CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 10)

[frisbee]

Twinfan said:

Scotty2 said:

Outside thinking...
Why not move Easter a couple of weeks...

Seriously? You do know what Easter is and how it's been defined for hundreds of years, dont you?

Everything else has been shoved aside for the holy COVID-19 crusade!

[Otispunkmeyer]

Uggers said:

Scotty2 said:

Outside thinking...
Why not move Easter a couple of weeks...

Steady now we haven't had Xmas yet remember

Well, my xmas presents are still waiting for me up north! so yeah!

[Twinfan]

frisbee said:

Twinfan said:

Scotty2 said:

Outside thinking...
Why not move Easter a couple of weeks...

Seriously? You do know what Easter is and how it's been defined for hundreds of years, dont you?

Everything else has been shoved aside for the holy COVID-19 crusade!

I'm not religious, but what I mean is that Easter is a clearly defined thing within Christianity. You can't arbitrarily move the date of it!

Edited by Twinfan on Tuesday 9th March 14:56

[Leicester Loyal]

danllama said:

LBC can't help themselves but I did enjoy this first comment

Hahahaha, I know Aaron, how weird is that Small world.

[Leicester Loyal]

Ntv said:

I suspect part of the reason is they want Brits to holiday in the UK for economic reasons.

I said this to a work colleague a few weeks ago tbf. I think they want us to all stay here this year so that our coffers are boosted massively, rather than given to other countries, it'll give us a huge economic advantage.

[Garvin]

isaldiri said:

Garvin said:

The more so as the sterilising effect of the vaccines seems to be quite good as well.

What sterilising effect? It's being theorised that it reduces transmission - there is nothing as far as I have seen that says anything about sterilising immunity (especially long term sterilising immunity).

I previously read that a study found that one Oxford AZ vaccine jab reduced onward transmission by two-thirds. This is why I used the term “sterilising effect” followed by “seems” and “quite good” i.e. not conclusive that it is a sterilising vaccine. If the study finding is fully borne out in practice then it obviously reduces the probability of cases arising and add grist to the mill that restrictions should be released sooner.

[Donbot]

Twinfan said:

frisbee said:

Twinfan said:

Scotty2 said:

Outside thinking...
Why not move Easter a couple of weeks...

Seriously? You do know what Easter is and how it's been defined for hundreds of years, dont you?

Everything else has been shoved aside for the holy COVID-19 crusade!

I'm not religious, but what I mean is that Easter is a clearly defined thing within Christianity. You can't arbitrarily move the date of it!

We could call it the second holy reformation.

[deeps]

Twinfan said:

I'm not religious, but what I mean is that Easter is a clearly defined thing within Christianity. You can't arbitrarily move the date of it!

Edited by Twinfan on Tuesday 9th March 14:56

Why not though? The date of it moves every year anyway.

[Boringvolvodriver]

deeps said:

Twinfan said:

I'm not religious, but what I mean is that Easter is a clearly defined thing within Christianity. You can't arbitrarily move the date of it!

Edited by Twinfan on Tuesday 9th March 14:56

Why not though? The date of it moves every year anyway.

Easter is linked to Passover which is a moving feast based on the first full moon after the spring equinox as determined in Exodus or the 15th day of thenHebrew month Nisan.

It is the key part of the Christian calendar despite the fact that Christmas Day is certainly not the day that Jesus (even iff you believe he existed) was born.

My late father was very religious and he was of the opinion that Easter should become a fixed date, in the same way that Christmas Day was fixed.

However, it will not happen although for school holidays, there has been a move towards fixing these and then having a long weekend over Easter - which is a good thing and a pragmatic approach.

[Boringvolvodriver]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Be interesting to see how many get reported on the government web site as based on yesterday’s figures there doesn’t seem to be relation between the two!

[monkfish1]

Leicester Loyal said:

Ntv said:

I suspect part of the reason is they want Brits to holiday in the UK for economic reasons.

I said this to a work colleague a few weeks ago tbf. I think they want us to all stay here this year so that our coffers are boosted massively, rather than given to other countries, it'll give us a huge economic advantage.

Not really. Just going to help make up for all the other people NOT coming to this country for their holidays.

[TheJimi]

Garvin said:

isaldiri said:

Garvin said:

The more so as the sterilising effect of the vaccines seems to be quite good as well.

What sterilising effect? It's being theorised that it reduces transmission - there is nothing as far as I have seen that says anything about sterilising immunity (especially long term sterilising immunity).

I previously read that a study found that one Oxford AZ vaccine jab reduced onward transmission by two-thirds. This is why I used the term “sterilising effect” followed by “seems” and “quite good” i.e. not conclusive that it is a sterilising vaccine. If the study finding is fully borne out in practice then it obviously reduces the probability of cases arising and add grist to the mill that restrictions should be released sooner.

Transmission reduction and sterilising effect are different things, as I understand it.

[ukbabz]

Boringvolvodriver said:

Be interesting to see how many get reported on the government web site as based on yesterday’s figures there doesn’t seem to be relation between the two!

Wonder if they missed off London and NE yesterday as those combined make up the difference between reported by NHS and reported by government portal.

[alangla]

Boringvolvodriver said:

deeps said:

Twinfan said:

I'm not religious, but what I mean is that Easter is a clearly defined thing within Christianity. You can't arbitrarily move the date of it!

Edited by Twinfan on Tuesday 9th March 14:56

Why not though? The date of it moves every year anyway.

Easter is linked to Passover which is a moving feast based on the first full moon after the spring equinox as determined in Exodus or the 15th day of thenHebrew month Nisan.

It is the key part of the Christian calendar despite the fact that Christmas Day is certainly not the day that Jesus (even iff you believe he existed) was born.

My late father was very religious and he was of the opinion that Easter should become a fixed date, in the same way that Christmas Day was fixed.

However, it will not happen although for school holidays, there has been a move towards fixing these and then having a long weekend over Easter - which is a good thing and a pragmatic approach.

Surprisingly, Sturgeon appears to have actually taken some note of the date & moved the re-opening of churches in Scotland (still no idea why they were closed, must be as near zero risk as indoor events go) to 26th March, so covering all of Passover, Easter etc. The attendance limit is also 50, which is what it would be in Tier 3 or below, previously it was 20 in Tier 4.

[CAH706]

ukbabz said:

Boringvolvodriver said:

Be interesting to see how many get reported on the government web site as based on yesterday’s figures there doesn’t seem to be relation between the two!

Wonder if they missed off London and NE yesterday as those combined make up the difference between reported by NHS and reported by government portal.

They will get lumped in as a catch up at some point with a brief note. The explanatory note will be missed (conveniently) by the press and there will be a reported increase in deaths. Narrative will be that alas this isn’t over. Government won’t clarify where there has been a spike.

The cynic in me thinks this is to allow the government a ready made excuse to keep to the ridiculous timeline. The reality is probably just incompetence and an inability to accurately control and collate data!!

[isaldiri]

Garvin said:

isaldiri said:

Garvin said:

The more so as the sterilising effect of the vaccines seems to be quite good as well.

What sterilising effect? It's being theorised that it reduces transmission - there is nothing as far as I have seen that says anything about sterilising immunity (especially long term sterilising immunity).

I previously read that a study found that one Oxford AZ vaccine jab reduced onward transmission by two-thirds. This is why I used the term “sterilising effect” followed by “seems” and “quite good” i.e. not conclusive that it is a sterilising vaccine. If the study finding is fully borne out in practice then it obviously reduces the probability of cases arising and add grist to the mill that restrictions should be released sooner.

A lot of articles are also conflating asymptomatic vaccine efficacy with reduced transmission.....

Reduced transmission likely is going to happen irrespective of sterilising immunity which everything so far suggests is not going to be long term.

[Jordan210]

Boringvolvodriver said:

Be interesting to see how many get reported on the government web site as based on yesterday’s figures there doesn’t seem to be relation between the two!

231 on dashboard

[Garvin]

isaldiri said:

Garvin said:

isaldiri said:

Garvin said:

The more so as the sterilising effect of the vaccines seems to be quite good as well.

What sterilising effect? It's being theorised that it reduces transmission - there is nothing as far as I have seen that says anything about sterilising immunity (especially long term sterilising immunity).

I previously read that a study found that one Oxford AZ vaccine jab reduced onward transmission by two-thirds. This is why I used the term “sterilising effect” followed by “seems” and “quite good” i.e. not conclusive that it is a sterilising vaccine. If the study finding is fully borne out in practice then it obviously reduces the probability of cases arising and add grist to the mill that restrictions should be released sooner.

A lot of articles are also conflating asymptomatic vaccine efficacy with reduced transmission.....

Reduced transmission likely is going to happen irrespective of sterilising immunity which everything so far suggests is not going to be long term.

Well we can get wrapped around the axle on semantics here but the main thrust is that the vaccines appear to be reducing onward transmission which you seem to agree with.

[Pete102]

Almost 1.5 million tests yesterday.

And the money train keeps on chugging......£5 a test?

[Graveworm]

isaldiri said:

What sterilising effect? It's being theorised that it reduces transmission - there is nothing as far as I have seen that says anything about sterilising immunity (especially long term sterilising immunity).

Beyond a theory, plenty indicating it's going that way. Obviously not definitive and too soon for long term.
Oxford Astra Zenica is showing indications of preventing infection 43.9%.

https://static.poder360.com.br/2021/02/estudo-efic...

Moderna's showed a 2/3rd reduction after one dose in their studies.

Edited by Graveworm on Tuesday 9th March 16:32