• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[COVID-19] General Discussion

I think its because generally if young children get it they don't get as sick from it and not so serious that they end up in hospital. Plus, there's still the whole parental consent thing. But they can still catch it and spread it.

But there are countries who are vaccinating young children of 5-11: USA and Spain. I think it's only a matter of time here they will at least give one dose.
as i say, this opinion is pretty much worthless as i dont have kids, but i kind of think see as one of the biggest concerns now is the long term effects of catching it....i kind of think id want my non existent kids protected
 
Please note, the following numbers are bullshit, and are for illustrative purposes only.

Because the death rate in kids is about 1 in a million, and there's a 1 in 10-million death rate from vaccines - and therefore we can't vaccinate them for their own sake.
Nevermind that the death rate for mumps is also 1 in a million, whilst the death rate from that vaccine is 1 in 5 million - we do that to protect the child's parents and grandparents - which isn't a consideration for Covid - obviously - probably because it's the grand/parent's own fault for being fat, or old, or having asthma, or whatever it might be.
 
Sticking this in COVID



Had one friend suggest this on Sunday, had to reply with unlike Johnson I have a 'social conscience'. But its definitely going to lead far more rule breaking especially if further restrictions are required. I'm actually surprised how much mask wearing came back with little non-compliance at least from observation in my local area.
 
I suspect with Bojo and Co sticking everything on boosters there won't be any more lockdowns. Even if Omicron turns out to be worse.
 
Yes they are hoping (as am I) that the new variant is milder bit if they are wrong it's going to be much worse than anything so far
 
I was going to say that this feels like an over-reaction to bury bad news but if there's concern about how deadly the new variant is, then comparing stats:

Last Christmas uTurn (19th December is the date i saw on my cursory google, but I thought it was later than that?):
Cases: 24,752
Hospital: 18,603
Deaths: 436

Yesterday:
Cases: 45,691
Hospital: 7,317
Deaths: 180


If it's not a distraction then they must have some very concerning news about the rate those cases are going to turn into hospitalisations/deaths
 
I was going to say that this feels like an over-reaction to bury bad news but if there's concern about how deadly the new variant is, then comparing stats:

Last Christmas uTurn (19th December is the date i saw on my cursory google, but I thought it was later than that?):
Cases: 24,752
Hospital: 18,603
Deaths: 436

Yesterday:
Cases: 45,691
Hospital: 7,317
Deaths: 180


If it's not a distraction then they must have some very concerning news about the rate those cases are going to turn into hospitalisations/deaths
Problem is its both, an overreaction to bad news but to do things we should been doing weeks ago. Basically because he's a **** whos' botched everything he touches he's both failed by not introducing measures earlier and now because of timing secured low conformity. Initaly reaction on twitter is basically people saying he can **** right off and they won't follow it or just plain anger because they will and know he won't.
 

....I have no words its probably needed but we know why its being implemented




Seems there is substance to the story.

But wait til the 18th to implement? Dragging his heels yet again.
 
Seems there is substance to the story.

But wait til the 18th to implement? Dragging his heels yet again.
Yeah it might blow away by the time of any conference but its definitely been heavily leaked.

Johnson eventually moved to the playing politics line about all this and getting on with the job.

Wes Sterling raised a point of order why any announcement was not in the commons and the speaker went off on one.
 
But wait til the 18th to implement? Dragging his heels yet again.
I've seen outher sources saying they could be brought in tomorrow morning.

If the doubling time is as low as is thought and the 250 confirmed cases are all we have (which seems unlikely), waiting 9 days would mean IRO 45,000 Omicron cases by 17th December.
 
I've seen outher sources saying they could be brought in tomorrow morning.

If the doubling time is as low as is thought and the 250 confirmed cases are all we have (which seems unlikely), waiting 9 days would mean IRO 45,000 Omicron cases by 17th December.
The problem is further restrictions were not supposed to be bought in until proper evidence came in about the nature of Omicron. Now if the situation is dire they should absolutely be bought forward. I'll also be honest and say this has coming for months. However its also quite clear that none of this is reason why the government are suggesting bringing any of this forward. They've also most worryingly completely torpedo'd likely compliance.
 
The problem is further restrictions were not supposed to be bought in until proper evidence came in about the nature of Omicron. Now if the situation is dire they should absolutely be bought forward. I'll also be honest and say this has coming for months. However its also quite clear that none of this is reason why the government are suggesting bringing any of this forward. They've also most worryingly completely torpedo'd likely compliance.
What constitutes "proper evidence"?
 
What constitutes "proper evidence"?
Scientific study into the transmissibility and symptoms with a significant sample size. For instance as mad as it sounds if Omicron has a high transmissibility but most people are just ill for a couple of days and has a very low mortality rate you actually want it to become a dominant strain unlike say Delta. However if its more deadly you want shut it down fast.

I am however not a virologist so its all well above my pay grade. Like I said if they are looking at the figures and it does need to acted upon earlier we absolutely should.
 
Scientific study into the transmissibility and symptoms with a significant sample size. For instance as mad as it sounds if Omicron has a high transmissibility but most people are just ill for a couple of days and has a very low mortality rate you actually want it to become a dominant strain unlike say Delta. However if its more deadly you want shut it down fast.

I am however not a virologist so its all well above my pay grade. Like I said if they are looking at the figures and it does need to acted upon earlier we absolutely should.
"The figures" seem to be saying with a decent level of confidence that it's significantly more transmissible. If you accept that, failure to act quickly and decisively is nothing more than gambling on it being significantly less serious as far as I can see - if it isn't, there will be significant negative consequences. In an ideal world, there would be enough data to have an idea of whether it's better / worse / same, but unless there is sufficient to say that the negative scenarios are highly unlikely, it seems to me that we already know enough to start taking it seriously.
 
"The figures" seem to be saying with a decent level of confidence that it's significantly more transmissible. If you accept that, failure to act quickly and decisively is nothing more than gambling on it being significantly less serious as far as I can see - if it isn't, there will be significant negative consequences. In an ideal world, there would be enough data to have an idea of whether it's better / worse / same, but unless there is sufficient to say that the negative scenarios are highly unlikely, it seems to me that we already know enough to start taking it seriously.
Not trying to argue either way, if it were me we'd have never made mask wearing optional and a would from home order would of come before now. I'm just saying why government claimed they didn't and why they are now bringing stuff forwards to deal with a political shitstorm.
 
We're are at about 700 hospitalisations a day.
Anecdotal I know, but I saw a tweet from an anesthetist on Saturday saying that in his hospital, cancer surgeries were already getting cancelled because ICU beds were full. This current level is unmanageable, let alone any additional admissions.
 
Not trying to argue either way, if it were me we'd have never made mask wearing optional and a would from home order would of come before now. I'm just saying why government claimed they didn't and why they are now bringing stuff forwards to deal with a political shitstorm.
I get that, I'm saying that it's reasonable to argue that they do have the information that they said they would need in order to make a decision, so this doesn't constitute a u-turn. Even if it does (not that anyone will admit it), it's one I'm glad to see made. Even if this was always in the pipe line for today, I have no doubt that you're right that it will be used as a tool to bury the partygate news. If it has brought a decision forward, great. At least some good will come of the party. Given the stakes at play, I view it as rather churlish to use either the u-turn or the decision to score political points. We will see over the next day or so if opposition parties agree.
 

Latest posts

Top