirmed in the breakdown of the reasons given:

Safety Concerns​

Of those who wouldn't have the jab at this stage:

  • 56% cited safety concerns
  • 27% would rather wait
  • 7% mentioned personal health reasons
  • 14% had other reasons

Now that's not 56% of all doctors rather is 56% of those who didn't want the vaccine straight away, so about 22%.

However it should be noted that the survey was done on the period 18th to 23rd of November and so was on fairly limited data from the studies and before the news stories about how the trails wate were able to be done back to back without the need for waiting for funding and getting volunteers which delays the normal rollout of vaccines.

Full article (only needs a free registration):

A Medscape UK reader poll of 308 UK doctors found 4 in 10 would not have a COVID-19 vaccine as soon as one is approved by the MHRA. Online polling took place 18-23 November after the positive Pfizer/BioNTech results but with most responses received before the positive news about the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine. Safety Concerns Of those who wouldn't have the jab at this stage: 56% cited safety concerns 27% would rather wait 7% mentioned personal health reasons 14% had other reasons Overall, 59% said vaccination for healthcare staff should not be compulsory. Among those who wouldn’t have the jab at this stage, 9 out of 10 were against compulsory staff vaccination. Herd Immunity Vaccination rates against SARS-CoV-2 of around 60-72% are thought to be needed to make it effective, according to a recent Lancet article. Polling by Kantar of 1000 people carried out 10-11 November found 76% of people in Britain would have a vaccine for COVID-19. That's fallen since June when 78% said they would be vaccinated. In these latest results, 53% were worried about safety and the speed of development. However, 57% were confident that a vaccine will not be dangerous if it is proposed by public authorities.
 

notlob.divad

Established Member
Joined
19 Jan 2016
Messages
1,609
I see they've decided not to do NHS staff first anymore. I wonder if that is anything to do with the survey I saw last week that 40% of doctors wouldn't take one at this point?

(Link is behind a registration wall, but the first two lines should be sufficient to make the point)
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/941492
I suspect the article goes on to say that a significant portion of those 40% would not have it as soon as it is produced becasue they feel others should be prioritised first...
 

Richard Scott

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
3,673
I suspect the article goes on to say that a significant portion of those 40% would not have it as soon as it is produced becasue they feel others should be prioritised first...
Which is a good way of saying they don't want it.....?
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
I suspect the article goes on to say that a significant portion of those 40% would not have it as soon as it is produced becasue they feel others should be prioritised first...

The full article disagrees:

A Medscape UK reader poll of 308 UK doctors found 4 in 10 would not have a COVID-19 vaccine as soon as one is approved by the MHRA.

Online polling took place 18-23 November after the positive Pfizer/BioNTech results but with most responses received before the positive news about the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine.

Safety Concerns​

Of those who wouldn't have the jab at this stage:

  • 56% cited safety concerns
  • 27% would rather wait
  • 7% mentioned personal health reasons
  • 14% had other reasons

Overall, 59% said vaccination for healthcare staff should not be compulsory. Among those who wouldn’t have the jab at this stage, 9 out of 10 were against compulsory staff vaccination.

Herd Immunity​

Vaccination rates against SARS-CoV-2 of around 60-72% are thought to be needed to make it effective, according to a recent Lancet article.

Polling by Kantar of 1000 people carried out 10-11 November found 76% of people in Britain would have a vaccine for COVID-19.

That's fallen since June when 78% said they would be vaccinated.

In these latest results, 53% were worried about safety and the speed of development.

However, 57% were confident that a vaccine will not be dangerous if it is proposed by public authorities.

No selflessness there.

I would make the point though that just because they're qualified MDs doesn't mean that they're experts on vaccine or general medicine development, they're much the same as the general public on that front. It's certainly not good optics though, and does raise issues around "would I be happy to get something my doctor wouldn't endorse"
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,355
Jonathan Van Tam was saying on the TV news tonight that if we vaccinate the most vulnerable people, he thinks we could get rid of 99% of the hospitalisations and deaths from COVID-19.

Even if it doesn't turn out to be 99%, then a large decrease in hospitalisations and death will mean that COVID-19 is no worse than seasonal flu, and something approaching a normal life can then resume.

I think the requirement to continue self isolating after vaccination is only until the scientists understand the effect of vaccination on transmission of the virus, or until sufficiently large numbers of people have been vaccinated.
What he said was that they are targeting groups of people for vaccination in phase 1 where those groups contain 99% of the hospitalisations and deaths from COVID-19. That does not mean a 99% reduction in serious cases is expected...
There is no data on the effectiveness of covid vaccines in older people with underlying health conditions. Data for other vaccines show varying degrees of lower effectiveness levels in in older people with underlying health conditions.

If you target the 99% groups with a vaccine that is 95.1% efficient (+0.1/-0.6%) you get a 94.1% reduction not a 99% reduction (i.e. 0.99*0.951).
6% with no restrictions or mitigation in place level of transmission is probably manageable for the NHS but still has some big impacts on their ability to do deal with non covid workloads.

If the vaccine is less effective in those high risk groups then the reduction in case numbers will be lower.

Not all of those ~24-25m in the priority groups are able to have the vaccine, recent estimates put that number at 1.2m (or 5% of that group).

Hence 0.99*(1-0.05)*0.951 = 89.4% this assume the vaccine effectiveness is 95.1% in that group and all those that can be vaccinated take it. 10.6% of a no restrictions / mitigation serious case level is a problem for the NHS.

They also only have enough of the Pfzier vaccine by the end of 2021 for 20m of those 24-25m. So they need the Oxford/AZ and Moderna vaccines.

Hence the reality is that the reduction will be lower than the 89.4% above.

It will take many months to get data on transmission rate reduction and transmission rate reduction is a key part of those who can't have the vaccine or for whom it isn't effective. These will be a very interesting and import set of numbers!

I hope this isn't true. It seems whatever happens some people want to keep restrictions in place as something might happen. You really would think this is the most deadly virus ever.
There is very limited data on the effect of the vaccines on infectiousness /transmission. Pfizer and Moderna have't tried to collect data and the UK arm of the Oxford AZ trial did but there is no public analysis of that data yet.

As Boris said yesterday he wished he had had a better understanding of asymptomatic transmission far earlier. Asymptomic transmission of Covid is far worse than for SARS / MERS (for both of which peak infectiousness starts 2 days after starting to show symptoms, unlike Covid which appears to start 1.5-2 days before if you show symptoms) or Flu which is one of the reason dealing with Covid is so hard.

A person offered the vaccine should be considered equivalent to a person receiving the vaccine for the purposes of deciding when restrictions are released.

If an over 65 year old decides not to be vaccinated, that is there decision, but the rest of the country should not be held ransom to them.
If they catch it they catch it and if they die they die, society will have discharged their responsibility to them at that point.
Unfortunately for your thinking the government is banking on some level of transmission rate reduction to protect the 1.2m who can't be vaccinated in the priority group or those for whom vaccination is ineffective. The maths needs people vaccinated even if you don't like this!
If there are useful levels of transmission rate reductions measured then they will be looking to vaccinate 85%+ of the adult population. (Transmission rate reductions are almost always lower than the measured vaccine effectiveness)

This is what I feared might happen. For most of the year we have been told that restrictions will be around until we can start to vaccinate. Then when the vaccine arrives, the experts suddenly start to dial back and tell us vaccines aren't the be all & end all.
It was always clear to me a fair number of others that you need quite a large number of people vaccinated to start seeing effects and there are lots of time lags too e.g. the measured effectiveness in 2 weeks post second dose, several months to vaccinate the high risk groups if they have enough vaccine. Again always clear to me a number of others that the reality wasn't going to be as magically quick as some were spinning.

It is also worth remembering that the weather will be against us till at least April. The winter : summer case prevalence ratio in the 4 traditionally circulating human coronaviruses is 9:1, hence if Covid is similar you would need more restrictions in winter than summer to achieve the same transmission levels.

While people might want the restrictions lifting ASAP, the maths ins't pointing to that.
 
Last edited:

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,680
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
It was always clear to me a fair number of others that you need quite a large number of people vaccinated to start seeing effects and there are lots of time lags too e.g. the measured effectiveness in 2 weeks post second dose, several months to vaccinate the high risk groups if they have enough vaccine. Again always clear to me a number of others that the reality wasn't going to be as magically quick as some were spinning.

It is also worth remembering that the weather will be against us till at least April. The winter : summer case prevalence ratio in the 4 traditionally circulating human coronaviruses is 9:1, hence if Covid is similar you would need more restrictions in winter than summer to achieve the same transmission levels.

While people might want the restrictions lifting ASAP, the maths ins't pointing to that.
What you are not factoring in is the groups that are at most risk of hospitalisation and death. These are predominantly the elderly and ill. Given priority to the vaccine as they should, you don't need to wait for wider effects to gain the most benefit because having protected the most at risk of hospitalisations & deaths the risk to the NHS is minimised.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,636
Unfortunately for your thinking the government is banking on some level of transmission rate reduction to protect the 1.2m who can't be vaccinated in the priority group or those for whom vaccination is ineffective. The maths needs people vaccinated even if you don't like this!
If there are useful levels of transmission rate reductions measured then they will be looking to vaccinate 85%+ of the adult population. (Transmission rate reductions are almost always lower than the measured vaccine effectiveness)

The cold blooded truth is that trying to protect those people through maintenance of the eternal lockdown whilst they try and bully or compel mass vaccination of the populace is simply not worth it.

Hitting the over 65s will dramatically cut death rates to the point where there is no possibility of the NHS being overwhelmed.

Waiting till next Christmas for total population coverage is a fools errand, especially given we have no real idae what the transmission suppression properties of the vaccine are.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,355
What you are not factoring in is the groups that are at most risk of hospitalisation and death. These are predominantly the elderly and ill. Given priority to the vaccine as they should, you don't need to wait for wider effects to gain the most benefit because having protected the most at risk of hospitalisations & deaths the risk to the NHS is minimised.
It is still going to take quite along time to vaccinate people (both doses + the lag time to gain effectivenss) before the higher group is covered. Supplies of the vaccines are also limited as the is only enough Pfizer vaccine in the next few months to cover 30% of the high risk groups so unless the Oxford / AZ vaccine is approved soon the vaccination levels this winter won't be that high. No Moderna vaccines (if approved) is available to the UK till April.

It was covered earlier in that post the effectiveness in those groups and the ability for all that group to have a vaccine isn't there there the NHS will still have issues (smaller than currently) after vaccination of the higher risk groups and lifting restrictions, hence getting the NHS impact down to manageable levels will still need some restrictions or lots of the rest of the adult population vaccinated to bring some reduced transmission and reduce the case rate in those that can't be vaccinated or those for whom the vaccination isn't effective.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,543
Location
Redcar
The cold blooded truth is that trying to protect those people through maintenance of the eternal lockdown whilst they try and bully or compel mass vaccination of the populace is simply not worth it.

Hitting the over 65s will dramatically cut death rates to the point where there is no possibility of the NHS being overwhelmed.

Waiting till next Christmas for total population coverage is a fools errand, especially given we have no real idae what the transmission suppression properties of the vaccine are.

Yes I'd broadly agree with that. Once everyone in Phase 1 has been offered a vaccine then the Government and the rest of society have discharged our duty to them so it's time to move to the only significant consideration in any further restrictions being around issues in the population that haven't been offered a vaccine yet and/or NHS capacity crunches which could impact on the section of society which hasn't yet had the vaccine or has had it but would lose out on access to the NHS for other health conditions. Because really, at that point, it's kinda tough. We don't have the time or money to coddle anti-vaxers.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,680
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
It is still going to take quite along time to vaccinate people (both doses + the lag time to gain effectivenss) before the higher group is covered. Supplies of the vaccines are also limited as the is only enough Pfizer vaccine in the next few months to cover 30% of the high risk groups so unless the Oxford / AZ vaccine is approved soon the vaccination levels this winter won't be that high. No Moderna vaccines (if approved) is available to the UK till April.
And this is where some planning is going to be needed, and perhaps why the decision has been made to take care / healthcare staff off the top priority tier. It needs to be targeted at those most at immediate risk, because just being in the higher risk groups does not automatically mean someone will likely be hospitalised should they be infected. However even with the limited amounts of the Pfizer vaccine a significant reduction in risk to the NHS can be achieved in a relatively short space of time, remembering that reducing risk to the NHS is a key priority.

It was covered earlier in that post the effectiveness in those groups and the ability for all that group to have a vaccine isn't there there the NHS will still have issues (smaller than currently) after vaccination of the higher risk groups and lifting restrictions, hence getting the NHS impact down to manageable levels will still need some restrictions or lots of the rest of the adult population vaccinated to bring some reduced transmission and reduce the case rate in those that can't be vaccinated or those for whom the vaccination isn't effective.
Let's face it, the NHS has had issues for as long as it has existed, and as of now isn't particularly at threat of being overrun by the illness. Vaccination of those at immediate risk as above will further reduce this risk and allow the NHS to start to deal with all the people shoved onto the waiting list as a result of the measures in place at the moment.
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
unless the Oxford / AZ vaccine is approved soon

Based on the ~3.5 week difference between the Pfizer announcement and approval by MHRA, we should hopefully see the Oxford/AZ vaccine approved around Mid December. Should also hopefully also be a quicker turnaround between approval and the first jabs starting

hence getting the NHS impact down to manageable levels will still need some restrictions or lots of the rest of the adult population vaccinated to bring some reduced transmission and reduce the case rate in those that can't be vaccinated or those for whom the vaccination isn't effective.

There's still that big assumption there around the vaccine reducing transmission!

If we assume that it does prevent transmission (and that having caught covid previously also grants a transmission preventing immunity - fingers crossed that both hold) then we can use the (upper) Herd Immunity Threshold as the lower bound target for immunisation, which comes out at 53 million assuming a 90% efficient vaccine - the actual minimum will be lower because of the higher unrecorded cases during the first peak, a likely lower HIT than 75%, as well as other immunity mechanisms not accounted for. With some more optimistic numbers you can conceivably reach the HIT with as little as 50% of the population vaccinated
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,355
The cold blooded truth is that trying to protect those people through maintenance of the eternal lockdown whilst they try and bully or compel mass vaccination of the populace is simply not worth it.

Hitting the over 65s will dramatically cut death rates to the point where there is no possibility of the NHS being overwhelmed.

Waiting till next Christmas for total population coverage is a fools errand, especially given we have no real idae what the transmission suppression properties of the vaccine are.
The point I'm making is that is that vaccination will take a while to have a useful impact, hence people should expect quick changes.

Given the number who can't have the vaccine for medical reasons (~1.2m) or for whom it won't be effective (at least 5% but there is no data of those with underlying conditions...), the serious case rates will still be high enough to cause issues for the NHS (e.g. not being able to treat non-covid patients as they need to and start clear backlog) unless they have started a phase 2 vaccination programme or still have some risk mitigation measures in place.
All addressable in the first half of 2021 no one mentioned anything about Christmas till you did!
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,556
Location
Mold, Clwyd
The BBC live newsfeed (1045 Friday) has the information from BioNtech that the first vaccine shipment yesterday from Belgium was by Eurostar.
So they'll be limited to the one-a-day Brussels/Amsterdam service.
Presumably they are accompanied by security staff, and not delivered like a Red Star parcel!
The manufacturing plant is at Puurs, south of Antwerp.

Covid-19: Fauci says UK vaccine will 'do really well' - BBC News
Sean Marett, chief commercial officer for BioNTech - the company that, with Pfizer, makes the vaccine that the UK has approved - says each of the batches coming out of the manufacturing site in Belgium have to be approved for a "quality check".
The doses are then packed and shipped, he says. The first batch arrived by Eurostar into the UK yesterday and was taken to a "safe storage facility".
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,355
Based on the ~3.5 week difference between the Pfizer announcement and approval by MHRA, we should hopefully see the Oxford/AZ vaccine approved around Mid December. Should also hopefully also be a quicker turnaround between approval and the first jabs starting



There's still that big assumption there around the vaccine reducing transmission!

If we assume that it does prevent transmission (and that having caught covid previously also grants a transmission preventing immunity - fingers crossed that both hold) then we can use the (upper) Herd Immunity Threshold as the lower bound target for immunisation, which comes out at 53 million assuming a 90% efficient vaccine - the actual minimum will be lower because of the higher unrecorded cases during the first peak, a likely lower HIT than 75%, as well as other immunity mechanisms not accounted for. With some more optimistic numbers you can conceivably reach the HIT with as little as 50% of the population vaccinated
Reducing transmission and vaccine effectiveness are 2 very different things. The Pfizer/BioNTech trial definition was symptomatic effectiveness. Prof Sahin of BioNTech went with 50% transmission reduction with his vaccine as a guess a couple of weeks ago which suggests highish vaccination numbers needed overall. 50% transmission reduction would still be very useful

We won't get transmission reduction data until we do large scale vaccination so best to assess the situation when there is some data as the range of permutations and variance on outcomes /speed of outcomes is large. Transmission reduction should be a useful secondary impact even if the % reduction doesn't look that impressive, if the transmission reduction is over 65% then things get very very interesting (in a good way).
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
6,540
Location
UK
Based on the ~3.5 week difference between the Pfizer announcement and approval by MHRA, we should hopefully see the Oxford/AZ vaccine approved around Mid December. Should also hopefully also be a quicker turnaround between approval and the first jabs starting
Indeed, it's storage characteristics mean that it could ship out and be waiting in the vaccination centers ahead of time.
The BBC live newsfeed (1045 Friday) has the information from BioNtech that the first vaccine shipment yesterday from Belgium was by Eurostar.
So they'll be limited to the one-a-day Brussels/Amsterdam service.
Presumably they are accompanied by security staff, and not delivered like a Red Star parcel!
The manufacturing plant is at Puurs, south of Antwerp.

Covid-19: Fauci says UK vaccine will 'do really well' - BBC News
Fortunately, there are plenty of Eurostars sitting around, if really needed, they could be chartered.
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
Indeed, it's storage characteristics mean that it could ship out and be waiting in the vaccination centers ahead of time.

I hadn't even thought about that aspect, but that's very true. I was thinking more along the lines that they'll be able to piggyback off the infrastructure and background work done for Pfizer. Additionally the fact that it's produced in Britain should simplify the logistics a little compared to sourcing the Pfizer/BioNtech one from Belgium

On that note, I expect that it was just a Eurostar/Eurotunnel mix up - I think they'd struggle to bring 10s if not 100s of thousands of doses over in a refrigerated suitcase! (there's also a daily mail article mentioning them coming over in unmarked lorries via eurotunnel)
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,686
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
The cold blooded truth is that trying to protect those people through maintenance of the eternal lockdown whilst they try and bully or compel mass vaccination of the populace is simply not worth it.

Hitting the over 65s will dramatically cut death rates to the point where there is no possibility of the NHS being overwhelmed.

Waiting till next Christmas for total population coverage is a fools errand, especially given we have no real idae what the transmission suppression properties of the vaccine are.

People aren’t going to tolerate restrictions through next year. A lot of people have declared 2020 a “write off”, which whilst still a complete year of useful life they will never get back (and especially damaging if you’re, for example, a child who took exams this year) is tolerable for many. People may wear it for the winter as well. However once spring approaches this will no longer be acceptable.

Under no circumstances am I prepared to spend the better months of 2021 essentially living a life of work/home/local walks. Even the latter has been oppressive these last four weeks as even rural locations have been busier than normal.

I’d put mid-March as the tidemark. As well as being a year from the point when this all properly kicked off, it’s also the point where the days get longer and we start to think about moving the clocks forward.

There will then likely be a massive period of reflection as we pick up the pieces and realise what we’ve collectively lost as a result of a year of restrictions.
 

Class 33

Established Member
Joined
14 Aug 2009
Messages
2,362
Indeed. I echo similar words to the above.

The bulk of 2020 has been a complete and utter write off, completely stuffed up by these two blasted waves of Coronavirus and all these restrictions that have just dragged on and on. I'm expecting the first few months of 2021 to be a write off too. But come 1st April 2021(or before that with a bit of luck), that would have been a mammoth 12 and a half months of all this. We would have the vaccines rolled out to the most vulnerable people, and continuing to roll out to people further down the priority list. So by then it would be high time to move on from all this, scrap all these restrictions once and for all, so people can start getting on with their lives properly again and have things to look forward to such as holidays/short breaks away, going to festivals, etc.

I've been unemployed since January just before all this took off. And it's near enough impossible to get further employment whilst all these restrictions/lockdowns/tiered restrictions are still dragging on! Very very much fewer jobs have being advertised since March, and then the ones that are advertised get multiple more applications than normal due to many more being unemployed! It's not atall easy! I want to get working again! I'm not expecting to be able to get another job until all these restrictions are finally scrapped! So that's not likely to be for at least (almost) another 4 months yet!

If all these restrictions drag on beyond the end of March 2021 with still no end in sight, it will be simply unacceptable and absolutely ridiculous.
 
Last edited:

DB

Guest
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
5,036
Very very much fewer jobs have being advertised since March, and then the ones that are advertised get multiple more applications than normal due to many more being unemployed!

Yes, that's certainly true - we've advertised a few jobs this year and had a lot more applicants than normal.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,970
Location
Taunton or Kent
People aren’t going to tolerate restrictions through next year. A lot of people have declared 2020 a “write off”, which whilst still a complete year of useful life they will never get back (and especially damaging if you’re, for example, a child who took exams this year) is tolerable for many. People may wear it for the winter as well. However once spring approaches this will no longer be acceptable.

Under no circumstances am I prepared to spend the better months of 2021 essentially living a life of work/home/local walks. Even the latter has been oppressive these last four weeks as even rural locations have been busier than normal.

I’d put mid-March as the tidemark. As well as being a year from the point when this all properly kicked off, it’s also the point where the days get longer and we start to think about moving the clocks forward.

There will then likely be a massive period of reflection as we pick up the pieces and realise what we’ve collectively lost as a result of a year of restrictions.
I agree, my impression is January, February and in many cases March are relatively inactive months and I'm prepared to be relatively idle for them. The only times they're not inactive is for winter holidaymakers seeking warmer climbs (I'm not one of those) and some small scale events. After March though not only will this all be completely intolerable, but the events industry can't afford another year out, and certainly won't be seeking so-called vaccine passports if they are to stand a chance of being viable next year.

I'm "hoping" that the Government will be scrutinised to the hilt from all possible fronts on the vaccine rollout to make sure there are as few delays as possible so the above is more reasonable.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,613
Location
First Class
Indeed, it's storage characteristics mean that it could ship out and be waiting in the vaccination centers ahead of time.

Fortunately, there are plenty of Eurostars sitting around, if really needed, they could be chartered.

Are 319’s still cleared for the tunnel (if they ever were)? Tongue in cheek but actually not a bad idea!
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,830
Location
Yorks
I think that if, as the media seems to suggest, we're aiming for a "herd immunity through mass vaccination" approach, it seems all the more imperative to ditch the lockdown measures locally and nationally, and move to more sustainable measures, as this will likely take a long time.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,439
Location
Yorkshire
Can we stick to discussing Vaccine Progress, Approval, and Deployment in this thread please

We have plenty of other threads to discuss other topics
 

HS2isgood

Member
Joined
9 Nov 2020
Messages
177
Location
Madrid, Spain
I think the problem with the way you frame the question is that what people are willing to call a 'lockdown' has mutated since we saw the first one in Wuhan.

Wuhan's lock down saw entire families locked into their own homes in some cases.
In Madrid's children were pretty much confined to their homes with no adequate reason to go out.

However now, people are talking about the UK having just emerged from lockdown 2. However it was very different from the first, this time children were still in school, construction sites and factories remained open. The country was not in the same situation as when key workers were the only ones leaving the house for more than a jog around the block or a trip to the supermarket.

So the nature of lockdown has changed. People have learnt from the past when the health services were overloaded and stepped up and down the restrictions as deemed nessesary to prevent it happening. I am not sure you would get the evidence you are looking for because which government would evidentally want to be seen to allow this to get so out of control again that the systems they are in charge of are unable to cope.
Yeah, we were basically completely locked down back in spring, I live in Madrid.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,543
Location
Redcar
Worrying news this lunchtime about the first reciptient of the vaccine ;)

First vaccine patient Margaret Keenan strangely compelled into shopping spree for Microsoft products​

The first person in the world to receive the Pfizer vaccine outside of clinical trials is relaxing this morning, after bizarrely spending a frantic first half-hour after receiving the jab compulsively buying unnecessary Microsoft products online.

90-year-old Margaret Keenan, who received the milestone vaccination in Coventry this morning, spoke of her joy at being finally able to see her family in the new year, after purchasing over £3,000 worth of Microsoft products in just minutes after the injection.

Speaking earlier she revealed, “I feel absolutely great, this is a fantastic feeling.

“But not as great as you will feel if you sign up to an amazing Microsoft Office deal with a new Windows 10 home digital download package and a new Microsoft Surface, which is way better than an iPad.

“I mean yes, seeing my family in real life is great and everything, but nothing quite beats a good old meeting on Microsoft Teams using the latest groundbreaking Microsoft software.

“I’m just so happy that I am finally going to be protected from this deadly disease, and I can write about it all using the amazing Microsoft Word Home and Student package to share with the world.”

Asked what she’s looking forward to most in the new year she told us, “Starting a new subscription with Microsoft 365 Personal at at the absolute top of my list, obviously.

“Oh, and being able to hug my daughter I suppose.”


More seriously the first vaccines have indeed been delivered to people outside of the clinical trials this morning. I think this qualifies as extremely good news:

A UK grandmother has become the first person in the world to be given the Pfizer Covid-19 jab as part of a mass vaccination programme.

Margaret Keenan, who turns 91 next week, said it was the "best early birthday present".

She was given the injection at 06:31 GMT - the first of 800,000 doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine that will be dispensed in the coming weeks.

Up to four million more are expected by the end of the month.

Hubs in the UK will vaccinate over-80s and some health and care staff - the programme aims to protect the most vulnerable and return life to normal.

Health Secretary Matt Hancock, who has dubbed Tuesday V-day, said he was thrilled to see the first vaccinations take place but urged people to keep their resolve and stick to the rules for the next few months.

Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said viewing footage of the moment gave her "a lump in the throat".

Prime Minister Boris Johnson, on a visit to a London hospital to see some of the first people getting the jab, said getting vaccinated was "good for you and good for the whole country".

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top