Tracks of my tiers

[tinseltitsbumfannythelot]

New thread!

Morning all.

@NotAnActualSheep

Oh, that's odd, re the lack of review today. I thought it was usually Tuesday the update was given to parliament. But I suppose as Parliament is in recess, there isn't that option. They are reconvening temporarily tomorrow though to debate brexit (again...) and a ministerial briefing on covid is scheduled in there too, so I suppose that will be it.

I confess I may have changed my opinion slightly on the deal/ no deal thing looking into it a bit more last night and may have been a bit harsh re a vote against being effectively a vote for no deal. It seems even if BJs enabling act wasn't supported by Parliament, he would have other options to ratify the deal without parliamentary support, just a bit messier and not so convenient for him... and he'd have to go back to the EU cap in hand to delay stuff while that was put in place. But it wouldn't necessarily revert to the "no deal" option everyone was planning for before Christmas eve, unless the EU refused the delay/ extension to the transition period - as there is a signed deal waiting to be put into action. So the parliamentary vote is itself a bit of rhetoric really. I still don't blame anyone opposed to brexit for supporting it, though, just to get the fucker over and done with, as it's not going to change - it is still the only deal we can get at this stage. But if it isn't supported, it would embarrass BJ, which can't be a bad outcome, even if it is childish to want that.

It's not childish to make a stand about an issue! Parties who oppose Brexit should be able to let the records reflect that.

Except restrictions and lockdown do reduce the rate of virus transmission. Glasgow's numbers did reduce, with a time lag due to restrictions. ICU numbers have hovered around 60, due to the restrictions.
If lockdown and restrictions don't work, why have we not had exponential increase in transmission?

Lockdowns and restriction do reduce transmissions but they're only a pause button not a stop, especially with this new, easy to spread margarine version of covid. It's useful when that time is used to do something- strengthen healthcare, track and trace, vaccine deployment etc - but it seems like we locked down for months over spring and did not very much with that time to make us better prepared. It was also known that lockdown couldn't be done indefinitely as there is a limit to how long people will complying for and it seems to me that is very much the case - so many people are not following restrictions now as they have just had enough. Heck I only have to look at the number of non-resident cars in my street over the last few days to see that people are still socialising - just in their homes.

I don't know how relevant this is but not one teacher in my school has been required to isolate as a result of a pupil testing positive (and plenty of pupils have). I think because we're supposed to stay 2 metres away from them because that's so easy.

Parties who oppose Brexit should be able to let the records reflect that.

Yes, but we've brexitted (?) already, so that isn't what the records should be reflecting (granted the debate probably will, and that is the right of whoever is speaking). The vote is, if anything, an opposition to the details of the trade deal reached with the EU. Fine... parties are allowed to put that opposition on record, but it won't change anything, as the same trade deal will go ahead, delayed and not ratified by Parliament (if how I'm reading it now is correct). I'm still not sure what benefit to the country such opposition and delay would create, other than buggering up business arrangements which won't be as planned on 1st Jan, creating further delays on exports and imports and so on. Of course Parliament has the right to cause that delay, by putting their opposition on record, but it doesn't seem very kind to the people of the UK, whether or not they support brexit in general or the deal in particular.

Scotland is doing roughly half the level of testing per head of population relative to England. England has doubled its testing in the last couple of weeks. A lot of that is mass community testing. It is not unreasonable to suggest this is the main driver in diverging rates.

Differing hospital pressures are very difficult to measure. Patients "in hospital with Covid-19" include anyone tested positive within 28 days of admission or since admission until they leave hospital. Assume vaccine roll out will be increasing delayed discharge - eg no nursing home in the process of vaccination is going to want a new admission atm.

It doesn’t matter what I think or what the stats are or what the graphs show, they’ve decided that lockdown is the way and we must all comply.

I’m done resisting. It’s hopeless.

@NotAnActualSheep every vaccine given to a healthy teacher or TA will delay one given to an elderly or vulnerable person and it's true that the stats don't show that teachers are dying in greater proportions than other professions, although I don't know when the most recent figures for that is so it may have risen over the past few months.

But it gets schools back and that's a massive part of the equation to getting a fully functioning economy going. Sure the teens will still catch it, so we need to keep some form of restrictions about seeing people until first few waves of vaccine is rolled out.

That's how I'd do it anyway, goodness knows what the governments will do.

Glasgow numbers went down to roughly in line with rest of Scotland once the student numbers washed out. The main driver now looks to be infection control in QEUH and related healthcare - there is a pattern to the Pillar 1 test effect. Similar pattern to Manchester. These are the 2 largest hospitals in the UK and by far the largest and most concentrated provision relative to the populations they serve.

Manchester, similar to Glasgow, has had continuous level 3/4 measures. The numbers went up and down regardless.

@icanboogieboogiewoogie

I don't know how relevant this is but not one teacher in my school has been required to isolate as a result of a pupil testing positive (and plenty of pupils have). I think because we're supposed to stay 2 metres away from them because that's so easy.

That's interesting, boogiewoogie. Is that a primary or high school? Are the relevant teachers given a say in it and are saying that they were 2m away? Because I would have thought that would be pretty difficult to maintain at all times (though maybe limiting to less than 15min per pupil per lesson?), as you imply with your deletion! So either the teachers are happy that they can and have maintained the distance, or something has gone wrong with the system and people who should be isolating aren't. Maybe because they are too scared to say that they haven't been sticking to the guidance, or just aren't asked as it's assumed they have been? So it's either good, or very, very bad, depending on which! Though still, if teachers haven't been actually getting ill even though pupils have, it's probably not too critical, and suggests that something is being done right to protect the teachers. Or luck, I suppose.

@NotAnActualSheep

Parties who oppose Brexit should be able to let the records reflect that.

Yes, but we've brexitted (?) already, so that isn't what the records should be reflecting (granted the debate probably will, and that is the right of whoever is speaking). The vote is, if anything, an opposition to the details of the trade deal reached with the EU. Fine... parties are allowed to put that opposition on record, but it won't change anything, as the same trade deal will go ahead, delayed and not ratified by Parliament (if how I'm reading it now is correct). I'm still not sure what benefit to the country such opposition and delay would create, other than buggering up business arrangements which won't be as planned on 1st Jan, creating further delays on exports and imports and so on. Of course Parliament has the right to cause that delay, by putting their opposition on record, but it doesn't seem very kind to the people of the UK, whether or not they support brexit in general or the deal in particular.

Don't you think political parties have a duty to act in accordance with the views of those who voted for them?

I’m just stopping in to appreciate this margarine version of covid

Wouldbegood you are very wise. There will come a time, in the not too distant future I hope, when it will suit our masters and mistresses to undo all of this. There will doubtless be kicking and screaming from many with vested interests but that will inevitably lead to an even more robust unwinding. Otherwise how will they ever put the vested interests they have been feeding to suit back in their boxes. If I were a vested interest I would be looking to hedge my bets right about now.

If it hasn't happened long before May I will be surprised.

Couldn't disagree more with pp re Brexit Deal. If the EU is unanimously supporting the Deal and looking forward to an evolving new partnership then it is in Scotland and the whole of the UK's interests, as well as theirs, to meet them with an equally united partnership.

It is almost impossible to build relationships with people who can't even manage to work together among themselves.

Don't you think political parties have a duty to act in accordance with the views of those who voted for them?

Interesting way of putting that question. Less than 50% of Scotland vote SNP (3% ish of UK). It is estimated that about 1/3 of SNP voters are pro-Brexit.

I don't agree political parties should only reflect the views of their voters. It is surely for them to act on principle for the good of their constituents, not just their voters. If they want to be re-elected it is then for them to persuade the electorate to back these principles.

[quote rookiemere]@NotAnActualSheep every vaccine given to a healthy teacher or TA will delay one given to an elderly or vulnerable person and it's true that the stats don't show that teachers are dying in greater proportions than other professions, although I don't know when the most recent figures for that is so it may have risen over the past few months.

But it gets schools back and that's a massive part of the equation to getting a fully functioning economy going. Sure the teens will still catch it, so we need to keep some form of restrictions about seeing people until first few waves of vaccine is rolled out.

That's how I'd do it anyway, goodness knows what the governments will do.[/quote]
I agree, and the stats do show that teachers aren't any more likely to contract covid than any other workers. So I assume that would also apply to deaths (though the latest death data by occupation only goes up to the summer, so not sure that's too useful given schools weren't open then!)

But I'm still not sure why vaccinating teachers will get schools back. A teacher being off school due to illness or isolation will be more disruptive to more children's education than if a child is off. And vaccination will prevent the "illness" part, but as far as I can see not the risk of them having to isolate if one of their contacts is infected. If the infection risk is from children (who generally don't get ill themselves but could pass to vulnerable relatives or teachers) is the intention to scrap isolation of close contacts in schools if teachers (and the vulnerable relatives) are vaccinated? Because that would stop a lot of the disruption, granted, but I can't see it being very popular amongst some parents and haven't seen it proposed. If the infection risk is the teachers themselves, will vaccination stop them passing it onto children (or other teachers, or anyone else)? I'd thought that hadn't yet been confirmed, though it is of course a possibility, in which case I can see the point in their vaccination.

I can't see teachers getting to jump the que. Partly because that would be admitting schools are unsafe.

Can you imagine parents reactions? Hurumf "I'm no sending ma weans to the school until they've been vaccinated"

The SNP have been opposed to Brexit since day one. Are you seriously suggesting they vote for it now because...well I've really no idea why you think they should to be honest.

Because brexit was already voted on and it didn't go the way they pretended they wanted? Now it's about voting for what happens now, that's a different vote which might be a totally different position to take.

As pp said, it's like being a toddler and the option you want not being available so refusing to engage with the choices still available.

No it's about registering your protest even when you know it won't make the blindest bit of difference. It happens in a democracy, although we don't appear to be living in a functional one any more, which is apparently ok with a lot of people.

Well it does make a difference because its shoving a stick in the spokes because of sour grapes and an snp supporter talking about democracy is a laugh.

There was a democratic referendum on independence just a few years ago 🤷🏻‍♀️

Does anyone know if routine surgeries and outpatients are likely to be affected by this latest lockdown?

@NotAnActualSheep

Parties who oppose Brexit should be able to let the records reflect that.

Yes, but we've brexitted (?) already, so that isn't what the records should be reflecting (granted the debate probably will, and that is the right of whoever is speaking). The vote is, if anything, an opposition to the details of the trade deal reached with the EU. Fine... parties are allowed to put that opposition on record, but it won't change anything, as the same trade deal will go ahead, delayed and not ratified by Parliament (if how I'm reading it now is correct). I'm still not sure what benefit to the country such opposition and delay would create, other than buggering up business arrangements which won't be as planned on 1st Jan, creating further delays on exports and imports and so on. Of course Parliament has the right to cause that delay, by putting their opposition on record, but it doesn't seem very kind to the people of the UK, whether or not they support brexit in general or the deal in particular.

The S and NI Govs know that how they vote doesn't make a difference as the devolved nations are always outnumbered by English MPs but they are recording a vote against on principle.