Coronavirus

[Morrisandmoo]

10 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Funnily enough mask wearing is one if the things I hate most and hoose parties one of the things I like best ( in normal times of course 😊)  But if it was a toss up between wearing masks or living like this for the next 2 years I would happily continue with masks.

I think you are right with your suggestion that there has to be a bit of a compromise. Unfortunately though the UK climate is not conducive to medium risk stuff that governments could use to . There is only a certain element of the population that is interested enough in sport to freeze their balls off watching Killie, or any other team, in December. 
When you start moving indoors the risk ramps up . How do you create a more natural social atmosphere indoors, whether it be the pub/school/work, without increasing risk ?

 

Aye, we might need to all move to Australia so we can party on the beach in December. I'll get the Killie games on 4g

It is certainly much easier to deal with this virus in places with warm climates and an outdoors culture. As opposed to a wet, cold and indoor-drinking culture! Albeit this situation seems to have pushed a whole new generation out into the munros etc so that is good (if you ignore the inconvenience of having loads more people in the highlands generally). 

Honestly, it's always been a risky business socialising in close contact with folk indoors. It's only slightly more risky for individuals now, but we are much more conscious of it and worry about overwhelming the NHS with waves of ill people all turning up at once - hopefully mitigated to a reasonably large extent by the vaccine. But the short answer is you cannot increase socialising (especially indoors) without increasing risk. 

But I do think if you keep access high to the low-medium risk activities then demand for the high-risk stuff will be lower, if people are appropriately informed of relative risk. I drink coffee, but I don't smoke. If I couldn't drink coffee...I probably would smoke.  If I can get to the football and climb hills then I'm personally less inclined to got to my pals for a drink (at least not as often). 

Folk that just really value the high risk stuff (like yourself :)) can still do those things if they choose. I mean we let folk jump out of planes, ride motorbikes and smoke and do all sorts of mad stuff. But hopefully a combination of vaccinations, a more agile NHS (able to cope with an extra  say 25,000 winter deaths), information on relative risk, continuous access and nudging towards lower risk social activities....all means the net risk to society is tolerable, while the freedoms offered to individuals (all with different preferences and risk appetites) are sufficient to offer a fulfilling life before they die.

Choose life, choose a hoose partay*!

*just be vaccinated, wash your hands and be appropriately informed of the risk. But most of all....have fun!

[TDYER63]

2 hours ago, Morrisandmoo said:

Aye, we might need to all move to Australia so we can party on the beach in December. I'll get the Killie games on 4g

It is certainly much easier to deal with this virus in places with warm climates and an outdoors culture. As opposed to a wet, cold and indoor-drinking culture! Albeit this situation seems to have pushed a whole new generation out into the munros etc so that is good (if you ignore the inconvenience of having loads more people in the highlands generally). 

Honestly, it's always been a risky business socialising in close contact with folk indoors. It's only slightly more risky for individuals now, but we are much more conscious of it and worry about overwhelming the NHS with waves of ill people all turning up at once - hopefully mitigated to a reasonably large extent by the vaccine. But the short answer is you cannot increase socialising (especially indoors) without increasing risk. 

But I do think if you keep access high to the low-medium risk activities then demand for the high-risk stuff will be lower, if people are appropriately informed of relative risk. I drink coffee, but I don't smoke. If I couldn't drink coffee...I probably would smoke.  If I can get to the football and climb hills then I'm personally less inclined to got to my pals for a drink (at least not as often). 

Folk that just really value the high risk stuff (like yourself :)) can still do those things if they choose. I mean we let folk jump out of planes, ride motorbikes and smoke and do all sorts of mad stuff. But hopefully a combination of vaccinations, a more agile NHS (able to cope with an extra  say 25,000 winter deaths), information on relative risk, continuous access and nudging towards lower risk social activities....all means the net risk to society is tolerable, while the freedoms offered to individuals (all with different preferences and risk appetites) are sufficient to offer a fulfilling life before they die.

Choose life, choose a hoose partay*!

*just be vaccinated, wash your hands and be appropriately informed of the risk. But most of all....have fun!

😁

I agree with a lot of that, the restrictions have not been all bad. My daughter and her boyfriend are playing rounders today in Kelvingrove park with their friends, she is 25, I can guarantee that would never have happened before Covid. She would still be lying in bed with a hangover. She is as blind as a bat without her glasses right enough she will probably end up in A&E with an injury. 
Generally though, encouraging people to spend more time outside and getting more exercise can only be a good thing, I hope people continue with this when things eventually return to ‘normal’ . 

Like most things, being restricted from things you enjoy or told you cannot do them creates a greater desire , after 15 months I imagine this is why we are now seeing a breakdown in compliance. 
There will need to be a time where a balance is struck  .

What do you mean about the NHS coping with an extra 25k deaths ? You are not suggesting we sacrifice that amount of lives are you ? 

 

[Morrisandmoo]

45 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

😁

I agree with a lot of that, the restrictions have not been all bad. My daughter and her boyfriend are playing rounders today in Kelvingrove park with their friends, she is 25, I can guarantee that would never have happened before Covid. She would still be lying in bed with a hangover. She is as blind as a bat without her glasses right enough she will probably end up in A&E with an injury. 
Generally though, encouraging people to spend more time outside and getting more exercise can only be a good thing, I hope people continue with this when things eventually return to ‘normal’ . 

Like most things, being restricted from things you enjoy or told you cannot do them creates a greater desire , after 15 months I imagine this is why we are now seeing a breakdown in compliance. 
There will need to be a time where a balance is struck  .

What do you mean about the NHS coping with an extra 25k deaths ? You are not suggesting we sacrifice that amount of lives are you ? 

 

Ha! Yeah I think/hope people will continue with quite a lot of the good stuff. 

It's less about sacrificing and just recognising the inevitability of it. There will be seasonal waves of covid for decades to come, that we need to be able to manage without it threatening the NHS i.e. we can't still be pushing nurses to their limits once we get to wave 312 of Covid. We basically need to train more doctors and nurses and have them working in better conditions - reflecting the reality of our situation now and the risks of the future. 

We've got a new virus which kills between 0% and 1% of those infected with it. Medium term mortality rates are very likely going to be worse than they could have been, had covid not emerged.  A bad flu year gets 30k folk and we don't bat an eyelid. Hence the arbitrary 25k number. However I don't think, for example, <5k covid deaths p.a  is achievable without misery and long-term limits on human progress/life. But happy to be proved wrong!

However, those 5k-25k could very well be offset by improved healthy habits (e.g. playing rounders with appropriate eyewear!) benefiting other mortality causes - which is maybe the more sensible play, rather than a futile drive for <5k covid deaths to the detriment of all other mortality causes and life in general. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Morrisandmoo

[TDYER63]

7 minutes ago, Morrisandmoo said:

Ha! Yeah I think/hope people will continue with quite a lot of the good stuff. 

It's less about sacrificing and just recognising the inevitability of it. There will be seasonal waves of covid for decades to come, that we need to be able to manage without it threatening the NHS i.e. we can't still be pushing nurses to their limits once we get to wave 312 of Covid. We basically need to train more doctors and nurses and have them working in better conditions - reflecting the reality of our situation now and the risks of the future. 

We've got a new virus which kills between 0% and 1% of those infected with it. Medium term mortality rates are very likely going to be worse than they could have been, had covid not emerged.  A bad flu year gets 30k folk and we don't bat an eyelid. Hence the arbitrary 25k number. However I don't think, for example, <5k covid deaths p.a  is achievable without misery and long-term limits on human progress/life. But happy to be proved wrong!

However, those 5k-25k could very well be offset by improved healthy habits (e.g. playing rounders with appropriate eyewear!) benefiting other mortality causes - which is maybe the more sensible play, rather than a futile drive for <5k covid deaths to the detriment of all other mortality causes and life in general. 

I know this has probably been mentioned before , but what has the number of flu deaths been since vaccinations were started ? Has there been a drop in flu deaths suggesting Covid could be replacing flu to some extent , rather than in addition to ? Or are flu death numbers consistent with other years ? 
I am not suggesting for one minute that this is ok, just wondering if a number of people who would be susceptible to flu are generally the same that would be susceptible to Covid, and when everyone is vaccinated the additional deaths between both viruses would be within a level that could be reluctantly accepted as a means to the end of the restrictions. 

[Lamia]

10 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

How do you create a more natural social atmosphere indoors, whether it be the pub/school/work, without increasing risk ?

 

Install effective ventilation systems.

[Lamia]

5 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

I know this has probably been mentioned before , but what has the number of flu deaths been since vaccinations were started ? Has there been a drop in flu deaths suggesting Covid could be replacing flu to some extent , rather than in addition to ? Or are flu death numbers consistent with other years ? 
I am not suggesting for one minute that this is ok, just wondering if a number of people who would be susceptible to flu are generally the same that would be susceptible to Covid, and when everyone is vaccinated the additional deaths between both viruses would be within a level that could be reluctantly accepted as a means to the end of the restrictions. 

I believe flu has reduced but that would be pretty obvious given all of the social distancing measures so I don't think you can take much from what has happened so far.

[phart]

Flu is less contagious and is mitigated by a lot of the same measures Covid is so a side effect of mitigating covid is stopping flu spread as well.

Flue deaths have fell of a cliff since the pandemic started. Not sure about them since vaccination has started.

[phart]

Pretty bad news.

[phart]

That's the current vaccine coverage for scotland we've just finished giving everyone in the 9 at risk groups their first dose and not even finished group 6 for second doses.

[phart]

Starting to accelerate as well.

[Morrisandmoo]

5 hours ago, phart said:

That's the current vaccine coverage for scotland we've just finished giving everyone in the 9 at risk groups their first dose and not even finished group 6 for second doses.

I don't understand why we are giving 20 and 30 year old their first jag when there are still priority groups needing fully vaccinated, given how important that 2nd shot is. Is it minimum wait times between doses that are holding us back or something else?

Plus - Scotland are about to win the Euros and then we are into the summer holidays. So might start getting a little stuck (with missed and delayed appointments).

[fringo]

6 hours ago, phart said:

Starting to accelerate as well.

That R rate is pretty worrying.

Thankfully the vaccine is curbing serious illness compared to pre vaccine days but still concerning.

[phart]

1 hour ago, fringo said:

That R rate is pretty worrying.

Thankfully the vaccine is curbing serious illness compared to pre vaccine days but still concerning.

Don't really have the info to confirm that yet, but it is looking promising with the very limited data. 5 week lag between cases and serious illness sometimes The cases were a 5th of what they are now 5 weeks back.

This variant seemed to have a longer lag time. Again prelimenary info.

[Scotty CTA]

Ontario's numbers have improved to the point where we are going to start to re-open our economy three days ahead of schedule.

Non essential shops can open with up to a 15% customer capacity starting this Friday (June 11th, 2021).

The uptake in vaccine has been strong here and will hopefully see us pull ahead of the Delta variant.

(The race is on as my 12 weeks are up in 30 days.)

[Freeedom]

22 hours ago, Morrisandmoo said:

I don't understand why we are giving 20 and 30 year old their first jag when there are still priority groups needing fully vaccinated, given how important that 2nd shot is. Is it minimum wait times between doses that are holding us back or something else?

Plus - Scotland are about to win the Euros and then we are into the summer holidays. So might start getting a little stuck (with missed and delayed appointments).

Probably because 20 and 30 year olds are still at a serious risk from the virus and they need to be vaccinated? And because it is not a question of either or, both are being done at the same time.

[tartandon]

On 6/7/2021 at 12:07 PM, phart said:

Pretty bad news.

based on that, I'm bloody glad I got 2 doses of Pfizer. I would rather have the 88% protection than the 60% protection offered by the AZ vaccine

[Lamia]

2 hours ago, tartandon said:

based on that, I'm bloody glad I got 2 doses of Pfizer. I would rather have the 88% protection than the 60% protection offered by the AZ vaccine

From the start I didn't want the shitty AZ vaccine but knew that is the one I would end up with. The UK Gov has stuck Union flags all over it so we will be stuck with it. Lets hope they develop better version in the future for variants or you too could have to join the club at booster time!

[tartandon]

2 minutes ago, Lamia said:

From the start I didn't want the shitty AZ vaccine but knew that is the one I would end up with. The UK Gov has stuck Union flags all over it so we will be stuck with it. Lets hope they develop better version in the future for variants or you too could have to join the club at booster time!

that's my fear.

I'm hoping that the current tests to mix vaccines for booster jags go disastrously!

[Lamia]

There is this to cling to however

 

 

[Hertsscot]

2 hours ago, tartandon said:

based on that, I'm bloody glad I got 2 doses of Pfizer. I would rather have the 88% protection than the 60% protection offered by the AZ vaccine

I m unclear, is that because the AZ vaccine needs longer time to give fuller protection or does it just give less protection with no caveats?

[tartandon]

14 minutes ago, Hertsscot said:

I m unclear, is that because the AZ vaccine needs longer time to give fuller protection or does it just give less protection with no caveats?

in all the academic papers I've seen that compare the different vaccines, Pfizer always seems to outperform AZ. This also appears to be the case with new variants that have been discovered so far.

The big worry is that each new variant appears to be slightly more vaccine resistant. If this trend continues and we have even more variants, we will be in a situation where the existing vaccines don't work against the newly dominant variants and we will be back to harsher restrictions as the only feasible manner to avoid deaths and hospitalisations.

[Scotty CTA]

1 hour ago, Lamia said:

From the start I didn't want the shitty AZ vaccine but knew that is the one I would end up with. 

Have you had your second shot, Susan?

[Scotty CTA]

2 hours ago, tartandon said:

that's my fear.

I'm hoping that the current tests to mix vaccines for booster jags go disastrously!

Why's that?

I'm not following.

[Scotty CTA]

1 hour ago, Hertsscot said:

I m unclear, is that because the AZ vaccine needs longer time to give fuller protection?

Yes, definitely. 

1 hour ago, Hertsscot said:

...or does it just give less protection with no caveats?

My understand (depending on the person, of course) is that the first shot of AZ will give about 54% protection in the first couple of weeks, then 'slowburn' to about 76% protection at 12 weeks.

If the second shot of AZ  is administered while the person is still around 54% protection (after, say, three weeks) then the 'slowburn' will stop.

My pharmacist told me that an AZ first shot, and a Pfizer/Moderna second shot will give more protection than two AZ's or two Pfizers/Modernas.

(Who knows?)

[Lamia]

7 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

Have you had your second shot, Susan?

Yeah. But like others I fear it will not be long before all this effort leaves us back to square one. I am hoping that the way the virus is mutating is able to be tracked in some way to make it possible to to develop an updated vaccine quickly. It does seem the successful mutations share similar features so far but of course I am far from expert