italian dave

11 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I was quite outspoken before, and took some time off to reflect about that. Stand by my opposition to Vaccine Passports but...

1. Lateral flow tests x 2 per week? Need for work, so yes. Since first week of May.
2. Do I isolate if Test and Trace get in touch? Absolutely.
3. Do I isolate if anyone I am with reports that they or the group had symptoms? Absolutely.
4. Do I isolate if symptoms? Absolutely.
5. Do I isolate if Positive LFT? Absolutely.
6. Wear Masks in store and other necessary indoor settings? Yep.
7. Sanitise in and out of stores and other buildings? Yep.

That's just off the top of my head. Other bits? I expect so.

NHS App sounds significantly oversensitive and anyway my phone and Apps don't mesh well, whether it would be any point in me downloading to my current phone, doubt it.

Vaccine Passports though...just feels a bridge too far- think @Baba Yaga makes a strong point, the goalposts keep moving. Perhaps some of it is due to scientific necessity and a prior optimism bias, but it also feels like mission creep- slippery slope, precedent etc.

First it was 3 weeks to normal. Then it was 3 months to turn the tide- but fair enough I accept.

Early Circuit breaker might have meant less harsh lockdown later, only time will tell or it may just have delayed the inevitable- who knows for sure?

The bigger worry for me though is..."No vaccine passports" "No vaccine passports" "No vaccine passports"...

...Freedom Day arrives...come Teatime "Vaccine Passports for Nightclubs"- and probably other crowded venues too.

The sudden ruling out of other alternatives, such as Lateral Flow Testing and I heard unless I missed it, no mention of Natural Immunity- presumably that's Antibody Tests.

42-43 Tory MPs have signed against, Labour will oppose- wonder if it could actually fall down in the Commons if it's Vaccine or bust?

@cidered abroad Can't speak for anyone else but a number of those- excellent- vaccines that you list, prevent onward transmission? This one seems not to- reduces? For sure, they're also tried and trusted- vaccines in themselves absolutely positive, but this one- Speed vs layers of safety checks etc.

I think that if you're going to do anything like this then it needs to be done with clarity, transparency and clear data-driven rationale. Otherwise it will cause misunderstanding, confusion and will never get public consensus.

And I agree with you (and @Baba Yaga) about the complete lack of any of those things from our government. Its just been yet another example of policy being made up as they go along, knee jerk response, constant u-turns, with no clear strategy.

There are probably three reasons for having vaccine passports (and I'm not arguing for or against here, just setting out what the case might be):

- short term as an alternative to tighter restrictions: we can open this up but there's a risk so the only way we can do it safely is to use passports

- short term as amends of incentivising vaccinations: this is a public health imperative and if you go along with it you make the country safer and you get something out of it as a direct result

- long term as a means of controlling an infectious disease: where the data supports the very clear benefits, ie with them the virus stops spreading, without them it doesn't.

Seems to me that it's far too early for the last of those, not least because the data isn't even available, let alone clear. 

I give you two scenarios, both starting where we were a month or two ago:

1. We hope that we will be able to relax restrictions in July. We're confident we'll be able to do so as long as cases don't rise. As cases start to rise the message becomes more cautious: the data is highlighting the risks of opening up too quickly, we need to go forward cautiously and we're looking at whether its sensible to relax restrictions and at other measures that might be necessary, including vaccine passports. As numbers continue to rise: we are still confident vaccines are helping keep this under control but given the rise in cases, hospitalisations etc we don't want to relax everything as completely as we'd intended. However, we can still take that a significant step with the reassurance that other measures, including vaccine passports in the short term, will give us.

2. Freedom Day will happen in July and it will be irreversible. We're aware the numbers are continuing to rise but vaccines vaccines vaccines. We have no plans for vaccine passports. And when the day arrives, with continuing rises in cases, along with the challenge that scientists are warning this is at best risky and irresponsible, I need to manage this news conference - so I'll suggest that we're going to introduce vaccine passports, even though we haven't really thought it through and we'll need to backtrack and obfuscate in a few hours time.

No surprise when the UK, using the second approach, finds people confused and angry. 

6 minutes ago, Riaz said:

I’ll try and make this my last comment.

I hope I’m wrong about the vaccine and it does what it says on the tin. And everything turns out to be honky dory.

But if i am right, and birth rates are affect and/or lots of people die or suffer injuries, i hope, those of you who got personal, are big enough to admit you were wrong.

By all accounts we won't be here to do so....sorry!

Riaz - I always had you down as a bit of a Corbyn-ista. Seems like I was right and wrong - I just had the wrong one in mind!

2 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Not being capable of driving

Your comparing that to deciding against a medical treatment….

I’m talking about the choices we make. And the consequences they have.

3 minutes ago, Riaz said:

that’s when you commit a crime. 

 

Commit a crime, or breach a regulation. Yes, of course, that’s how governments work, that’s how society implements its constraints. Whether it’s in China or here - the laws might be different but the principle is the same. 

13 minutes ago, Riaz said:

If your in China. 
 

Freedom based on injecting chemicals. This is what it has come to now?

You evidently have more knowledge of China than I do. But it’s also the way society works here.

Sometimes by mandate; you’re not free to drive on the right. Sometimes by prohibition if you choose not to comply: driving with poor eyesight, even if, for example, you could have had it corrected by treatment but chose not to because it involved injecting chemicals. 

I didn’t want to have my European citizenship taken away from me, or be deprived of my right to travel in Europe, but it’s happened because society mandated it by the election of Bozo. 

3 minutes ago, Riaz said:

In China, you are punished if you don’t comply with what the government wants. 
 

Difference?

In the UK you are punished if you don’t comply with what the government wants.

1 minute ago, Riaz said:

What is exactly wrong with what i shared?

It was again from government sources 

Well, several people have already had a go, but in the hope you’ll take notice of at least one.

Thats based on the yellow card reporting scheme. Anyone can go through that scheme and report anything that they think happens to them after they’ve had the vaccine. Some people evidently take that very literally and report things that are blatantly unconnected. Others report things that almost certainly have no causal link. And other report minor inconveniences like the sore arm that probably 99% of all those getting the vaccine experience.

A tiny proportion record what may or may not be more serious consequences. 

Now, for the third time of asking, are you seriously suggesting that pregnancy, redundancy and insect bites are among the consequences of vaccination?

And, subsidiary question, is a sore arm really a reason for not getting a vaccination?

1 hour ago, Riaz said:

Did you just say that 

About a million people injured according to government figures is the reality 

And apparently only 1-10% of issues get reported

Oh please…….

I respect your right to your view on taking vaccines.

But you are just peddling dangerous and untrue nonsense with this. 

I’m still waiting for you to explain the pregnancy, redundancy and insect bite consequences to having the vaccination. 

1 hour ago, Riaz said:

In a few years, when birth rates are down, lots of people have suffered from side affects…

I will be proven right.

If not, paranoid.

In the meantime, i shouldn’t be forced to take something or lose my freedoms.

That’s the way society works.

29 minutes ago, Riaz said:

I’ve not shared any disinformation and I’ve mainly shared things from the governments websites 

Actually, you’ve shared 20 things from Geert Vanden Bossche and two things from government websites.

Of the latter, one you have entirely misunderstood or, more likely, deliberately misused.
The second makes precisely the point you seem to be arguing against, namely that until you get sufficient numbers of people vaccinated (regardless of vulnerability) the there’s a high risk of mutation.

Dr Bossche, incidentally, trained in veterinary medicine and you can read about him here

https://perma.cc/69AE-D6GL

13 minutes ago, Riaz said:

 

When did i say they don’t matter? 

I wasn’t against the vaccine until they went to the lengths of trying to make us all have it. 
 

Give it to those at risk and anyone else’s who wants it.

Trying to make everyone have it, is dis-proportionate 

But there is a reason for trying to make everyone have it and that is - as has been touched on - unless you get sufficient people vaccinated to stop exponential transmission (ie keep the R0 below 1) then it will keep spreading and the risk of further lockdowns etc goes with that. 

The best chance of getting back to 'normal', and of ending the need for restrictions is directly related to the number of people getting the vaccine.

15 minutes ago, Riaz said:

I can’t find the figures for Covid deaths for healthy people under 60, but last time i checked it was under 1000.

Deaths from vaccine 1470 and counting.

Covid has been here’s for 16 months and most people have only just been vaccinated 

So 

a) you're evidently of the Johnson "anyone over 80 doesn't really matter" view, only taking it that much further

b) haven't fully read the small item you've circled: "The deaths aren't necessarily caused by the vaccine though"

I really don't know why this has to keep being pointed out, but if you base your view on what's recorded on the yellow card scheme, then you'll believe that the vaccine can get you pregnant, give you insect bites, make you redundant and a whole manner of other things. 

2 minutes ago, nebristolred said:

So there's what, 40,000,000 people who have been vaccinated in the UK to some extent. And 1,470 have died within 28 days?

That sounds like about the normal number you'd expect to die from 40,000,000 in the 7 months or so we've been vaccinating people. Nothing dodgy about that at all.

Indeed....you might even conclude that the vaccine will keep you alive longer!!

8 minutes ago, Riaz said:

 

In this country, more people have now died from the vaccine, than healthy people have died from covid.

 

 

 

Evidence? 

39 minutes ago, Riaz said:

You believe in this vaccine and trust it.

I dont.

Why does your opinion matter more than mine?

I don't think this is about opinions, its about decisions and actions (although clearly there's a link).

I'm aware that there are risks associated with the vaccine. I certainly don't believe in it 100%. 

I don't really like the idea of passports more generally, my opinion is we shouldn't have to have them, but I choose to have one. Just as people choose to drive on the left, wear helmets on a motorbike etc.

So, to answer your question:

1. Because I've done what society has asked me to do in order to help us collectively overcome this pandemic, and you haven't.

2. Because if I'm wrong then you're no worse off. If you're wrong you could kill or seriously disable me.

8 minutes ago, wayne allisons tongues said:

Think he’s including children. Just over 50% of whole population had two jab. About 15 to 16 million will not be eligible which is roughly 22%. That then leads to the question what % needed for herd immunity or the 22% get it and we hope it starts to die out.

Do you have any idea what that estimate currently is?. I believe there's a way virologists can calculate it. I thought a figure of 80% (of the population) had been mentioned for delta covid. 

51 minutes ago, Baba Yaga said:

The difference is that the rules changes were proposed by Boris so people could longer use tests to go to mass events. Once the vaccine passports are in place the goalposts can keep changing. I'm not comfortable with a new normal where if you don't take your unlicensed medication you are shut out from parts of society and it continues every 6 months or so, the green pass is being used again in Israel from next week which is a good source because they are generally ahead of us in the vax programme, if we look at them we can anticipate what will happen next here.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-uk-data-offer-mixed-signals-on-vaccines-potency-against-delta-strain/

Here's another link from my favourite country  Israel saying the Pfizer jab is 41% effective (against symptomatic transmission) and the UK is saying it's 88% effective. I wonder if the Washington Post will report that? Who are the scientists here and who are the vaccine sales reps posing as scientists?

Ah, OK, I'm with you! Mind you, if you are looking for coherence, consistency, sense, then anything that comes out of the mouth of our beloved leader is probably not the place to go!

However, I can see that there's an issue with anything 'passport' related for a short period because not everyone's had the chance. Once everyone has had the chance it becomes more straightforward and - whether you agree with the principle or not - at that stage the passport can be as simple as evidence of the two jabs. And that really is then as simple as scanning your QR code. No more intrusive than, say, age checks to buy certain items etc.

Presumably one of the issues with Israel is that they got further ahead longer ago, so must be getting to the point where people had both jabs months ago. I'd understood the green card to be their version of the passport. In Italy you're going to have to use a green card (which is the EU version of our vaccine code) to get into bars and restaurants from next month. I think it could well be coming.

My personal view is that using it as an incentive to get people to have a vaccine isn't a bad thing. There was a piece about vaccine resistance (as in people not having it) on BBC earlier. Apart from one chap saying that he was worried it would result in the government knowing how much he earned, how intelligent he was, and everywhere he travelled, there were no absolute 'wont ever get it', mostly 'haven't been bothered yet/not quite sure'. And one young man who was going to have it because it would be his "football passport". I don't underestimate the ethical issues around that - just on balance think its the right way given the increasing evidence of vaccine take up slowing down.

29 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

Of course they have.

We know flu can kill, and have serious long term effects, and it circulates widely every Winter, including at AG.

All we can do is get innoculated if we feel at extra risk, but as with Covid that does not provide anything like full protection.

We either accept there is always a risk in existing in daily life or we stop going to Ashton Gate, stop going to the pub, stop socialising altogether, and organise our lives so as to come into contact with as few people as possible.

Some people seem content with the prospect of repetitive lockdowns and endless restrictions, but that is not only economically impractical, it is for many people psychologically catastrophic.

 

 

 

Of course. But it doesn't kill to the same degree as covid. It doesn't have the same serious long term consequences to the same degree as covid. (It also doesn't spread as easily as covid, especially delta covid). And in terms of community transmission its nowhere near the same case numbers as Bristol currently has of covid. 

Of course there's a risk every time we cross the road. And a risk of catching flu when you go to AG. But neither, I'd suggest, are anything like the risk currently around covid - given the case numbers in Bristol and the potential consequences at this point in time.

Would you have had no restrictions at all, right from day 1? If so, I think you'd have been foolish. If not then it just becomes a judgement call when is the right time to adjust, and how. 

I don't know anyone who is "content with the prospect of repetitive lockdowns and endless restrictions". Do you?

If ending all restrictions results in 100s of 1000s of people getting the virus every week and millions having to isolate - does that do anything for the economy or for people's physical or mental health?

I repeat what I said earlier: I'm not suggesting that I have all the answers - but I am suggesting that things are not 'normal'. And you only have to look at the people just on here with concerns and reservations about going to watch a football match to see that.

21 minutes ago, pillred said:

Currently 85% of adults have had first vaccination and nearly 70% their second, hardly barely half is it. I don't know if you are including children in your figure though. 

Yes - barley half the population is what I said.  The virus doesn't distinguish between a 17 year old and a 19 year old. 

I know that the government publishes the figures "...of the adult population" partly because that sounds better and partly - to be fair - because its measure against who's been offered the vaccine. 

10 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

Other viruses can have detrimental long term effects.

Flu can kill of course, but the debilitating, long term ME, or Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, has long been associated with viral infections, with about 260k known cases in the UK, or 1 in 250 of the population.

All true. But I don't think alters what I've said above.

And I doubt many people have ever been to watch a match at Ashton Gate with the realistic possibility that one of those things might be the outcome.

1 minute ago, TheReds said:

But the vaccine is never going away, and many will never be vaccinated, including people who simply cannot have it. So at what point do you think we should go back to normal, as in how many deaths/hospitalisations are acceptable?   

Like I said, I don't have all the answers.

I just know that August - while we have an ongoing global pandemic, peak case numbers here, barely half the population vaccinated - isn't going to be "normal" as we knew it - and I'd hope it's not going to be 'normal' going forward.

There seem to be two potential scenarios: either it goes away in a year or so, which would mean we go back to the normal we knew, but seems unlikely. Or we have to "live with it" but that will mean a new 'normal'. I don't agree with those who see this as just being like flu. People don't get "long flu", people don't suffer long term organ damage as a result of flu, people in their mid 20s don't have strokes as a result of flu (BBC News this morning). 

I don't think anyone knows what that new normal might like look like. But it's quite conceivable that it could include incentivisation to get vaccinated/restrictions if not. The 'some people cant have it' is a complete red herring: that's the case with a great many of the things we take for granted and there will be ways of managing that. 

As I say, I don't know what it looks like. But I honestly don't think you can pretend that going back to Ashton Gate for the Blackpool game will be just like going to the first home game in August 2019.

Maybe the solution is as simple as making the vaccine passport blue

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/covid-vaccine-polling-hesitancy-support-brexit-voter-leave-oxford-university/

9 minutes ago, TheReds said:

There will be many, many double jabbed people with the virus carrying it around with them and passing it on - and I expect multiple double jabbed people in Ashton Gate carrying it. At what point are you going to say to yourself "I have done everything I possibly can for myself so have to get on with it"? If you think you are never going to say that, then prepare yourself for avoiding pretty much everywhere where there are people present, as this virus isn't going away. After September I doubt there will be many more people taking up the offer of having the vaccine if they haven't already, so that really has to be the end of any restrictions, unless you want to ban unvaccinated people (many who cannot have it) from everything that you do.

I don’t know what all the answers are.

I was just trying to make the point that it’s nonsense to talk about “going back to normal” when we are in the middle of a global pandemic.

We all want ‘normal’ back, but it’s not going to happen in August.

Yes, banning the unvaccinated from doing anything is one extreme of the potential responses. But just carrying on and trying to pretend it’s not happening is just as extreme the other way. 

7 hours ago, Will b11 said:

Thrilled by this , as said by someone above it’s your own choice now and I’m glad we’re back to normal life , hopefully it stays like this for all the league/cup games aswell , roll on the start of the season. 

Normal???

With Bristol’s infection rate, the Blackpool game could see dozens of people get ill as a result of going to the game, a number of them ending up in hospital, as well as hundreds getting pinged, many of whom will be unable to go to work as a result. And all having to miss the next game(s).

That doesn’t sound like ‘normal’ to me. 

On 14/03/2021 at 19:28, wayne allisons tongues said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-56392670
 

Hopefully all goes well and crowds can  return from these test events.

So, when do we get to hear the results of the last two pilot events, testing the impact of larger, nearer to full capacity crowds? They were the Euros final and semis - the former at least anecdotally being a true “super spreader” event.

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/england-fans-testing-positive-for-wembley-variant-soars-after-euros-final-281693/
 

And what will the results mean for grounds being allowed to open to full capacity at the start of the season?

Both questions asked decidedly tongue in cheek: my money is that Bozo’s determination to press ahead regardless of consequences will mean that these pilots are quietly forgotten.