Covid restrictions extended to 19/7/2021. Your views on how this will pan out.

[Cdd89]

If the QR code is digitally signed, that won’t be possible. However it appears to be encrypted and until the government provides the tools to decrypt and read it, what you say is certainly true.

 

[NorthKent1989]

It’ll be track and trace all over again, barely used - if ever in some venues.

All this will lead to is a rise of unvaxxed pubs or illegal underground pubs otherwise known as speakeasies, people rebelled in the 1920s, 1960s and 1980s and that time it seems has come again.

 

[greyman42]

So from this… A&Es overwhelmed as the patients are skipping out the GP part because they’ve made it really hard to attend over the past year.

There was an article in the Daily Mail about this yesterday.

Capacity at Wembley for the finals is being upped to 60,000. No news yet on quarantine changes, if any, but if the Government are prepared to do this it suggests they might go ahead with an exemption for officials, unless the final does get moved (Italy are now angling for it, citing rising UK cases):

I cannot see a good reason for it not being 90,000.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Cases reported takes a big jump up to 16,135, the last time it was this high (going up) was 17th October. Interestingly I looked at deaths for the same day, 150 vs only 19 today. Patients admitted, (13th October as todays hospitalisations is only for 19th June) around 912 vs todays of 211.

I don't think evidence of the massive break in the link between cases, hospitalisations and deaths needs to be much clearer than that.

 

[kristiang85]

Cases reported takes a big jump up to 16,135, the last time it was this high (going up) was 17th October. Interestingly I looked at deaths for the same day, 150 vs only 19 today. Patients admitted, (13th October as todays hospitalisations is only for 19th June) around 912 vs todays of 211.

I don't think evidence of the massive break in the link between cases, hospitalisations and deaths needs to be much clearer than that.

Indeed. We really need to stop this obsession with positive tests, they are meaningless now.

 

[Eyersey468]

Indeed. We really need to stop this obsession with positive tests, they are meaningless now.

I agree

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Indeed. We really need to stop this obsession with positive tests, they are meaningless now.

You need to convince the media of your view, as the television news programmes still report them and deaths as part of their daily narrative.

 

[kristiang85]

You need to convince the media of your view, as the television news programmes still report them and deaths as part of their daily narrative.

Well yes, that's not going to happen.

If they reported daily cancer, heart disease, suicide, flu, "misadventure", etc deaths in the same way then I could get on board with it. Clearly this is not in their interests though.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Well yes, that's not going to happen.

If they reported daily cancer, heart disease, suicide, flu, "misadventure", etc deaths in the same way then I could get on board with it. Clearly this is not in their interests though.

We also need to convince much of the population. Many in my team are quite nervous and this has not been helped by someone's double jabbed 70 year old father, no underlying health conditions, dying of covid this week.

I am very aware of the chances etc. And that vaccines are not 100% effective but to many people, the closer it is to home the more real it is.

 

[kristiang85]

We also need to convince much of the population. Many in my team are quite nervous and this has not been helped by someone's double jabbed 70 year old father, no underlying health conditions, dying of covid this week.

I am very aware of the chances etc. And that vaccines are not 100% effective but to many people, the closer it is to home the more real it is.

I'm sorry to hear that on behalf of your colleague; all deaths are terrible for those involved and we should obviously remember that statistics are still people. And indeed I agree it does bring it closer to home when those you know are affected. Was this definitely through covid related symptoms? Because that is really rare statistically - so far it seems - for someone with the vaccine and no underlying conditions.

But not wanting to belittle that, I have a former colleague who died in her late 30s because her cancer symptoms werent checked out in time in lockdown 1, despite many attempts on her part.

There are many unwarranted and unexpected deaths; we need to have a mature conversation about this as a nation what risk we can accept. If anything this last year has made me resent restrictions more as I want to live my life fully whilst I can, as you just never know when your number is up. Hence the argument that the media's obsession with covid cases and deaths alone is quite unhealthy.

 

[quantinghome]

Cases reported takes a big jump up to 16,135, the last time it was this high (going up) was 17th October. Interestingly I looked at deaths for the same day, 150 vs only 19 today. Patients admitted, (13th October as todays hospitalisations is only for 19th June) around 912 vs todays of 211.

I don't think evidence of the massive break in the link between cases, hospitalisations and deaths needs to be much clearer than that.

The big jump in cases today is partly due to a large amount of surge testing in Scotland. The England-only figures show cases increasing at about 30% per week which is bang on the trend seen over the last week or so.

The link between cases, hospitalisations and deaths hasn't been broken; we're still seeing them all increase with a lag between each set of data. BUT crucially the ratios of hospitalisations-to-cases and deaths-to-cases are much, much lower than they were compared to January, showing the vaccines are making a big difference.

The question is going to be how long the growth rate of 30% per week continues, and whether surge testing and vaccination can suppress local flare ups. My guess is that worst case we see deaths back up into the hundreds per day.

 

[Domh245]

The question is going to be how long the growth rate of 30% per week continues

The current trend seems to suggest a levelling off of infections, possibly somewhere just north of 10,000 /specimen date, but 19th of July (assuming that doesn't get shifted once more) will inevitably see an increase

My guess is that worst case we see deaths back up into the hundreds per day.

Hundreds of deaths a day is a certainty (though it'll be interesting to see any future split between 'withs' and 'ofs') - the question is whether it's low hundreds or pushing the thousands

 

[Bertie the bus]

All this will lead to is a rise of unvaxxed pubs or illegal underground pubs otherwise known as speakeasies, people rebelled in the 1920s, 1960s and 1980s and that time it seems has come again.

It's looking quite likely that the number of people refusing the vaccine will be around 6 or 7%. I think if businesses are forced to choose they will cater for the 93 or 94% who have been vaccinated. If you are lucky you might get the odd crank like that hairdresser in Australia who put up posters saying she would refuse to cut the hair of vaccinated people but that is about it.

 

[NorthKent1989]

It's looking quite likely that the number of people refusing the vaccine will be around 6 or 7%. I think if businesses are forced to choose they will cater for the 93 or 94% who have been vaccinated. If you are lucky you might get the odd crank like that hairdresser in Australia who put up posters saying she would refuse to cut the hair of vaccinated people but that is about it.

So the hairdresser you mentioned is a crank in your words for not wanting to serve vaxxed people, then who are the business owners who refuse people entry just because they haven’t had the jab? What shall we call them? I have a fair few names to call them that I shan’t share on here, but why is she crank?

So are you for or against segregation? Because this is how it starts, authoritarianism isn’t a good way to go especially for a virus we will have to live with, has a 99% survival rate and even when vaxxed you can still catch and transmit, I fail to see the danger of an unvaxxed person poses to a vaxxed person or vice versa at this stage.

It won’t stop at going to the pub or theatre, it’ll continue to whether you can shop for food, it’s coercion and last I checked forcing someone to get medical treatment they don’t consent to is against the law, segregation is against the law.

I’m going to confess something here but I for one no longer give a single toss about Covid or cases, and I don’t see why our lives have to be up ended just so a few authoritarians can feel all cozy, safe and have any excuse to look down on others.

 

[Bertie the bus]

What would I call business owners who, if forced to make a choice between catering for 94% of the population and 6%, chose the 94%? Sensible.

As for your claim the government is going to prevent you from buying food, that is utter nonsense.

 

[Bantamzen]

What would I call business owners who, if forced to make a choice between catering for 94% of the population and 6%, chose the 94%? Sensible.

As for your claim the government is going to prevent you from buying food, that is utter nonsense.

So you are in favour of a medical apartheid? OK what about people who haven't had a flu jab, should they also be segregated? After all flu can kill tens of thousands in winter seasons. And what about the MMR jab, would you include that too?

Hey, how about an age apartheid? After all older people are more likely to get sick, so how about we keep them away from younger people. So as younger people tend to be the ones working in public facing roles, let's build walled off zones for over 60s to keep them from spreading illness to the workers....

I hope by now my point is made. But if it is not then understand that I find a mentality where some want people segregated on the basis of medical interventions, gender, age, race, social standing, financial position etc fundamentally disturbing. History is full of examples of these, and the consequences they reap. We should be learning from history and the mistakes we made, not seeking to repeat them.

If you are looking for a risk free life, and want anyone you might perceive as a threat kept away from you, it is up to you to make the necessary changes to your life, not for everyone else to change theirs. Life comes attached with risks, we either deal with that reality, or we try to hide from it. The only problem for the hiders is that life knows exactly where they are.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

All this will lead to is a rise of unvaxxed pubs or illegal underground pubs otherwise known as speakeasies, people rebelled in the 1920s, 1960s and 1980s and that time it seems has come again.

In case you have not noticed, pubs have been closing for a number of years now. Call in at any of the large supermarket branches where you will see the reason, neatly stacked up in cases, ready to be taken home.

 

[NorthKent1989]

What would I call business owners who, if forced to make a choice between catering for 94% of the population and 6%, chose the 94%? Sensible.

As for your claim the government is going to prevent you from buying food, that is utter nonsense.

A year ago the idea of vaccine passports just to live a normal social life was “utter nonsense” and now look at where we are now, funny that isn’t it.

You basically answered my question for me you are for segregation and apartheid, remember at one time it was legal and sensible to put a sign saying “No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs” legality does not equate to morality I sincerely hope you understand that

 

[DelayRepay]

What would I call business owners who, if forced to make a choice between catering for 94% of the population and 6%, chose the 94%? Sensible.

As for your claim the government is going to prevent you from buying food, that is utter nonsense.

I don't think a business which decides to only cater for vaccinated people will still have access to 94% of the population.

I am one of the 94% who will be double vaccinated by 19 July, but I would not be happy being asked to prove this to go for a pint or a bite to eat. Given the choice, I would avoid any venue which had such a policy, even though I could comply with it. I am sure I am not the only person who feels this way.

At the end of the day my vaccine protects me. Even if I do catch Covid it most likely stop me getting very ill. The only people vulnerable to Covid will be those who've not had a vaccine. For a small minority there will be genuine medical reasons, but for the majority it's a simple choice. If people have chosen not to get vaccinated and go on to catch Covid, that's their bad luck.

 

[NorthKent1989]

In case you have not noticed, pubs have been closing for a number of years now. Call in at any of the large supermarket branches where you will see the reason, neatly stacked up in cases, ready to be taken home.

And they’ll close down even faster if they try and enforce this nonsensical idea of checking if someone is vaccinated for a virus which has a 99% survival rate, pubs and restaurants will want customers after this, so any notion of people feeling smug and superior will be surly dashed, they’ve scrapped the vaccine passports in Israel and Texas and Florida have been opened for months back to normal without a vaccine passport for anything, so the case for them isn’t necessary, Covid isn’t deadly to the vast majority of people

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

And they’ll close down even faster if they try and enforce this nonsensical idea of checking if someone is vaccinated for a virus which has a 99% survival rate

Why do you think there was the move for breweries to close pubs in the first place commencing a good number of years ago?

 

[NorthKent1989]

Why do you think there was the move for breweries to close pubs in the first place commencing a good number of years ago?

I don’t know but it can’t relate to Covid seeing as Covid wasn’t around years ago

 

[YorkshireBear]

I'm sorry to hear that on behalf of your colleague; all deaths are terrible for those involved and we should obviously remember that statistics are still people. And indeed I agree it does bring it closer to home when those you know are affected. Was this definitely through covid related symptoms? Because that is really rare statistically - so far it seems - for someone with the vaccine and no underlying conditions.

But not wanting to belittle that, I have a former colleague who died in her late 30s because her cancer symptoms werent checked out in time in lockdown 1, despite many attempts on her part.

There are many unwarranted and unexpected deaths; we need to have a mature conversation about this as a nation what risk we can accept. If anything this last year has made me resent restrictions more as I want to live my life fully whilst I can, as you just never know when your number is up. Hence the argument that the media's obsession with covid cases and deaths alone is quite unhealthy.

Oh absolutely! And that is the conversation I had with them. Which once we'd got the end (our colleague wasn't in the call as this would be crass) all I said was, all I have learnt this morning is that I am still, sometime in the future, going to die. It was a mature conversation but like I say they are nervous.

My friends, family and colleagues all fit into own of three categories.

1. Fed up, want to live their lives and while still following rules for masks and isolation etc. Push the boundaries elsewhere especially over recent months in terms of seeing friends and family indoors before rules allowed.

2. Happy to follow the rules but cannot wait for it to be over. May push the boundaries a little.

3. So nervous about what this virus can do that the rules and restrictions make them feel they have control so they follow them religiously.

I don't know any locktivists and I'm of the view there isn't actually that many. I have sympathy with 3, having been scared witless (in some ways understandably), the rules give them control and a way to cope. I also find 3 become quite more comfortable as friends and family move to category 2.

I've lost the point of what I'm saying but basically. Group 3 need comforting out of this nervousness not shouting at and once they do. For me that is the vast vast majority of the population so slowly the pressure to release restrictions will increase.

I see travel rules are being reviewed today, there is only one reason to review rules, and that is to change them.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I don’t know but it can’t relate to Covid seeing as Covid wasn’t around years ago

The answer is there has been a change in the way people live.

 

[NorthKent1989]

The answer is there has been a change in the way people live.

Yes there has been a change, WFH will remain most likely but beyond that most people want the old normalities too and that includes living a normal social life and not on zoom

 

[35B]

So you are in favour of a medical apartheid? OK what about people who haven't had a flu jab, should they also be segregated? After all flu can kill tens of thousands in winter seasons. And what about the MMR jab, would you include that too?

Hey, how about an age apartheid? After all older people are more likely to get sick, so how about we keep them away from younger people. So as younger people tend to be the ones working in public facing roles, let's build walled off zones for over 60s to keep them from spreading illness to the workers....

I hope by now my point is made. But if it is not then understand that I find a mentality where some want people segregated on the basis of medical interventions, gender, age, race, social standing, financial position etc fundamentally disturbing. History is full of examples of these, and the consequences they reap. We should be learning from history and the mistakes we made, not seeking to repeat them.

If you are looking for a risk free life, and want anyone you might perceive as a threat kept away from you, it is up to you to make the necessary changes to your life, not for everyone else to change theirs. Life comes attached with risks, we either deal with that reality, or we try to hide from it. The only problem for the hiders is that life knows exactly where they are.

I call a spade a spade; the hairdresser referred to who refused to serve the vaccinated is a crank. Nothing to do with whether she does or does not support vaccination, or compulsion, but the anti scientific nonsense that some anti-vaxxers are spouting about the vaccines being dangerous to others.

 

[philosopher]

Oh absolutely! And that is the conversation I had with them. Which once we'd got the end (our colleague wasn't in the call as this would be crass) all I said was, all I have learnt this morning is that I am still, sometime in the future, going to die. It was a mature conversation but like I say they are nervous.

My friends, family and colleagues all fit into own of three categories.

1. Fed up, want to live their lives and while still following rules for masks and isolation etc. Push the boundaries elsewhere especially over recent months in terms of seeing friends and family indoors before rules allowed.

2. Happy to follow the rules but cannot wait for it to be over. May push the boundaries a little.

3. So nervous about what this virus can do that the rules and restrictions make them feel they have control so they follow them religiously.

I don't know any locktivists and I'm of the view there isn't actually that many. I have sympathy with 3, having been scared witless (in some ways understandably), the rules give them control and a way to cope. I also find 3 become quite more comfortable as friends and family move to category 2.

I've lost the point of what I'm saying but basically. Group 3 need comforting out of this nervousness not shouting at and once they do. For me that is the vast vast majority of the population so slowly the pressure to release restrictions will increase.

I see travel rules are being reviewed today, there is only one reason to review rules, and that is to change them.

To me those who are pro lockdown can be split into two groups, those who are still very frightened of Covid and those who seem preferred the restricted way of life. The former I can sympathise with as they may have genuine reasons to be scared. The latter I can’t, why should life be permanently changed because you prefer it if most of rest of the population want life closer to what it was like in 2019. If there are certain bits of the last 16 months you prefer such as greater WFH that is fine, however don’t force your preferences on the rest of the population.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I call a spade a spade; the hairdresser referred to who refused to serve the vaccinated is a crank. Nothing to do with whether she does or does not support vaccination, or compulsion, but the anti scientific nonsense that some anti-vaxxers are spouting about the vaccines being dangerous to others.

If the hairdresser is a crank for not serving vaccinated then those who refuse to serve those who have chosen not to get the vaccine for a 99% survival rate virus are quite frankly hysterical segregationists.

There have been reports of adverse reactions to the vaccine, maybe few and far between but one can’t deny it

 

[35B]

If the hairdresser is a crank for not serving vaccinated then those who refuse to serve those who have chosen not to get the vaccine for a 99% survival rate virus are quite frankly hysterical segregationists.

There have been reports of adverse reactions to the vaccine, maybe few and far between but one can’t deny it

The difference is the reasoning. A business refusing to serve someone who hasn't been vaccinated is indeed an over-reaction, especially where there are ether mandatory precautions or (as in Australia) the risk is basically zero. But refusing to serve someone who has been vaccinated because of a wholly illusory, known to be false, concern over the risk of the person vaccinated being a danger to the (presumably unvaccinated) person providing the service is in a different league of bonkersness.

There is anti-vaxx propaganda out there which alleges that vaccines can "shed", and that this "shedding" is dangerous. That is the basis on which some businesses refuse to serve, and in one case, employ the vaccinated (the cases I've come across are in the US, not Australia). It is pseudoscientific hokum, has nothing to do with questions of adverse reactions to the vaccine from those who've received it*, and is part of a campaign of lies from people who no sane person should take seriously.

* - it's also the case that the anti-vaxxers are trying to exaggerate the perceived risk of those adverse reactions, spreading propaganda and lies to support their bogus argument that vaccination is a bad thing.

 

[NorthKent1989]

The difference is the reasoning. A business refusing to serve someone who hasn't been vaccinated is indeed an over-reaction, especially where there are ether mandatory precautions or (as in Australia) the risk is basically zero. But refusing to serve someone who has been vaccinated because of a wholly illusory, known to be false, concern over the risk of the person vaccinated being a danger to the (presumably unvaccinated) person providing the service is in a different league of bonkersness.

There is anti-vaxx propaganda out there which alleges that vaccines can "shed", and that this "shedding" is dangerous. That is the basis on which some businesses refuse to serve, and in one case, employ the vaccinated (the cases I've come across are in the US, not Australia). It is pseudoscientific hokum, has nothing to do with questions of adverse reactions to the vaccine from those who've received it*, and is part of a campaign of lies from people who no sane person should take seriously.

* - it's also the case that the anti-vaxxers are trying to exaggerate the perceived risk of those adverse reactions, spreading propaganda and lies to support their bogus argument that vaccination is a bad thing.

My cousin has had the vaccine and had an adverse reaction, he’s an NHS worker, 26, he has had breathing difficulties since and has not gone for his 2nd Jab, now his case is probably a minority case, is he an anti vaxxer for not wanting the 2nd Jab? Even though he is a minority case of an adverse reaction to the jab, it still needs to be looked into, the government were quick enough extending restrictions because of cases, not deaths, cases

To me those who are pro lockdown can be split into two groups, those who are still very frightened of Covid and those who seem preferred the restricted way of life. The former I can sympathise with as they may have genuine reasons to be scared. The latter I can’t, why should life be permanently changed because you prefer it if most of rest of the population want life closer to what it was like in 2019. If there are certain bits of the last 16 months you prefer such as greater WFH that is fine, however don’t force your preferences on the rest of the population.

I sympathise with those still frightened of Covid but that group should be small now, Covid hasn’t become the world ending pandemic we thought it would be back in March 2020, we are clearly at the other side of that now, and it’s partly thanks to them that not only restrictions have been extended but talks of a winter lockdown, I am losing patience with them, life is a risk every single day.

So you are in favour of a medical apartheid? OK what about people who haven't had a flu jab, should they also be segregated? After all flu can kill tens of thousands in winter seasons. And what about the MMR jab, would you include that too?

Hey, how about an age apartheid? After all older people are more likely to get sick, so how about we keep them away from younger people. So as younger people tend to be the ones working in public facing roles, let's build walled off zones for over 60s to keep them from spreading illness to the workers....

I hope by now my point is made. But if it is not then understand that I find a mentality where some want people segregated on the basis of medical interventions, gender, age, race, social standing, financial position etc fundamentally disturbing. History is full of examples of these, and the consequences they reap. We should be learning from history and the mistakes we made, not seeking to repeat them.

If you are looking for a risk free life, and want anyone you might perceive as a threat kept away from you, it is up to you to make the necessary changes to your life, not for everyone else to change theirs. Life comes attached with risks, we either deal with that reality, or we try to hide from it. The only problem for the hiders is that life knows exactly where they are.

It seems that some people on here are quite keen on authoritarianism as long as it doesn’t effect them, just so they can sit on their lofty perch and virtue signal and judge everyone else, they have no real understanding on how authoritarians work, but they’re usually the first to complain when it effects them at some point.