Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[beorhthelm]

Who is saying that the vaccines are not effective against the South African variant?
Haven’t seen that anywhere yet

no one of note. Peston is grade A fearmonger, loves to stir up a bit of fuss, while Hancock and some others appear to hedge bets. the trouble you'll find a scientist say they are concerned or not sure about the vaccine because its not tested. the vaccines work on a number of known parts of a virus, so the makers do know if the variant will have an affect or not. if a scientist in the know (ie from a vaccine company or regulator) comes out and explictly says theres a problem, its a problem, otherwise its conjecture and should be ignored.

upside if there is a change required, the new vaccines are more easily modified to re-target and may not need to go through trials to be re-approved.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I assume Hancock is just repeating what the scientists are saying.



The problem with this situation is that Scientists are evidence based so will never commit until something is proved. Journalists love to use this non-committal as licence to throw out some scary headlines.

I am not saying he is wrong, but he seems to be the only one that has spoken out so far?

 

[dsr-burnley]

I assume Hancock is just repeating what the scientists are saying.

The problem with this situation is that Scientists are evidence based so will never commit until something is proved. Journalists love to use this non-committal as licence to throw out some scary headlines.

If that's what started the SA rumour, then it's a non issue. They asked a scientist who knows nothing about the SA virus if he knows how it will affect the vaccine, and he said he doesn't know, so the journalists spun a scare story. If that's all it is, then it's a non-story.

I reckon the thing to look at is whether people are catching either variant who have already had the "standard" covid. With the UK variant, they aren't, which suggests that a vaccine that protects against one will protect against the other. Are people in South Africa catching the new variant when they have already had the old one? Not that I've heard.

 

[The Fits]

Has any NSC'rs had/have it?

I'm being tested today after having a fever for 2 days. I had the most strangest dream i've ever had last night which i can only assume is a 'fever' dream. Anyone else experienced that?

I had it in November.
Felt like very severe flu for about 2 days. Then nothing, then I lost my taste and smell for about a week which is a very, very odd feeling.

 

[Nobby]

no one of note. Peston is grade A fearmonger, loves to stir up a bit of fuss, while Hancock and some others appear to hedge bets. the trouble you'll find a scientist say they are concerned or not sure about the vaccine because its not tested. the vaccines work on a number of known parts of a virus, so the makers do know if the variant will have an affect or not. if a scientist in the know (ie from a vaccine company or regulator) comes out and explictly says theres a problem, its a problem, otherwise its conjecture and should be ignored.

upside if there is a change required, the new vaccines are more easily modified to re-target and may not need to go through trials to be re-approved.

[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WATFORD zero]

"Running the department" is the responsibility of the senior civil servant - the Humphrey Appleby. The minister sets policy, the civil service carries it out. Hancock (Hacker) could perhaps have seen earlier that the civil service was putting obstacles in the way of volunteer vaccinators, but the person or system who actually put the obstacles there was the responsibility of the Humphrey Appleby character.

Hancock (Hacker) sets the policy, and Appleby (or whoever it si in real life) sees that it is done or explains that it can't be done. It's when Appleby tells Hancock that it will be done but then doesn't do it, that Hancock looks a proper Charlie. Which is happening quite a lot. I don't believe Hancock is talking to the press and saying what will be done, and lying because he knows it won't be done; there's no benefit to him or anyone else in doing that. I reckon he is being misled by his civil service that it making promises it can't keep.

Hancock has responsibility for seeing that the department runs OK, and I suspect that Humphrey Appleby is heading for early retirement because (no matter how incompetent Hancock is) so is Appleby. But I reckon it's deeper than that - the Home Office has been showing for years that it is incompetent - and I reckon there is a malaise in the Civil Service that needs rooting out. Though who among these current politicians can do it, I have no idea.

That's exactly what Dominic Cummings was doing throughout his time in no 10 and why so many senior civil servants have now been replaced by political appointees. (That's gone well hasn't it). I think your Yes Minister analogies are probably best left in the 80's where you got them from. It's almost as if you've been asleep for the last 40 years


*edit* Sorry, just realised you're from Burnley. That explains a lot.

 

[The Fits]

Johnson...."I would stress schools are safe and the risk to kids is very, very small....The risk to teachers, and of course we will do everything we can to protect teachers, but the risk to teachers is no greater than it is to anyone else"

What is this blind spot? Why is this the way he is framing it when the reality is that kids are taking Covid back in to the home, and in to the community?

 

[Nobby]

Johnson...."I would stress schools are safe and the risk to kids is very, very small....The risk to teachers, and of course we will do everything we can to protect teachers, but the risk to teachers is no greater than it is to anyone else"

What is this blind spot? Why is this the way he is framing it when the reality is that kids are taking Covid back in to the home, and in to the community?

He is a liar. Always has been always will be. Incapable of doing anything else

I’ve never been able to find an example of when he actually told the truth?

 

[The Fits]

He is a liar. Always has been always will be. Incapable of doing anything else

I’ve never been able to find an example of when he actually told the truth?

Is he a liar or just an idiot?

 

[Nobby]

Is he a liar or just an idiot?

He’s no idiot. A clever manipulator and serial liar who has got away with it his whole life

 

[e77]

Part of the reason we organise into countries with governments and pay taxes is to pool resources to protect us against once in a generation events like wars and pandemics. Ten years ago we went down the path of austerity which reduced the states capacity to do things like this. While I would love to blame the current government there have been elections in 15, 17 and 19 where people voted for more of the same so people did have a choice.

That is great when you are in work and don't have much call on public services. Then one day your bins are only collected every two weeks or it takes a month to see a GP. Ten years ago we had world leading plans in place to deal with a pandemic but they weren't maintained.

Too many people leave politics to other people or vote with their heart without performing due diligence. This needs to end and more people need to hold government up to scrutiny and account.

 

[The Fits]

And from the Guardian, Hancock THIS MORNING...

"On the substance of the question, it is clear that children are very, very unlikely to get this disease, and that is true, as far as we can see, with the new variant, as well as the old."

This is misleading because children do get coronavirus like other people. This report from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine says children are “typically less susceptible” to infection than adults. But the latest ONS Covid infection survey, released on 24 December, said “secondary school-age children continue to have the highest percentage testing positive”.

What Hancock probably meant was that children are very unlikely to get ill or seriously ill from the disease, which is true.

But the claim that the suggestion that the new variant does not make a difference is more contentious. An Imperial College London study (pdf) published at the end of last week said there was evidence of under-20s being more affected by the new variant than by the old one. But the authors said they could not explain why, and that it could just be that the new variant is more infectious for everyone, but that because schools were open in November when England was in lockdown, teenagers might have been disproportionately affected.

Plus the Sage report from December that said...

Children were more likely to be the index case (i.e. bring the infection home). Compared to those aged 17 and over, the likelihood was 7 times higher for children aged 12-16 years and almost 3 times higher for children under 12.

This isn't about kids, or even teachers dying. It's about family members or other members of the general public catching a disease that is being spread throughout the education system.

It's just a total lie.

 

[dazzer6666]

And from the Guardian, Hancock THIS MORNING...

"On the substance of the question, it is clear that children are very, very unlikely to get this disease, and that is true, as far as we can see, with the new variant, as well as the old."



Plus the Sage report from December that said...

Children were more likely to be the index case (i.e. bring the infection home). Compared to those aged 17 and over, the likelihood was 7 times higher for children aged 12-16 years and almost 3 times higher for children under 12.

This isn't about kids, or even teachers dying. It's about family members or other members of the general public catching a disease that is being spread throughout the education system.

It's just a total lie.

It’s clever...and very stupid and dangerous.....semantics. Kids are very unlikely to suffer any symptoms (so they don’t ‘get the disease’ as Hancock would say) but they sure as hell can give it to granny.

Close the schools FFS for all but essential keyworkers kids etc. It’s simple

 

[dazzer6666]

It's not just key workers that need to go to work though. So it's not that simple.

‘Etc’ [emoji2369][emoji2369]

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

‘Etc’ [emoji2369][emoji2369]

Etc is a rather large pool of people.

 

[beorhthelm]

... Ten years ago we had world leading plans in place to deal with a pandemic but they weren't maintained.

you're suggesting plans were dispensed with, along with those that knew about them? no. PHE has 2000 staff allocated to Protection from Infectious Diseases. those who planned did so for narrow scenarios, without scope for alternatives (asymptomatic transmission has blindsided them). note Scotland and Wales, most other countries in western Europe followed same general response plan.

 

[beorhthelm]

Close the schools FFS for all but essential keyworkers kids etc. It’s simple

if school are so dangerous, keyworker's kid best not going to school? not so simple.

 

[Nobby]

if school are so dangerous, keyworker's kid best not going to school? not so simple.

Key workers are key to the NHS, food supplies and everyone’s security So their kids have to go to school. Teachers will teach them , without PPE

But schools are not safe places, nor is Tesco or walking down the street.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

So it looks like the entire country for Tier 4.... with schooled to remain closed until at least February....

Ergo.... Tier 5/ National Lockdown....


Via twitter

 

[atomised]

So it looks like the entire country for Tier 4.... with schooled to remain closed until at least February....

Ergo.... Tier 5/ National Lockdown....


Via twitter

Completely unsurprising if true