Lockdown for the unvaccinated - or a full lockdown for everybody?

[PrincessNutNuts]

Which would you choose?

@Wellbythebloodyhell

For me, it's about what I understand to be necessary.

Thankfully for the country what YOU deem to be necessary has absolute no relevance to reality whatsoever

It's good that you approve of what's been happening in covid strategy for the last couple of years.

Because there's plenty more where that came from.

@frumpety Now thats something i could get behind

In order of preference:

a) no more lockdown
b) lockdown the unvaccinated

Not, particularly, because I think there's much point to either but because I'm going to ignore any further lockdowns as much as I can anyway, so it would be easier as a fully vaccinated person to ignore b).

How would anyone identify the unvaccinated?

@PrincessNutNuts

Which would you choose?

Username checks out

@ColinTheKoala

So if vaccinated people are more likely to have the disease mildly they’re more likely be asymptomatic carriers, right

you would have thought so wouldn't you? Or have mild symptoms they don't really notice like sniffles or a slight cough or sore throat?

The ‘science’ is always changing on the fly, it’s like they have no idea 🤔

I read a comment something like :
The govt is trying to persuade the unvaccinated that the vaxs work, but simultaneously telling the vaxxed that they 'don't work' hence the need for a booster.

Crazy times, when the vaxxed are scared of the unvaxxed. No more lock downs either, I think an awful lot of people would ignore it anyway.

@PrincessNutNuts unless you're a government advisor, what you deem to be necessary is as irrelevant as what everyone else on this thread thinks.

@PrincessNutNuts
I feel like I’m not up to date on things, but are they saying now that unvaccinated are more likely to spread than vaccinated?
I think that info needs to be made clear as I think many people believe that vaccinated spread as much as unvaccinated.
I think people’s immediate reaction is to blame the government for this situation - or when they see it’s happening elsewhere across Europe - then its ‘governments’ which doesn’t make sense - that would imply that there is some sort of world conspiracy going on which infuriates me.
I think whatever we do in the UK will be more lax than many other countries because a Tory government will put a greater emphasis on preserving the economy.
For me personally, I’d be ok with a lockdown. I can’t afford holidays, restaurants, going out etc. My happiest times are my children, partner cuddled up on the sofa, and I enjoyed homeschooling. And my wider family have adapted to this situation so we’d be back to zoom calls. I realise I’m fortunate here.

So I’d do whatever is needed, but I tend towards more left wing thinking - so whatever strategy would save most lives over the economy. I currently don’t know what Labour are saying, but I’d probably lean towards that!

No lockdown. If you have to choose it would have to be everyone because it would be impossible in our society to operate lockdown only if unvaccinated. Chilling thought of the authorities checking our papers. Like some kind of authoritarian regime.

How would anyone identify the unvaccinated?

Exactly. When we were all locked down your neighbour could grass you up for having a party, now no-one will know if their neighbours are vaccinated or not. And let's face it that is the only way anyone would get caught breaking 'the rules' as there's hardly any police officers around to deal with actual crimes as it is. This simply couldn't be policed or enforced.

@Noducksgiven

How would anyone identify the unvaccinated?

Exactly. When we were all locked down your neighbour could grass you up for having a party, now no-one will know if their neighbours are vaccinated or not. And let's face it that is the only way anyone would get caught breaking 'the rules' as there's hardly any police officers around to deal with actual crimes as it is. This simply couldn't be policed or enforced.

Easy. Just demand to see your neighbour’s papers 😂

Easy. Just demand to see your neighbour’s papers 😂

😂 Am sure there's a few curtain twitchers out there who would do just that!

@PrincessNutNuts

Decisions the government has made about who to vaccinate and when don't change the fact that to have a hope of population immunity you need over 90% of the population to be vaccinated.

Which is what the governments "Vaccine Only" strategy relies on.

Without it, a vaccine only will fail, and NPIs and restrictions will be needed.

Ireland has over 90% of the population fully vaccinated, has had the longest and harshest lockdowns, masks wearing is enforced and vaccine passports in place and only recently lifted restrictions on nightclubs but again with mitigations in place. They currently have one of the highest case rates in Europe, despite ticking all the boxes for vaccines and other mitigations. So as a case study for doing all the right things and 90% = herd immunity especially when we know vaccine effectiveness reduces over time it doesn't exactly add up.

Ireland has over 90% of the population fully vaccinated

Is that 90% of the population or 90% of the eligible population?

@loudbatperson

I don't think a lockdown for the unvaccinated would work.

I am vaccinated, but laying here ill with Covid, having caught it of my also vaccinated daughter.

We have been very careful throughout, but have been unlucky. We don't know exactly where my daughter caught it from (likely school) but she passed it over to me.

This is so true, everyone I know who has had covid is vaccinated. This is also another reason vaccine passports are a stupid idea.

ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations

I’ve just looked at Ireland. 75.53% of the population fully vaccinated.

@Noducksgiven

How would anyone identify the unvaccinated?

Exactly. When we were all locked down your neighbour could grass you up for having a party, now no-one will know if their neighbours are vaccinated or not. And let's face it that is the only way anyone would get caught breaking 'the rules' as there's hardly any police officers around to deal with actual crimes as it is. This simply couldn't be policed or enforced.

Even during the universal lockdowns there were people getting away with parties unsanctioned, and it was at least visible then who was breaking the law. It's never been possible for the state to police or enforce lockdowns, there just aren't the numbers. Even pre austerity that wouldn't have worked, but certainly not now. They've always needed buy in from the population, amongst other things such as financial subsidy for enough people to stay at home. This, incidentally, is why there isn't going to be another one.

@QuornSausagesAreTheDevilsPenis

Neither. But mask wearing indoors being mandatory for a bit would be a least worst option.

If we are doing the least worst option then it would be lockdown for the unvaccinated as that would be a group who have then chosen to be locked down.

If we are doing the least worst option then it would be lockdown for the unvaccinated as that would be a group who have then chosen to be locked down

Weird definition of choice you’ve got there.

@UsedUpUsername

If we are doing the least worst option then it would be lockdown for the unvaccinated as that would be a group who have then chosen to be locked down

Weird definition of choice you’ve got there.

Chosen not to do something which gives them freedoms. Just as people who choose not to get a driving license cannot drive.

As someone said upthread men are more likely to be seriously impacted by Covid as are the severely overweight and those with pre existing conditions. If we're thinking a targeted lockdown would be fun, why not include these criteria as well ?

I think people should get the vaccination, but I can kind of understand why some haven't. It feels like a slippery slope to start targeting the relatively small pocket of the population who haven't.

Ironically I'd get my 15 year old his second dose tomorrow if I could- and he wants it too - as it's going to be a royal pain in the ass to travel with him not fully vaccinated.

Chosen not to do something which gives them freedoms. Just as people who choose not to get a driving license cannot drive

Coercion is not choice.

It’s not like these silly mandates have worked anywhere else they’ve been implemented (see: Ireland).

What other point do they have other than to satisfy a rather sadistic urge to punish those who won’t comply?

Why is either kind of lockdown necessary?

If we are doing the least worst option then it would be lockdown for the unvaccinated as that would be a group who have then chosen to be locked down.

Yeah, being born after 2009 was a choice.

What we also have to take into account is the detrimental impact of the state passing laws that can't be enforced and that are widely flouted, as these would be. Because either you include under 12s in such a lockdown and have a mass parental mutiny on your hands, or you don't and then it applies only to a group who can't easily be identified as unvaccinated when they're privately socialising. Either way it's unenforceable. Anything that erodes public trust in this way is a bad thing.