Coronavirus - how is it/has it affected you?

Swinglowandslow

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2018
Messages
2,306
I have not suggested we have another lockdown, unless my suggestion of wearing masks on public transport and in shops is considered a lockdown.
It seems you are avoiding the 'underlying question' I allude to? You express concern ( post. 21178) in which you make no differentiation between vaxxed and unvaxxed, the impression being that very many vaxxed are in hospital and dying.
And this point is the crux of whether your concern is justified for the reasons I have already given.
As to what you are asking for, it isn't only mandatory mask wearing. In post 21154 you say" not the right time to open events in closed environments"
So, no theatres, cinemas, nightclubs. Are pubs not closed environments?,
Church halls? Churches? Etc
Do you not agree that if the infections are not seriously affecting the vaccinated, and the hospitalisations and deaths are almost all those refusing vaccinations, ( Everyone over 18 has been offered the vaccine),then the 45 million or so vaccinated should be allowed some worthwhile freedoms in which they will be mainly safe, and which allow the economy to start to recover?
However, if the figures show that a significantly large number of the hospitalised and dying are reasonably healthy vaccinated people, then your concerns are valid and actions you advocate should be taken.
 

SocketRocket

Ryder Cup Winner
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
17,204
It seems you are avoiding the 'underlying question' I allude to? You express concern ( post. 21178) in which you make no differentiation between vaxxed and unvaxxed, the impression being that very many vaxxed are in hospital and dying.
And this point is the crux of whether your concern is justified for the reasons I have already given.
As to what you are asking for, it isn't only mandatory mask wearing. In post 21154 you say" not the right time to open events in closed environments"
So, no theatres, cinemas, nightclubs. Are pubs not closed environments?,
Church halls? Churches? Etc
Do you not agree that if the infections are not seriously affecting the vaccinated, and the hospitalisations and deaths are almost all those refusing vaccinations, ( Everyone over 18 has been offered the vaccine),then the 45 million or so vaccinated should be allowed some worthwhile freedoms in which they will be mainly safe, and which allow the economy to start to recover?
However, if the figures show that a significantly large number of the hospitalised and dying are reasonably healthy vaccinated people, then your concerns are valid and actions you advocate should be taken.
If you have gained the impression I believe there is no difference between vaxxed and unvaxxed then that's wrong. My point was that hospitalisations and deaths appear proportional to infection rates. I cannot find imperical data that gives a breakdown on the age or vaccinated status of these people so cannot comment on it.

Regarding nightclubs etc, my opinion is that if they are virus superspreaders then they should be regulated by tests or not allowed.
 

ColchesterFC

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
5,610
The underlying question in these exchanges with Bobmac is if you think the rise in hospitalisations and deaths are involving to any significant effect those who have been double jabbed.
IF it does, then yes we have a problem.
No we don't. Imagine we got to the point where 100% of the UK population has been vaccinated. That would mean that 100% of those in hospital or dying had been double jabbed. The vaccines aren't 100% effective (and as far as I know there isn't any vaccine that is) which means that some of those that have received it will still become ill and die.

93% of people wear a seatbelt when they drive a car. But 66% of people killed in car accidents are wearing a seatbelt. This doesn't mean that seatbelts are ineffective, it means that the 7% of people that don't wear a seatbelt account for 34% of fatalities.
 

bobmac

Major Champion
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
24,882
Location
Lincolnshire
I've spent the last 18 months sat at home alone with no-one to talk to, doing my bit to stop this killer virus from spreading.
I shop every 2 weeks, I keep my 2m apart and I still wear a mask in shops.
I got my 2 vaccinations as soon as I could and I will take the booster when it's available.

What I will NOT do is spend the next 6-8 months stuck inside because some conceited, self opinionated anti vaxers refuse to get the vaccine and keep the number of cases high by spreading the virus and creating new variants which might one day beat the vaccines available.

If you don't want the vaccine then go and live in the US with the rest of the nutters and leave the rest of us to get the country working again.
 

Swinglowandslow

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2018
Messages
2,306
No we don't. Imagine we got to the point where 100% of the UK population has been vaccinated. That would mean that 100% of those in hospital or dying had been double jabbed. The vaccines aren't 100% effective (and as far as I know there isn't any vaccine that is) which means that some of those that have received it will still become ill and die.

93% of people wear a seatbelt when they drive a car. But 66% of people killed in car accidents are wearing a seatbelt. This doesn't mean that seatbelts are ineffective, it means that the 7% of people that don't wear a seatbelt account for 34% of fatalities.
I used the word significant for a reason😁
If there is no difference in the rates of hospitalisations and deaths between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, then it means the vaccine is not doing it's job as well as we are told it does. It isn't even doing any sort of job if the figures are the same amongst the two groups!
So if the vaccine isn't working, then ,yes, we have a problem!

What I am not saying is that there won't be some who are hospitalised or who die who have been vaccinated . Of course there will.

The figures are high at this time, but I believe the vaccines are working and it is the unvaccinated who make up the big majority of those figures.
 

GreiginFife

Money List Winner
Joined
Mar 7, 2012
Messages
8,130
Location
Dunfermline, Fife
Well it doesn’t seem to be reducing them, unfortunately.
As has been pointed out on multiple occasions on this thread, Scottish schools are back in session and this always means a spike in infections (just look at last year when schools and Uni's went back). Lets flip the paradigm, there is no evidence that without masks in other settings that the current figures would be exponentially higher. I think you will witness the same spike in a month or so with or without "masks in certain settings" as long as schools don't form part of those "settings".

Schools returning, along with relaxation of pretty much all restrictions (except mask wearing in certain settings) and, for example 50,000+ in Ibrox on Sunday (not many masks on view), and people are surprised that the infection rates are going up?

For me, the important figures are still relative rates for hospitalisations and deaths. These are climbing but, from what I can see, not at the same rate as infections (with the obvious caveat that there is a delay).
 

Ethan

Money List Winner
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
10,988
Location
Bearwood Lakes, Berks
As has been pointed out on multiple occasions on this thread, Scottish schools are back in session and this always means a spike in infections (just look at last year when schools and Uni's went back). Lets flip the paradigm, there is no evidence that without masks in other settings that the current figures would be exponentially higher. I think you will witness the same spike in a month or so with or without "masks in certain settings" as long as schools don't form part of those "settings".

Schools returning, along with relaxation of pretty much all restrictions (except mask wearing in certain settings) and, for example 50,000+ in Ibrox on Sunday (not many masks on view), and people are surprised that the infection rates are going up?

For me, the important figures are still relative rates for hospitalisations and deaths. These are climbing but, from what I can see, not at the same rate as infections (with the obvious caveat that there is a delay).
Flipping the paradigm, as you call it, sounds a bit like someone saying 'Prove that particular lung cancer was caused by smoking. They may have got it anyway'. The evidence for masks, direct and epidemiological is more than good enough now.

Hospitalisations and deaths are indeed important,. but community cases in young people fuel those numbers. Stopping a young person getting infected, whether through masks, vaccination or anything else, may stop one of those hospitalisations or deaths too. The link between hospitalisations/deaths and cases is two-fold. There is a time-relationship, with hospitalisations lagging behind cases and deaths lagging behind that, and the proportion of either depends on the risk profile of the population. When lots of older people were unvaccinated the proportion of cases that ended up in hospital was much higher. Now that it is mostly younger cases, and a few breakthroughs, the proportion is a lot lower. There still are a worrying number of young people, and a few US shock-jocks about whom I am much less worried, succumbing.
 

Lord Tyrion

Money List Winner
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
19,864
Location
Northumberland
Well it doesn’t seem to be reducing them, unfortunately.
Some people, not having a direct pop at anyone on here, seem to have blind faith that masks are the answer to this. They aren't. They may be part of the solution but they are a minimal part from all that I can see and have read. Certainly 99% of the masks we are all wearing, Your point about Scotland is simple but effective. If masks solved everything their numbers would be going down in comparison to England but they are not. Up there, up here. The reduction in mask wearing in England is not the cause of current spikes, mixing and the unvaccinated are the real areas to look at.
 

SocketRocket

Ryder Cup Winner
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
17,204
Some people, not having a direct pop at anyone on here, seem to have blind faith that masks are the answer to this. They aren't. They may be part of the solution but they are a minimal part from all that I can see and have read. Certainly 99% of the masks we are all wearing, Your point about Scotland is simple but effective. If masks solved everything their numbers would be going down in comparison to England but they are not. Up there, up here. The reduction in mask wearing in England is not the cause of current spikes, mixing and the unvaccinated are the real areas to look at.
I don't believe anyone is saying masks are a saviour to everything, only sensible precaution like social distancing.
 

Lord Tyrion

Money List Winner
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
19,864
Location
Northumberland
I don't believe anyone is saying masks are a saviour to everything, only sensible precaution like social distancing.
The reduction in wearing them does seem to be raised quite frequently as to why numbers in England are increasing. They may play a part but other factors are much greater

I think social distancing has largely gone out of the window from what I can see. The genie is out of the bottle.
 

DRW

Tour Rookie
Joined
Oct 7, 2015
Messages
4,808
Location
UK
Not sure if people have seen these before(pre vaccine in USA for example) :-

EwNuZeHVcAMrkM_.jpg
And a recent FT piece :-
E-D-HsOX0AcF2Jh.jpg

The main thing to take is if you are older(clearly other issues add to being higher risk), you should not be leading a normal life pre or post vaccine, unless you are happy to catch this thing and rolling the dice.

I know I have said it before, if you can change one thing(edit on top of vaccine), get to normal weight/fitness, obesity is a bad thing for covid whatever your age on average.

Covid is far to contagious, not to be challenged with it over the coming days/weeks/months/years, depending on how you live your life moving forward.

There is plenty of hospital data out there from other countries split between vaccine status online, have a search if it interests you and whilst vaccines are great, they only reduce the risk for your AGE/underlying conditions profile. The above gives you some idea but note that the above FT details above is population fatality rates not case fatality rates but is great for comparing different ages.

I still think the public health messaging has been poor over the virus, with regards to informing people of the risks with age and weight in particular. Just look at the first chart, its pretty yeek. I am shocked by how some older people are acting in not protecting themselves(understand the you only live once/your days your numbered outlook at well, however).
 
Last edited:

Mudball

Assistant Pro
Joined
Sep 21, 2017
Messages
2,895
my niece came around last week and lovingly spread whatever is the latest bug that is going around at nursery.
HID and me wiped out. Worryingly all the wrong symptoms... loss of taste, coughing, cold.. no fever so far. been a couple of days. Both are double vaccinated.

yesterday, our lateral flows came negative. So that is a relief... but who knows.. i am going to crawl under the bed for the rest of the week
 

pauljames87

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Apr 1, 2016
Messages
11,485
Location
Havering
my niece came around last week and lovingly spread whatever is the latest bug that is going around at nursery.
HID and me wiped out. Worryingly all the wrong symptoms... loss of taste, coughing, cold.. no fever so far. been a couple of days. Both are double vaccinated.

yesterday, our lateral flows came negative. So that is a relief... but who knows.. i am going to crawl under the bed for the rest of the week
LFT with symptoms don't work apparently book a PCR test
 
Top