22nd February - Roadmap out of the pandemic, lifting of restrictions.

[WelshBluebird]

The way we're going with bumbling Boris, he'd have us on a life long lockdown

Can we please stop with the unnecessary hyperbole?
We are not going to have a "life long lockdown" and that is certainly not what anyone wants or is planning to do.

And in terms of holidays in late September, the poster who replied to your question is spot on that given the current view it is likely to be restrictions from other countries that will be potential blockers for holidays around that time (it's already been discussed at length in the vaccine passport thread - it doesn't really matter if our government doesn't want restrictions of overseas travel - if other countries do then that is up to them).

 

[kristiang85]

Let's just say I'm already planning holidays for September, but I'm not booking anything thats not fully refundable until nearer the time.

 

[VauxhallandI]

Can we please stop with the unnecessary hyperbole?
We are not going to have a "life long lockdown" and that is certainly not what anyone wants or is planning to do.

And in terms of holidays in late September, the poster who replied to your question is spot on that given the current view it is likely to be restrictions from other countries that will be potential blockers for holidays around that time (it's already been discussed at length in the vaccine passport thread - it doesn't really matter if our government doesn't want restrictions of overseas travel - if other countries do then that is up to them).

Only if we can stop the mutant hyperbole along with many others...

 

[philosopher]

Can we please stop with the unnecessary hyperbole?
We are not going to have a "life long lockdown" and that is certainly not what anyone wants or is planning to do.

And in terms of holidays in late September, the poster who replied to your question is spot on that given the current view it is likely to be restrictions from other countries that will be potential blockers for holidays around that time (it's already been discussed at length in the vaccine passport thread - it doesn't really matter if our government doesn't want restrictions of overseas travel - if other countries do then that is up to them).

June the 21st is only four months away and I do think Boris will genuinely stick to this date unless something goes badly wrong. If all domestic restrictions do end of this date and are not reintroduced, more than half the year will have no domestic social distancing laws.

 

[Luke McDonnell]

I have just read a post on another forum from someone who is of the opinion that short restrictions may have to be introduced in the respiratory virus season every year for the next few years especially if vaccine resistance becomes an issue it is that sort of thing that makes me worried an anxious I don't want to live with the threat of new restrictions coming back every winter even if it is to 'protect the NHS' as surely even with new variants the strong T cell response should provide protections against severe C19 and event variants which have some degree of resistance to vaccines it is not like they are totally ineffective not even including the much better testing and surveillance that we will have in place to keep cases of any new variant low. After 21st June IMO lockdowns should never be used again we need to get back to normal

 

[Bertie the bus]

June the 21st is only four months away and I do think Boris will genuinely stick to this date unless something goes badly wrong. If all domestic restrictions do end of this date and are not reintroduced, more than half the year will have no domestic social distancing laws.

Nobody can say for certain when things will reopen or be permitted but I think you need to look at why this roadmap was created. It was due to pressure from Tory backbenchers. I’m not convinced it was either created in good faith, or just to try to shut people up, or that the dates will be met or there is a particular desire to meet them. We’ll see as things (hopefully) progress.

 

[Bald Rick]

Nobody can say for certain when things will reopen or be permitted but I think you need to look at why this roadmap was created. It was due to pressure from Tory backbenchers. I’m not convinced it was either created in good faith, or just to try to shut people up, or that the dates will be met or there is a particular desire to meet them. We’ll see as things (hopefully) progress.

That’s fairly conspirational.

It was created because it was the right thing to do!

 

[VauxhallandI]

That’s fairly conspirational.

It was created because it was the right thing to do!

Yep, I get the feeling that this time the cat will not be easily put back in the bag

 

[yorksrob]

I have just read a post on another forum from someone who is of the opinion that short restrictions may have to be introduced in the respiratory virus season every year for the next few years especially if vaccine resistance becomes an issue it is that sort of thing that makes me worried an anxious I don't want to live with the threat of new restrictions coming back every winter even if it is to 'protect the NHS' as surely even with new variants the strong T cell response should provide protections against severe C19 and event variants which have some degree of resistance to vaccines it is not like they are totally ineffective not even including the much better testing and surveillance that we will have in place to keep cases of any new variant low. After 21st June IMO lockdowns should never be used again we need to get back to normal

A competent opposition should hold the Governments feet to the fire to make sure that the capacity is introduced to the NHS in time for next winter. In comparison to the economic costs of shutting down the economy, the cost of this should be negligible.

Whether we'll get that, or continue to have a non-opposition cheerleading along more restrictions, remains to be seen.

 

[packermac]

A competent opposition should hold the Governments feet to the fire to make sure that the capacity is introduced to the NHS in time for next winter. In comparison to the economic costs of shutting down the economy, the cost of this should be negligible.

Whether we'll get that, or continue to have a non-opposition cheerleading along more restrictions, remains to be seen.

And where would al the doctors and nurses, whom it takes years to train, come from by next winter even if that did happen?

 

[yorksrob]

And where would al the doctors and nurses, whom it takes years to train, come from by next winter even if that did happen?

They ought to have been training them on the job over the past two years.

They cannot go around shutting down the country every winter to supposedly save the NHS.

 

[MikeWM]

And where would al the doctors and nurses, whom it takes years to train, come from by next winter even if that did happen?

The perfect is the enemy of the good. Doctors and nurses need to know a very wide range of diseases and skills, so they take time to train.

A simple approach would be to get talking to some of the millions of people on furlough who want to do something useful with their lives, and offer them a decent amount of money to be trained, *specifically* in treating Covid patients.

I absolutely refuse to believe that you couldn't get someone trained to a reasonable level of competency in treating and managing *one disease* in a period of 6-9 months.

The problem is apparent lack of political will to do it - we seem to prefer destroying the entire country instead, for some unknown reason.

 

[Luke McDonnell]

A competent opposition should hold the Governments feet to the fire to make sure that the capacity is introduced to the NHS in time for next winter. In comparison to the economic costs of shutting down the economy, the cost of this should be negligible.

Whether we'll get that, or continue to have a non-opposition cheerleading along more restrictions, remains to be seen.

Interestingly enough the same person seemed to suggest that restrictions could have to be re introduced due to low vaccine takeup or not enough being vaccinated being a possibility well if we did have pressure on the NHS for that reason I certainly can't see the vaccinated complying with any restrictions would you agree with me on that one and do you think if we got pressure on the NHS due to lower than expected uptake do you think it would make a strong case for making the vaccine mandatory or de facto mandatory - as I think that making the vaccine mandatory in that case would be far less damaging than population wider restrictions - remember we have been legally barred from seeing or family/friends due to protecting the NHS, so if vaccine refusers are causing a problem with the NHS should they legally be required to have it as a less economically and socially damaging way of protecting the NHS?

I agree with you after this summer restrictions especially the more draconian ones are not sustainable especially that people have been vaccinated and I don't see the vaccinated population complying with the restrictions on household mixing once vaccinated and the immunity has kicked in (vaccine+3 weeks) even though we are not officially allowed to have visitors from another household until May I am sure if everyones vaccinated people will meet up.

 

[yorksrob]

Interestingly enough the same person seemed to suggest that restrictions could have to be re introduced due to low vaccine takeup or not enough being vaccinated being a possibility well if we did have pressure on the NHS for that reason I certainly can't see the vaccinated complying with any restrictions would you agree with me on that one and do you think if we got pressure on the NHS due to lower than expected uptake do you think it would make a strong case for making the vaccine mandatory or de facto mandatory - as I think that making the vaccine mandatory in that case would be far less damaging than population wider restrictions - remember we have been legally barred from seeing or family/friends due to protecting the NHS, so if vaccine refusers are causing a problem with the NHS should they legally be required to have it as a less economically and socially damaging way of protecting the NHS?

I agree with you after this summer restrictions especially the more draconian ones are not sustainable especially that people have been vaccinated and I don't see the vaccinated population complying with the restrictions on household mixing once vaccinated and the immunity has kicked in (vaccine+3 weeks) even though we are not officially allowed to have visitors from another household until May I am sure if everyones vaccinated people will meet up.

I must admit, I don't believe that people should be forced to have the vaccination, and I think denying people services because of it is not the sort of society I want to live in. At the same time, I don't believe the population should be forced to live with restrictions because of people who won't have it (bearing in mind, there may also be some people who genuinely can't have it as well).

I think the answer is to get people used to the rolling vaccination programme, but we also need to accept that mutations might throw up a "bad covid year" as they do with flu. NHS capacity needs to be brought into line with our European neighbours as a starting point.

Also, the health sector has gotten too powerful over the past year in forming policy, and needs to have its neck wound in.

 

[35B]

The perfect is the enemy of the good. Doctors and nurses need to know a very wide range of diseases and skills, so they take time to train.

A simple approach would be to get talking to some of the millions of people on furlough who want to do something useful with their lives, and offer them a decent amount of money to be trained, *specifically* in treating Covid patients.

I absolutely refuse to believe that you couldn't get someone trained to a reasonable level of competency in treating and managing *one disease* in a period of 6-9 months.

The problem is apparent lack of political will to do it - we seem to prefer destroying the entire country instead, for some unknown reason.

Have you read the accounts from medics about what treating Covid involves? Because "one disease" is precisely what it isn't.

There is also the minor matter of how doctors and, to a lesser extent, nurses train. Two years gets them to just about the point where they're let near a patient, as they have to learn an enormous amount of basic science first.

 

[MikeWM]

Have you read the accounts from medics about what treating Covid involves? Because "one disease" is precisely what it isn't.

Err, by definition that is *precisely* what it is! Yes, it may also then cause other problems, the same as other nasty viruses can, but for the complex cases you still have the fully-trained doctors and nurses who know about those things too.

There is also the minor matter of how doctors and, to a lesser extent, nurses train. Two years gets them to just about the point where they're let near a patient, as they have to learn an enormous amount of basic science first.

As I say, the perfect is the enemy of the good. If I'm really ill, I'd rather get some reasonable standard of healthcare from someone with some basic training, if the alternative is sitting at home with paracetamol and hoping I don't get worse (which, incredibly, still appears to be the only advice we're given to follow if you get the virus and aren't (yet) at death's door).

 

[Bertie the bus]

That’s fairly conspirational.

It was created because it was the right thing to do!

Looking at what has panned out over the last year and assuming the same will continue is perception. The government hasn’t done the right thing once since last spring. It tells people what they want to hear, has no credible plan to deliver it and then u-turns. Although some will refuse to admit it, everybody knows infection rates will increase, probably significantly, when schools return. That jeopardises all future dates. If the government had wanted to do the right thing it would also have lifted stay at home at the same time schools returned, or wouldn’t have imposed it in the first place, as outdoor activities pose an incredibly small risk.

 

[Bald Rick]

Looking at what has panned out over the last year and assuming the same will continue is perception. The government hasn’t done the right think once since last spring.

I’m no defender of the Government, but I’d say their early ordering of vaccines, independent assessment of vaccination priorities, and the exceptional roll out of vaccines to date, are all things they got ‘right’.

 

[35B]

Looking at what has panned out over the last year and assuming the same will continue is perception. The government hasn’t done the right thing once since last spring. It tells people what they want to hear, has no credible plan to deliver it and then u-turns. Although some will refuse to admit it, everybody knows infection rates will increase, probably significantly, when schools return. That jeopardises all future dates. If the government had wanted to do the right thing it would also have lifted stay at home at the same time schools returned, or wouldn’t have imposed it in the first place, as outdoor activities pose an incredibly small risk.

So what have they done with the vaccines?

And if they've not done the right thing once, does that mean they shouldn't have locked down last March, and then should have locked down in the summer? Because I'm confused.

 

[Silver Cobra]

I’m no defender of the Government, but I’d say their early ordering of vaccines, independent assessment of vaccination priorities, and the exceptional roll out of vaccines to date, are all things they got ‘right’.

For sure. In less than 3 months, over 19 million people have received their first dose of vaccine, and 730K of those have had both doses. So almost 20 million vaccines issued in under 3 months. For all the things the government have got wrong throughout the pandemic, we do have to give them credit for how well the vaccination scheme is going.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

For some reason Corby is a particular hotspot. (Although that map isn’t fine enough to show it)

Corby currently has worst 7 day case rate across UK at 297/100k but its falling and way below the 1500/100k that some areas achieved at the peak.

I don't think that's a particularly unreasonable hypothesis. It is highly transmissible and clearly had some ability to reinfect people who already had other strains, albeit not generally making them seriously ill. It was allowed to burn through a large proportion of the population in the southeast very quickly with minimal testing and low levels of restrictions standing in the way. Obviously there were consequences in terms of hospitalisations and deaths, but because a lot of the cases were reinfections, it wasn't as extreme as it otherwise might have been.

Now it's up North, the spread has been slowed but not at all prevented by lockdown, and so it's still doing the rounds. Meanwhile targeted mass testing, which was foisted on those areas in a misguided belief that track and trace is useful, is accurately tracking it around the place and giving high numbers.

Interesting hypothesis and cases were rising in Kent even during Lockdown 2 then put in back in Tier 3 with shops to be open in December the cases transmitted into adjacent areas rapidly as well only moderated by Lockdown 3. So its spread North and Sth West is currently being inhibited by current lockdown. It may well be that a strategy which lets it rip through the population is abetter one.

Looking at what has panned out over the last year and assuming the same will continue is perception. The government hasn’t done the right thing once since last spring. It tells people what they want to hear, has no credible plan to deliver it and then u-turns. Although some will refuse to admit it, everybody knows infection rates will increase, probably significantly, when schools return. That jeopardises all future dates. If the government had wanted to do the right thing it would also have lifted stay at home at the same time schools returned, or wouldn’t have imposed it in the first place, as outdoor activities pose an incredibly small risk.

Come on Boris told on numerous

I’m no defender of the Government, but I’d say their early ordering of vaccines, independent assessment of vaccination priorities, and the exceptional roll out of vaccines to date, are all things they got ‘right’.

Have to give them the vaccine order but the roll out is down the NHS and has worked so effectively because it was left to them deliver and not some overpaid consultancy organisation. In all the learning I hope they now realise beefing up directors of public health organisation is the way to manage future outbreaks.
occasions schools were safe

 

[brad465]

And where would al the doctors and nurses, whom it takes years to train, come from by next winter even if that did happen?

Have you read the accounts from medics about what treating Covid involves? Because "one disease" is precisely what it isn't.

There is also the minor matter of how doctors and, to a lesser extent, nurses train. Two years gets them to just about the point where they're let near a patient, as they have to learn an enormous amount of basic science first.

Just because it takes a long time to train them, doesn't mean we shouldn't train more of them. This may well not be in time for next winter, but ultimately as time goes on more people will be reaching ages where they need more medical support in line with rapid population growth since the war, not to mention there'll be another pandemic one day we need to be ready for. There were reports recently of record numbers applying for medical related courses, showing at least a strong interest in the profession exists, but what we need is to boost the capacity to train them.

 

[Bikeman78]

Interesting to note that, with the mild sunny weather, the volume of traffic on the roads has noticably increased. The first properly warm weekend will be interesting.

 

[Bald Rick]

Have to give them the vaccine order but the roll out is down the NHS and has worked so effectively because it was left to them deliver and not some overpaid consultancy organisation.

Agreed, but Governement did decide to get the NHS to do it...

 

[route101]

Interesting to note that, with the mild sunny weather, the volume of traffic on the roads has noticably increased. The first properly warm weekend will be interesting.

Loads of people out walking today, even people on buses/trains on non essential trips by the looks.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Loads of people out walking today, even people on buses/trains on non essential trips by the looks.

How on earth can you tell if someone is on a bus or train for a non-essential reason? Can you tell by the style of their hair or something?

 

[route101]

How on earth can you tell if someone is on a bus or train for a non-essential reason? Can you tell by the style of their hair or something?

By the looks. group of 4 on BMXs on the train!

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Latest hospital admission data show London down from a peak of 977 on 6/1 to 103 on 23/3 being the latest data. This is neatly tracking cases down and does seem the areas that had the highest peaks have also come down the fastest.

 

[Crossover]

Although some will refuse to admit it, everybody knows infection rates will increase, probably significantly, when schools return. That jeopardises all future dates. If the government had wanted to do the right thing it would also have lifted stay at home at the same time schools returned, or wouldn’t have imposed it in the first place, as outdoor activities pose an incredibly small risk.

Of course infections rates will rise, but cases are not one of the 4 explictly stated "tests" set out by Government for easements. Any backtracking on this metric being included in the "tests" needs to be robustly questioned.

 

[RuralRambler]

The perfect is the enemy of the good. Doctors and nurses need to know a very wide range of diseases and skills, so they take time to train.

A simple approach would be to get talking to some of the millions of people on furlough who want to do something useful with their lives, and offer them a decent amount of money to be trained, *specifically* in treating Covid patients.

I absolutely refuse to believe that you couldn't get someone trained to a reasonable level of competency in treating and managing *one disease* in a period of 6-9 months.

The problem is apparent lack of political will to do it - we seem to prefer destroying the entire country instead, for some unknown reason.

Who is going to train them? The medical schools/Unis are already full of medical students as they always are, due to the gross over-subscription. You can't "magic" all the people needed to train them, the rooms/labs for them to train in, etc. As it is, the doctors' professional body sometimes veto proposed increased in trainee numbers as there are physically and personnel limits as to how many can be trained at once.