Tuesday

[screwcovid]

Apparently Doris holding a press conference and this fills me with anxiety is this shit ever gonna end !!
Probably trying to persuade kids to have the vaccine i despair

“ I'm sorry it made you unhappy but at leasr you were safer.”

Safer for COVID … Not everything is COVID in life … unhappy? Guess you’ve not heard about mental health and the problems people deal with.

Normal life DOES depend on the NHS being able to function, there’s no escaping that. Perhaps if we tripled our NHS investment and built specific Covid hospitals and recruited double the ICU staff levels we may have a robust chance at coping during a winter surge. Until then we must protect and cope with what we have.

It's been worn down to the bare bones long before COVID and perhaps if that hadn't been the case we would have been in a better position right now. Does normal life usually depend on the NHS being able to function? If vaccines aren't helping us continue as normal, I suspect there is a high number of people who think 'fuck it- I'm not putting life on hold any longer'- far higher than the number who were prepared to follow restrictions last winter.

I'm 33, tiny risk anyway, have been double jabbed since June. My parents in their 60s, double jabbed, don't believe in further restrictions.

Good luck getting people in their teens/20s to comply as well. I really hope they don't- they've been treated like absolute shit (NI increases the final kick in the teeth). They have no risk from COVID- especially when jabbed. Time to live life, or no one will remember what decent mental health actually was.

The logical thing is to accept Covid is here to stay and protect and support those most at risk.

How would you do that then?

@RedToothBrush

From the various rumours in the press, it sounds like Tuesday it will be announced that:

The Coronavirus Act 2020 will be repealed
This is a good thing largely. For those people panicking we still have the Health & Social Care Act 2008 and the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 which have some pretty far reaching and draconian powers should they be needed over the winter. The repeal restricts the power of the executive from being even more draconian and unable to be held to account. I broadly support as it doesn't rule out Autumn / Winter restrictions (or even a lockdown imo). Instead it has an effect of stopping the government use powers in the future for non-covid reasons. Its a democratic rather than covid issue. (The gap in this I think is going to relate to what financial support may be available if restrictions are reintroduced in anyway - make of that what you will). Both the existing Act retain the power to close things like schools on the grounds of public health - and my suspicion is that Tory Backbenchers would prefer to use these acts rather than the covid act which they've always hated.

Vaccine Passports won't be implimented.
I know that lots of people won't like this, however in terms of pushing vaccinations, there's a lot of evidence that they are actually counterproductive because they increase distrust - particularly amongst groups at higher risk of covid often have higher levels of distrust in the state to begin with and this merely amplifies this. Instead, its thought that more sympathetic and sensitive approaches to increase vaccine uptake are generally more effective because they tackle mistrust/fears better. I think the threat of passports was used to increase uptake and political / legal opposition to vaccine passports has rendered the issue hard to push through too. I suspect if they did get put through, there'd be legal challenges for discrimination. This is also different from a mandatory workplace vaccination policy, which I still think could happen (and may still cause issues with legalities). I personally favour a more softly softly approach on this tbh because of the counter productive issues.

A vaccine programme for 12 - 15 year olds will be announced
I have mixed feelings about this. The JVCI opposed this for a reason. The argument about whether catching covid or getting vaccinated in this age group is still on going. Early evidence is that vaccination carries a higher risk - particularly for boys - in this group than covid itself and that long covid concerns have been disproportionate to actual cases. (I'd argue that still lots of work to do on this research area so early findings might not kept to this). Word is that because the early evidence suggests the risk with boys and pfizer is greater after 2 doses, that this age group will only get one dose not two. So this doesn't solve the political issue brewing over differing policy and international travel, that many will have hoped a vaccination programme for 12 - 15 year olds would help solve.

I think it will be popular with many though. There is an arguable case for it being of benefit for society as a whole.

Announcement of a 'Winter Plan'
Whatever the hell this may mean. There's some talk of reintroduction of some mask restrictions (will believe that when I see it). So far I've not really seen much concrete on this apart from the words 'guidance' and 'advise' which will be as much use as a chocolate teapot. Far too many people simply won't do something unless backed by law. I fear a lack of concrete proposals may force u-turns further on. I think this is pointless gesturing to appease those worried about other announcements due on Tuesday. Putting the burden of 'choice' onto individuals and business only works to a point. If there is a real 'need' for reducing social interaction - guidance is not going to be sufficient and will harm the most vulnerable first.

Axing of needing PCRs to return to the UK after travelling
Mixed feelings on this one too. On the one hand, the current exortion of passengers is dreadful and its crippling the travel industry. On the other hand the problem is that this leaves us more at risk of missing new variants coming in and being detecting as lateral flows aren't as reliable and I worry about legal reporting of cases dropping as a result of switching from PCRs to lateral flows. It does have to happen at some point. I just wonder whether doing it before Spring was the right time to do it.

HOWEVER as much as this might reduce costs to travellers, there's still the question of what airlines will require (which could still be a PCR and what destinations will still require - so people are still likely to have to test prior to travel, so the policy is going to have limited overall effect).

Booster Program Formally Launched
This one has been waivering for a bit. I think there is clear evidence of a need for it in the oldest age groups and the most clinically vulnerable. BUT I think we could still be on for a row about who gets and who doesn't get. Healthy people in their 50s may yet be excluded, at least initially. Which won't be popular. And there will be a row from people with some conditions which are off the list.

By all accounts this is going to be Pfizer only. Research seems to give a strong argument that AZ followed by Pfizer gives greatest benefits to immunity and there's always been concerns that AZ isn't quite as effective as Pfizer (though latest seems to suggest AZ immunity is longer lasting that Pfizer so the effectiveness argument is starting to falter over a longer period).

I think we are starting to fall behind on this one. We announced we had plans for this very early on, but this hasn't been pushed through at all and I think we are behind where we should be with this.

Financial impacts
It sounds benefits for isolation are going to remain. The last of furlough is set to end soon, and there's particular fears over the travel industry - hence why it looks like the relaxation of PCRs with travel is going on. I think this is the area to keep a close eye on, as I think its possibly the one going under the radar a fair amount. Politically, I think extending furlough whilst slashing UC top ups and raising NI is impossible. But its not going to go down well, if we do face another lockdown (which is still part of contigency planning - if only for prudence and worst case scenarios).

What else to look out for
I think curve projections are the thing to look out for. There are concerns things are not quite going as well as hoped. HOWEVER anyone who has been following moderate commentary on twitter, may be aware of talk of the ceiling of cases/transmission due to vaccines. This is one guy who has been following it a while:
twitter.com/video4me/status/1436723127380291586
His 'gold line theory' has held out more or less about how transmission rates will fluxuate but gradually decrease. Its broadly been following that with blips in both directions, and we look like once we pass a 'back to school' spike to start to get into R being below 1 very soon if he's right.

I also think talk about flu vaccines will come up. The HGV shortage has apparently hit this years programme forcing cancellations already. I think this may be an area of concern.

And I think the big elephant in the room, is how the NHS are going to cope with this years winter peak and just how much covid and backlog of other conditions is going to impact on that. Another lockdown is going to impact on other health conditions - but so is high caseload. This still looks like an impossible equation to calculate. Whitty said this winter could be 'very difficult' previously. I start to fear that the calculation is that restrictions will only increase non-covid deaths but no restrictions will potentially increase covid deaths meaning that both options are problematic and there's now effectively 'no way out' of the dilema and that theres a car crash immenient whatever we do and the only choice we have is to 'pick our poison' (and that probably has to fall to supporting the economy and trusting vaccines to protect the highest number of people - the most vulnerable in society are probably most at risk from both options anyway sadly)

Overall I am very much aware we have to move now from crisis management into long term management. I'm not totally convinced thats we are ready for the lap on all fronts before March. But we do need a change in tone and language and prepping parts of the public for that. I don't think we are really going to get much honesty about the NHS car crash incoming though. (This is why we've just had a big announcement about NI payments btw so they can see look what we need to do to save the NHS. It will silence many NI criticisms from the lower middle income quarters).

So I'm kinda on board and support what seems likely to happen - purely because its a rock and a hard place situation and there really are limits as to how much more can be done, post population vaccine and what is possible now in practical terms (not least from a compliance POV). Its reasonable given the mess we've ended up in - rightly or wrongly.

But yeah. I think this is probably where we are at and its comments about just how shitty this winter is going to be for the NHS is where this is really going to be and how thats framed / sold to the public.

@RedToothBrush this is an excellent, well balanced, thorough and insightful post. I agree with everything you’ve said.

@Thesandmanishere

The logical thing is to accept Covid is here to stay and protect and support those most at risk.

How would you do that then?

By enabling some kind of new furlough for those with severe medical conditions, booster jabs for the elderly and most at risk and the rest of us get on with life whilst saying masks are mandatory on public transport, certain venues etc during the winter months.

Now let’s hear your proposal for moving forward apart from
Injecting every single person (which btw look at Israel isn’t even enough to eradicate covid)

@StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind

Not zero risk from covid. The risk to that age may be lower but there isnt zero risk. People in that age group have dies, people in that age are suffwring with long covid and complications from covid so it isnt accurate to say they have no risk

I live in Wales and our local hospital has made the decision to close to anything but emergencies, including cancelling surgeries. Our area escaped being badly hit until now, which is quite scary, but we’ve kept masks largely, whereas England hasn’t.

@Covidworries the number of young people who will either die or end up with long COVID once fully vaccinated must be vanishingly rare- so I'd say that's pretty damn close to no risk. Far more at risk of flu, far far far greater risk of their mental health being destroyed if any restrictions are brought back in. The people I know in that age group are not worried about COVID but are worried about their education, or their jobs, or missing out on actually living rather than just existing as life became throughout lockdown. I don't know any who will comply with any further lockdowns tbh.

@AlohaMolly

I live in Wales and our local hospital has made the decision to close to anything but emergencies, including cancelling surgeries. Our area escaped being badly hit until now, which is quite scary, but we’ve kept masks largely, whereas England hasn’t.

Many still wear them still. Here in London on public transport and in supermarket, so not totally gone.

Scotland kept them but numbers seem high

I’m not that fussed, and do wear one usually as mandated, even in not by law, but it’s not clear cut masks low cases and England none

@OnlyFoolsnMothers - you'd also need to restore priority delivery slots for the CEV, and SD in certain essential places - as the CEV's lives don't stop either

I'd also treat the household as the basic unit of infection - so if say DH has got it, DC2 is testing, you're feeling marginally off, you don't go out or wave DC1 off to school

Masks on public transport (it's pretty well observed anyhow in places that kept it) all healthcare settings, university lecture halls (and other groups working together over time) and secondary classrooms, and possibly anywhere else where people might be cooped up together for more than 15 minutes.

Staying restriction free outdoors and at home (able to have gatherings) unless it really goes very tits up - but I hope it wouldn't come to that

[quote StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind]@Covidworries the number of young people who will either die or end up with long COVID once fully vaccinated must be vanishingly rare- so I'd say that's pretty damn close to no risk. Far more at risk of flu, far far far greater risk of their mental health being destroyed if any restrictions are brought back in. The people I know in that age group are not worried about COVID but are worried about their education, or their jobs, or missing out on actually living rather than just existing as life became throughout lockdown. I don't know any who will comply with any further lockdowns tbh. [/quote]
I think the early data might not have been very conclusive on risk if flu vs covid but more recent data from the us suggests children are more likely to be hospitalised from covid than flu. Also we vaccinate children against flu.

I think the early data might not have been very conclusive on risk if flu vs covid but more recent data from the us suggests children are more likely to be hospitalised from covid than flu. Also we vaccinate children against flu.

I was taking more about late teens/20s though- not young children. Until recently we have only vaccinated younger children. People in their 20s unless by choice generally don't bother with a flu jab.

Incidentally my primary aged children have had to wait until right before Xmas before getting a flu vaccine at school. My children are too young to benefit from a covid vaccine as well.

I still think that more restrictions would have a far worse impact on young people, from young children all the way through to my age group. We can't live life risk free. We'd never let 17 year olds drive for example, if we didn't want to accept any level of risk for their age group.

Hopefully masks and WFH will be brought back to slow cases and prevent another LD. But it's him so it'll probably be more bullshit and wondering why the NHS is struggling still.

Rafals

Everyone keeps saying we vaccinate all kids for flu but we don’t - it must be certain year groups?

My teens 14,15 have never been offered flu vaccine - neither have any of the kids in my family

Uptake amongst kids who are offered is under 50%

Just read

So looks set to change this year but up til now only primary kids offered flu vaccine or at risk secondary groups

Our secondary has never offered the flu vaccine in achool

That's right @Watapalava - it's purely been a response to the pandemic I think- up until now it's only been primary pupils offered the flu vaccine. And often very very late into the flu season.

That's not true, my primary age child has had a vaccine every year I've early October, secondary age ones also get it too

@marieantoinehairnet secondary aged children have only recently been offered it as previously mentioned.

In the past my daughter had her flu vaccine in October, in recent years it has slipped back to nearly before Xmas. I would imagine it varies area by area. It's virgin health that provide the service through our school.

Like lots of the NHS, siphoned off to the private sector. And a postcode lottery as to when they get it. Familiar story.

By enabling some kind of new furlough for those with severe medical conditions

So essentially your plan is that people like my mum, who is a fit and healthy 55 year old with a keyworker job, who has an underlying health condition that doesn't affect any aspect of her life at all day to day BUT means she is CEV, should just be kept on furlough and shielded away while the rest of us get on with it? Forever? That's your big plan?!

I sometimes think that when the words "clinically vulnerable" are mentioned, people think that means bedbound, frail elderly or very unwell individuals who don't much leave the house anyway. No. These are functioning, important, contributing members of society. If your big plan is to keep all of them shielded do you have any idea what kind of impact that would have on the country? What about the CEV children? They just should, what, never go to school or socialise?

Honestly it really beggars belief how little critical thinking skills some of you have. It stands to reason that ensuring as many people as possible (including children) have the option of being vaccinated IN CONJUNCTION with keeping community cases low is the best way of living with the virus and minimising disruption. When you talk about "living with the virus" as in just letting it do its thing, what you are actually talking about is continued disruption and stop start restrictions. That's what your version of living with the virus is. Keeping community transmission low could be achieved with such basic, low ask steps as:

• keeping masks on public transport and unventilated indoor spaces
• making it so that employers MUST allow anyone who WANTS to work from home (and is able to) to do so. That way those who want to come back to the office get to do so. Win win.
• keeping it so that close contacts must isolate and getting significantly better at tracing close contacts
• making it so that any parent who wants and is able to home educate their child while cases are high can do so without being fined or losing their school place, and improving ventilation in classrooms

Big difference, and a lot less disruption than just "living with the virus".

@StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind

You said no risk to that age group which is incorrect. The risk may be tiny but that isnt the same as no risk

@RedToothBrush great summary of what to expect Tuesday, thank you.

When you say concerns about things not going quite as well as they should, do you feel this is more to do with cases, deaths or hospitalisations?

@StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind

That's right *@Watapalava* - it's purely been a response to the pandemic I think- up until now it's only been primary pupils offered the flu vaccine. And often very very late into the flu season.

it’s been working it’s way up the year groups for years. I don’t think the pandemic has affected the roll out of introducing it until this flu season when they’ve added years 8-11 rather than just year 8. Current y8 will have been offered the jab every year since they started school but any teen above year 8 won’t have been offered it unless they qualify for a flu jab under another criteria.

There were issues with supply last year for the jabs and possibly the nasal spray too, but getting it in December isn’t a total disaster.

So essentially your plan is that people like my mum, who is a fit and healthy 55 year old with a keyworker job, who has an underlying health condition that doesn't affect any aspect of her life at all day to day BUT means she is CEV, should just be kept on furlough and shielded away while the rest of us get on with it? Forever? well covid isn’t going anywhere so you tell me what the plan is? The evidence is starting to show that those who have had covid combined with being vaccinated have the best protection- your big plan is my mum is unfortunately negatively affected so every healthy person should forgo their lives …that makes sense!

well covid isn’t going anywhere so you tell me what the plan is?

Did you read my post? It isn't just "my mum is affected so everyone should keep restrictions to keep her safe". It's that your suggestion that CEV people should be shielded while the rest of us get on with it is absurd and unworkable because a sizeable chunk of the working, economically active population is CEV. How do you expect our society to function while they're all furloughed?

I mean are you honestly that dense that you don't understand that CEV people are not all at home, lying in bed? They are nurses, lorry drivers, supermarket workers, train drivers, teachers, food production workers, delivery drivers...the list goes on.