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

[PrincessNutNuts]

Which would you choose?

Pre pandemic many,people had restrictions placed on them by society not making provision for them and generally no one cared about that.

Being restricted from doing something because you won't agree to do something is also nothing new.

Lockdowns were the right thing for when the virus was rife, many hundreds were dying and we had no way of combating a serious pandemic which had the potential to decimate the population.

Lockdowns aren't right currently in the UK, because we've learned a great deal more about the virus, have several vaccines available plus a number of possible treatments, and we need to move on to the stage where we learn to live with the virus in our midst.

However, I do believe there should be more masks in crowded places/transport etc. I also believe that everyone should be encouraged to be vaccinated. Anti-vaxxers have their beliefs but they must accept that there are consequences to their actions, and that includes passes and so on. It's true that you can catch COVID when vaccinated but you are far less likely to need hospital treatment or die, or fill up the hospitals for weeks while you go through a very serious illness. For this reason I believe anti-vaxxers should have limits on what they can do or where they go, because of the threat of prolonging the pandemic, and the threat of more serious disease producing a mutant strain which could undo all the progress so far.

In countries such as Austria where the cases are rising again, and where relatively few have been vaccinated, yes, I would support serious curbs on the non-vaccinated....

I don't think it has to be as negative or dramatic as "Lockdown for the Unvaccinated" - that seems like a very divisive and punitive way of doing things.

But we could certainly bring in Covid passes like they are using in France etc. so that you have to prove a negative test/ vaccination status to go to a restaurant or nightclub.

Yes in some ways they are similar but it's about the way you approach it with people. Telling people they are in Lockdown because they are unvaccinated will never go down well.

@WildExcuses You claim not to be selfish yet you volunteer with vulnerable young people and are unvaccinated.

If that volunteering is face to face then that is pretty selfish.

You claim not to be selfish yet you volunteer with vulnerable young people and are unvaccinated.

They are not medically vulnerable. The are vulnerable in different ways.

I do LFTs regularly.

I wear a mask and we are still social distancing.

Please feel free to give up your time to help or indeed more of your time if you already volunteer. Maybe unvaccinated people could then be turned away, until then we will be thankful that people do give up their time to help others, regardless of vaccination status.

Neither. Ever again.

You do realise COVID is never going anywhere? Do you want to lockdown everyyear for ever?!

Drives me mad honestly, we have to get on with life, and I say this as I lay here with COVID unvaccinated.

[quote Flyonawalk]@Spikeyball Being restricted for not injecting an unlicensed drug for which there is no long-term safety data is new.[/quote]
What "unlicensed drug" are you talking about? Sputnik? If you mean AZ, Pfizer BionTech, or Moderna, then you're spreading fake news about their licensing status in the UK. Please stop.

@ichundich None of the drugs you list are licensed for use in the U.K. They were granted emergency use authorisation and are in stage 3 clinical trials.

Full lockdown for those that want a full lockdown.

Everyone else is free to do as they please.

If a lockdown was absolutely necessary (but it isn't and it's horrendous for businesses), then it should be for everyone. I don't think lockdowns are necessary; advice on mixing with business restrictions on space, ventilation / outside, masks etc are sufficient.

For very high risk activities such as entry to large indoor events I can support the need to be vaccinated or tested, and for working with very frail or immune compromised vulnerable people I think sadly vaccines are necessary. Shopping, hairdressers, pubs, cinemas, restaurants etc I think entry restrictions Austria-style are unnecessary overkill and counter-productive in that segregating groups is hugely alienating.

Neither of these options make any sense at all without knowing if someone is infectious or not - regardless of vaccine status. Quicker and more accurate testing might be helpful.

Nobody is.

I'm assuming everyone saying "neither" would plump for a package of NPIs implemented well in advance of winter to ensure there will be no need for any kind of lockdown?

Stuff like ventilation, HEPA filters, working from home, isolating contacts, an effective test and trace system, masks, etc.

Given that it would not be possible for this to function effectively, because you need trust and a cooperative population for an effective track and trace or contact isolation system, if we're allowed to choose from things that aren't on offer in reality, I shall plump for covid evaporating entirely.

@cookiesandtea

The uk didnt lockdown for fun, it locked down to prevent the real risk of so manypeople being ill and needing medical care at the same time that many people who would recover would die while waiting for care. There is a limit to the number of people tha5 can be cared for at any given time. Without lockdown there was a real risk of both covid and non covid patients dying unnessesarily in high numbers.

Although, vaccinati9n has reduced the numbers needing hospital care thankfully. The higher the case number the more people that will need hospital care. So if numbers continue to rise there isa risk of hospitals becoming overwhelmed lockdown may be needed.

The choice then islockdown or recognise thatyou chance of recieving neccessary medical attention for anything (rtc, broken bones, heart attack, covid etc) will be serverly reduced

Lockdown for the unvaccinated. Easy

Another vote for neither.

Lockdowns are so 2020. Been there, done that. More are pointless.

@Toty

Everyone under the age of 50 will soon be considered unvaccinated though. If you were double vaxxed by the summer you maybe have a couple of months of immunity left. So that leaves the elderly and vulnerable who've been triple vaxxed to go about their lives whilst the working age population who provide vital services and keep the economy going will be locked up, I'd like to see how that would play out.

Yes it will be interesting to see if opinion on this changes once a greater majority are classed as unvaccinated.

@ichundich

"This medicinal product has been given authorisation for temporary supply by the UK Department of Health and Social Care and the Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. It does not have a marketing authorisation, but this temporary authorisation grants permission for the medicine to be used for active immunisation of individuals aged 18 years and older for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19"

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachmentdata/file/1029200/INFORMATIONNFORHCPSSONCOVID--_

So in the case of Astra Zeneca it has not been "licensed" it has been authorised for temporary use and there is a world of difference between the two.

If you you are saying AZ has been licensed then you are spreading fake news. Please stop.

@PrincessNutNuts

Can somebody clarify which virus that has killed millions worldwide and ground the planet to a halt the fat people are spreading in this analogy?

Because otherwise it's a false equivalence isn't it?

That’s not what the analogy is about princess, as you well know. It’s pointing out that the majority of people in critical care at the moment are overweight/obese so are technically putting the most pressure on nhs services which is what people are complaining about. (And obesity related illnesses put a strain on the nhs even in non pandemic times) So why focus on only the unvaccinated? As a pp said, it would be considered ‘fat shaming’ to do this and extremely prejudiced/discriminatory even though, technically, it falls into the category of what a previous poster was blaming the unvaccinated for - ‘selfish’ behaviour resulting in a strain on nhs services.

Also, if there was more of an awareness campaign about overweight/obesity being a high risk factor you might find a higher uptake of the vaccine in younger people with higher BMIs. They may think that their age alone means that they are low risk even though they aren’t.

” overweight/obesity being a high risk factor”

This bugs me. For all the talk of following science, and for all of Johnson’s near fatal illness that he himself ascribes to his weight… basically it’s been ignored. No discussion, and certainly no effort to make the situation better.

But lockdown for those that “cause” that group risk. Yeah, that’s good.

@MeanderingGently “It's true that you can catch COVID when vaccinated but you are far less likely to need hospital treatment or die, or fill up the hospitals for weeks while you go through a very serious illness.”

Technically a vaccinated 60 + year old is still more at risk than an unvaccinated healthy

We were told the vaccines were the way out of this and they have been. If the two doses weren't enough then the boosters (already offered to CEV and over 50s) have to be.

Jan-Feb will be tough again - always is for the NHS - but we'll have to get on with it. There's easy wins like WFH if you can and masks on public transport/in shops etc, but we need to live with it now.

[quote 1dayatatime]@ichundich

"This medicinal product has been given authorisation for temporary supply by the UK Department of Health and Social Care and the Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. It does not have a marketing authorisation, but this temporary authorisation grants permission for the medicine to be used for active immunisation of individuals aged 18 years and older for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19"

[[https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment]]data/file/1029200/INFORMATIONNFORHCPSSONCOVID--_

So in the case of Astra Zeneca it has not been "licensed" it has been authorised for temporary use and there is a world of difference between the two.

If you you are saying AZ has been licensed then you are spreading fake news. Please stop.

[/quote]
Is there a difference in real world safety between an authorised product and a licensed product?

I live in Germany, and the English language media is reporting the Austrian decision very differently to how it actually is.

First of all, German-speaking countries have had "3G" ruling for months - that is tested, recovered, vaccinated (all start with G in German). Recovered or vaccinated people show their medical certificate to access eat-in at restaurants, gyms, leisure activities, events etc. If you don't have a certificate or don't want to show one you can show the result of a rapid test from a rapid test centre (which are available everywhere and free). Children under 16 do not need to meet any of the conditions, even though vaccination is offered from age 12. Teens can show a school ID to prove their age instead. Masks have remained compulsory pretty much everywhere and there has never been any medical exemption from mask wearing. Also it's been surgical/FFP2 only for almost all of this year.

Essential services including shops, public transport, takeaway restaurants, medical treatment (including non-urgent), schools/classes etc is always accessible to everyone. Employers are not allowed to ask an employee's vaccine status.

It was always possible to meet people in private, indoors and out, up to a max number of households. Adults in a relationship are considered one household. Children of separated parents are considered members of both households. Vaccinated and recovered people just don't count towards the total.

During the strictest parts of lockdown shops were reduced to "essentials" only and schools/childcare was closed, but they aren't proposing to bring that back.

Moving to the 2G model means removing the testing option for anything non-essential, so certain shops, leisure facilities, gyms, hairdressers etc. It's certainly not "only go out for food and work" whatever the media is saying. People who have a medical reason not to be vaccinated, including pregnant and recently pregnant women (even though this is now considered safe) can still use a test to access those services. But even someone who is unvaccinated and has not had covid can still do most things.

I don't know what they are tying it to in Austria, but in Germany it's tied to how full the intensive care units are rather than case numbers in general.