Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
filbertway

Coronavirus Thread

By filbertway, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Legend_in_blue said:

The original guidance stated 3 weeks.  Govt ignored this and went for 12.  Now we're being told 8?  Mine was 5 lol

 

They make stuff up as they go along.  As and when it suits.

 

The push is all about getting 1st jabs to 18 to 30 year olds.  Everything else is secondary to that right now.

No they react to research being carried out along the way.  Its called science.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

100% agree but given that the trick here is to get as many people double jabbed as quickly as is logistically possible, one would think that they would set a target of five/six weeks …….my suspicion is that they don’t have the Pfizer supplies to do this. 

This is not the case.  Realise the second Jab is a booster, and if you haven't allowed the first Jab to have maximum effect you negate the benefit of the booster to lower overall effect.  See?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Legend_in_blue

Legend_in_blue

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

No they react to research being carried out along the way.  Its called science.

The initial reaction to the science was to ignore guidance.  That's how the UK played it.  One study comes out and now it's OK to go to 8 weeks instead?  Little late, the majority of people taking up jabs already have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dunge

Dunge

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

The initial reaction to the science was to ignore guidance.  That's how the UK played it.  One study comes out and now it's OK to go to 8 weeks instead?  Little late, the majority of people taking up jabs already have.

You make it sound like they did it on a whim, like it was all Boris Johnson rolling a 12-sided dice and saying “that many weeks”. These were complex practical and theoretical discussions between scientists, not forgetting that AZ were already talking behind the scenes about having longer gaps between the jabs. Pfizer merely said 3 weeks to begin with because that’s what they had tested in their trials. I don’t have an issue with that advice, and nor do I have an issue with the UK’s experts - to me proving themselves to be some of if not the best in the world on the subject, taking the tools that had been created, then using theory and data to maximise their effects. It’s how we should be operating, rather than waiting on the WHO, who seem to get left further and further behind.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buce

Buce

Posted
Posted

BMA calls for 'urgent rethink' of government's Covid strategy, saying it is allowing virus to ‘let rip’

The British Medical Association, effectively the trade union for doctors, has called for “an urgent rethink” of the government’s Covid strategy, arguing that Boris Johnson has gone too far in lifting restrictions. Dr Chaand Nagpaul, the chair of the BMA council, has frequently questioned government policy in the past, but this morning he issued a particularly strong critique, arguing that the media focus on the so-called pingdemic is missing the point. He said: "The government’s current public infection control strategy is not working, it is leading to rocketing case numbers with more illness in the community, more people in hospital, and more people having to isolate. It is time for an urgent rethink rather than staying on the same course. BMA members across the country are seeing patient care threatened as surges in Covid illness is resulting in hospitals having to cancel more non-urgent care and GPs are overstretched with demand. Local public health units are overwhelmed with calls from schools and businesses. These pressures are now being exacerbated by increasing numbers of health service staff themselves falling ill or self-isolating, and unable to work at a time when they are most needed. Other key services such as supermarkets are telling us that they are struggling to put food on their shelves due to staff absences.The government needs to wake up. This is not a problem about excessive pinging of the NHS app, but is a direct result of lack of effective measures by government that is allowing the virus to let rip throughout the nation. The BMA has repeatedly warned that amidst the highest levels of infections in the world, now is not the right time to abandon legal restrictions such as social distancing and mask wearing - and we are likely to see this situation continue to worsen as a result."

On Monday the government announced that fully vaccinated frontline health and social care workers will be able to use daily testing as an alternative to isolation, if they have been in contact with someone testing positive, in some circumstances. (This is broadly the same policy extended to food depot workers, and to some critical workers, last night). But Nagpaul argued this policy was a mistake. He said: "Exempting healthcare staff from self-isolation to get them back to work is a desperate and potentially unsafe policy that does not address the root problem. The safety of patients and staff must be paramount. People go to see healthcare professionals in order to get better, not to risk getting infected, and staff should not fear transmission of the virus from their own colleagues."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dsr-burnley

dsr-burnley

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, Buce said:

BMA calls for 'urgent rethink' of government's Covid strategy, saying it is allowing virus to ‘let rip’

The British Medical Association, effectively the trade union for doctors, has called for “an urgent rethink” of the government’s Covid strategy, arguing that Boris Johnson has gone too far in lifting restrictions. Dr Chaand Nagpaul, the chair of the BMA council, has frequently questioned government policy in the past, but this morning he issued a particularly strong critique, arguing that the media focus on the so-called pingdemic is missing the point. He said: "The government’s current public infection control strategy is not working, it is leading to rocketing case numbers with more illness in the community, more people in hospital, and more people having to isolate. It is time for an urgent rethink rather than staying on the same course. BMA members across the country are seeing patient care threatened as surges in Covid illness is resulting in hospitals having to cancel more non-urgent care and GPs are overstretched with demand. Local public health units are overwhelmed with calls from schools and businesses. These pressures are now being exacerbated by increasing numbers of health service staff themselves falling ill or self-isolating, and unable to work at a time when they are most needed. Other key services such as supermarkets are telling us that they are struggling to put food on their shelves due to staff absences.The government needs to wake up. This is not a problem about excessive pinging of the NHS app, but is a direct result of lack of effective measures by government that is allowing the virus to let rip throughout the nation. The BMA has repeatedly warned that amidst the highest levels of infections in the world, now is not the right time to abandon legal restrictions such as social distancing and mask wearing - and we are likely to see this situation continue to worsen as a result."

On Monday the government announced that fully vaccinated frontline health and social care workers will be able to use daily testing as an alternative to isolation, if they have been in contact with someone testing positive, in some circumstances. (This is broadly the same policy extended to food depot workers, and to some critical workers, last night). But Nagpaul argued this policy was a mistake. He said: "Exempting healthcare staff from self-isolation to get them back to work is a desperate and potentially unsafe policy that does not address the root problem. The safety of patients and staff must be paramount. People go to see healthcare professionals in order to get better, not to risk getting infected, and staff should not fear transmission of the virus from their own colleagues."

This is still the same old problem. OK, the BMA report may go on a lot further and explain what should happen.  But all it says there amounts to "cases are rising, this is a bad thing, we must stop it".

 

We know their policy is to stop cases rising in the short term.  What is their long term policy? 

 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now so they can rise in winter instead? 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now so we can have a steady, carefully managed, acceptable and consistent number of cases? 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now in expectation that that some medical breakthrough will stop it permanently? 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now because this thing is going to go away of itself? 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now and keep restrictions for ever?  

 

This is a policy for tomorrow, or next week, or at the outside, next month.  What is their proposed long term policy?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dunge

Dunge

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Spudulike said:

There was some talk/evidence that mixing the vaccines might produce an improved response. I've not heard that discussed recently. 

I believe the results of this did come out; I can’t remember exactly which way around it was between Pfizer and AZ going first or second, but I think one way around there was a slight decline and the other way a negligible improvement. There wasn’t a lot in it either way, and certainly not to the point of shifting policy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
st albans fox

st albans fox

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

This is not the case.  Realise the second Jab is a booster, and if you haven't allowed the first Jab to have maximum effect you negate the benefit of the booster to lower overall effect.  See?

yes i understand but we need to get as many people double jabbed as possible as quickly as possible - that small difference in efficacy between six and eight weeks needs to be weighed against the number of v ill people that will result from the 2 weeks extra.  do you know for sure that there are enough mrna jabs to bring the wait down to six weeks ?? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kenny

kenny

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

yes i understand but we need to get as many people double jabbed as possible as quickly as possible - that small difference in efficacy between six and eight weeks needs to be weighed against the number of v ill people that will result from the 2 weeks extra.  do you know for sure that there are enough mrna jabs to bring the wait down to six weeks ?? 

They are doing walk-ins at Boots Fosse Park.

 

Practically begging people to take them last Saturday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, dsr-burnley said:

This is still the same old problem. OK, the BMA report may go on a lot further and explain what should happen.  But all it says there amounts to "cases are rising, this is a bad thing, we must stop it".

 

We know their policy is to stop cases rising in the short term.  What is their long term policy? 

 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now so they can rise in winter instead? 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now so we can have a steady, carefully managed, acceptable and consistent number of cases? 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now in expectation that that some medical breakthrough will stop it permanently? 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now because this thing is going to go away of itself? 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now and keep restrictions for ever?  

 

This is a policy for tomorrow, or next week, or at the outside, next month.  What is their proposed long term policy?

Its also worth pointing out that everyone seems to be treating the lifting of restrictions as "everything is back to normal", whereas so far I think most people are still wearing masks indoors, and still being generally careful.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Magictv

Magictv

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

yes i understand but we need to get as many people double jabbed as possible as quickly as possible - that small difference in efficacy between six and eight weeks needs to be weighed against the number of v ill people that will result from the 2 weeks extra.  do you know for sure that there are enough mrna jabs to bring the wait down to six weeks ?? 

You're spot on. It's very clear the strict 8 week limit is all about managing the limited supply we have. As was the 12 week rule at the start.

 

Sensible rules given the situation we're in with supply, shame we haven't done as well as other nations on mRNA volumes but there we go... You win some you lose some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WigstonWanderer

WigstonWanderer

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

This is still the same old problem. OK, the BMA report may go on a lot further and explain what should happen.  But all it says there amounts to "cases are rising, this is a bad thing, we must stop it".

 

We know their policy is to stop cases rising in the short term.  What is their long term policy? 

 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now so they can rise in winter instead? 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now so we can have a steady, carefully managed, acceptable and consistent number of cases? 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now in expectation that that some medical breakthrough will stop it permanently? 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now because this thing is going to go away of itself? 

Is it that we should stop cases rising for now and keep restrictions for ever?  

 

This is a policy for tomorrow, or next week, or at the outside, next month.  What is their proposed long term policy?

Or perhaps just wait until everyone has has the chance to get fully vaccinated before letting rip

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dsr-burnley

dsr-burnley

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Or perhaps just wait until everyone has has the chance to get fully vaccinated before letting rip

By "letting rip", are you saying that level 4 was fine but the current policy makes a lot of difference, or are you angling for the tougher restrictions of level 3, 2, or even full on lockdown being reintroduced?  Either way, I'm not convinced that leaving it till October to protect the under 30's will work.  October wouldn't be a good time to "let rip" a respiratory virus, and the number of deaths of under 30's (12 in the last 3 months) isn't all that high - it could well be more than offset by the lives lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...