I guess because they simply don't know for sure yet and can't risk the consequences of not playing safety first? One of the problems of rushing out the vaccine so fast is we may never have good data on infection driven antibodies & immunity!
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 1 second ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 19 minutes ago
Indeed you just have to wait. Feel sympathy for all the various call for priority but it must be clinical evidence led. The one thing that might swing things is the new mutant supposedly doing in more of the young but they don't know if that is because it is the young breaking the rules or the young going about their work or the young really being more likely to succumb?
I'm overdue speaking to my medic chums about it. I'm fairly confident they'll all say they've had it ergo they won't be taking the vaccine?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sure that even if you’ve had covid before, they still recommend you getting the vaccine?!
Think there’s been a study released showing that immunity is lasting more than 6 months, but taking the vaccine won’t do any damage and will help boost immunity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmmm, don't disagree. Just knowing the guys I know they almost always have an inside angle and it is almost always non-interventionist. They maybe aren't typical?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They may be letting others get their vaccine a bit quicker? You’ll know them better than I do, clearly!
Still find it odd that even people who’ve previously had covid still need to self isolate through track and trace. Boris had to do, Edouard is having to do it-why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe it's because you can still spread it. If you had it before, your anti body's will successfully fight it off so you don't get any symptoms, but you can still spread it.
That's just a guess.
comment by G3r5fan Oz (U6067)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 1 second ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 19 minutes ago
Indeed you just have to wait. Feel sympathy for all the various call for priority but it must be clinical evidence led. The one thing that might swing things is the new mutant supposedly doing in more of the young but they don't know if that is because it is the young breaking the rules or the young going about their work or the young really being more likely to succumb?
I'm overdue speaking to my medic chums about it. I'm fairly confident they'll all say they've had it ergo they won't be taking the vaccine?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sure that even if you’ve had covid before, they still recommend you getting the vaccine?!
Think there’s been a study released showing that immunity is lasting more than 6 months, but taking the vaccine won’t do any damage and will help boost immunity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmmm, don't disagree. Just knowing the guys I know they almost always have an inside angle and it is almost always non-interventionist. They maybe aren't typical?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They may be letting others get their vaccine a bit quicker? You’ll know them better than I do, clearly!
Still find it odd that even people who’ve previously had covid still need to self isolate through track and trace. Boris had to do, Edouard is having to do it-why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe it's because you can still spread it. If you had it before, your anti body's will successfully fight it off so you don't get any symptoms, but you can still spread it.
That's just a guess.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most people who’ve had it before though are supposed to be immune-that means they aren’t being reinfected. You might be thinking about what they believe is happening with vaccines.
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 5 minutes ago
I guess because they simply don't know for sure yet and can't risk the consequences of not playing safety first? One of the problems of rushing out the vaccine so fast is we may never have good data on infection driven antibodies & immunity!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, possibly. Like I said, I know I’ve read that they’re doing studies about immunity just now. There’s also date to be released I think in February about transmissibility after being vaccinated.
Ross McCrorie has twice tested positive for Covid.
He had it around March time when he was at Portsmouth and then he was one of the Scotland U21 players who had it I think around late November time.
Past Covid-19 infection may provide 'months of immunity' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55651518
I'm still dubious about false positives rates. Or, in the case of some teams, the lack of
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 41 minutes ago
Past Covid-19 infection may provide 'months of immunity' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55651518
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read that. Just think it’s was too early to say and we may be a year or so with getting anything that makes sense.
Still have to understand what term of immunity we will get from vaccines. If it’s less than a year then the world has a problem in that it won’t be able to hide away or run from through sporadic lockdowns.
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 41 minutes ago
Past Covid-19 infection may provide 'months of immunity' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55651518
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read that. Just think it’s was too early to say and we may be a year or so with getting anything that makes sense.
Still have to understand what term of immunity we will get from vaccines. If it’s less than a year then the world has a problem in that it won’t be able to hide away or run from through sporadic lockdowns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Calm down Negward. It’s only interim info just now.
There seems to be a growing hope (or signs) that the coronavirus will be seasonal, and also be endemic rather than pandemic as time goes on.
I think some of the restrictions will be about longer than we really need, but I’m hoping with some of the stuff I’ve read that when numbers have materially slowed down (and there’s already signs that the rate of positivity has slowed down) then we should be able to phase our way out of lockdown fairly quickly.
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 50 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 41 minutes ago
Past Covid-19 infection may provide 'months of immunity' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55651518
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read that. Just think it’s was too early to say and we may be a year or so with getting anything that makes sense.
Still have to understand what term of immunity we will get from vaccines. If it’s less than a year then the world has a problem in that it won’t be able to hide away or run from through sporadic lockdowns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Calm down Negward. It’s only interim info just now.
There seems to be a growing hope (or signs) that the coronavirus will be seasonal, and also be endemic rather than pandemic as time goes on.
I think some of the restrictions will be about longer than we really need, but I’m hoping with some of the stuff I’ve read that when numbers have materially slowed down (and there’s already signs that the rate of positivity has slowed down) then we should be able to phase our way out of lockdown fairly quickly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm fwcking calm right
Nah; I agree. I'm just hoping we aren't under restrictions of one kind or another for any longer than is necessary in this perpetual and ongoing mantra of "protecting the NHS".
A political decision will need to be made that accepts mortality for any kind of virus or disease and no matter when it is done it will be immediately launched upon by the lockdown brigade. That I'm afraid is part of life.
The NHS is there to protect us; and not the other way round so I hope we finally decide what we are going to do with it instead of funding a mismanaged mess of far too many contradictions and fund it properly and adequately in terms of money, systems , equipment and staff so that we minimise any risk of this happening again; regardless of who is in government or what the financial predicament is in the UK at any particular time.
I fear that yet again it will be a forlorn hope.
I think Lockdowns have their place in this pandemic, but I think we've used them as much as we need to - or should need to. I don't think there was any need to add to the restrictions yesterday by Sturgeon - just make sure the ones in place are being adhered to would have been enough.
Some of the narrative is changing - from some of the scientists and government officials anyway. There is more being said about 'having to live with it', so I expect more of that kind of chat over the coming weeks.
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 21 minutes ago
I think Lockdowns have their place in this pandemic, but I think we've used them as much as we need to - or should need to. I don't think there was any need to add to the restrictions yesterday by Sturgeon - just make sure the ones in place are being adhered to would have been enough.
Some of the narrative is changing - from some of the scientists and government officials anyway. There is more being said about 'having to live with it', so I expect more of that kind of chat over the coming weeks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’d like to think so but for the past year there has been a flat refusal to even acknowledge the hidden cost of lockdown (and I don’t mean just £ notes) other than the odd one or two incidents which were quickly stamped down on as not saving your gran.
The press and media have fallen into line demanding perpetual harsher lockdowns; the House is compliant with the same and anyone who rails against it is labelled a denier or who doesn’t care about saving lives.
I don’t ever recall any government in the western world not being held to question or account on laws being brought in overnight with such ease and acceptance before. Laws that may well stay in place for many years to come.
We are continually using a blunt tool we know will only lead to huge levels of debt, suffering, misery and painful deaths as well as the significant back step in research every time we do this.
They will last for many years after this.
Wealth tax and fuel inflation and it'll be all good
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 10 seconds ago
Wealth tax and fuel inflation and it'll be all good
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Many think that but a wealth tax in a simplistic form can never work.
The only thing I can think of is some kind of corporation tax on businesses who exceed profits by some percentage scale.
Then of course there is general taxation where everyone other than those on the lowest bracket take a proportionate hit (very unTory line so won’t happen).
Lastly a health and education tax which is ring fenced and set at a low percentage. If we’re serious about protecting the NHS and the future education of children then pay for it. Everyone.
Sign in if you want to comment
PL statement of apology
Page 5 of 5
posted on 14/1/21
I guess because they simply don't know for sure yet and can't risk the consequences of not playing safety first? One of the problems of rushing out the vaccine so fast is we may never have good data on infection driven antibodies & immunity!
posted on 14/1/21
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 1 second ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 19 minutes ago
Indeed you just have to wait. Feel sympathy for all the various call for priority but it must be clinical evidence led. The one thing that might swing things is the new mutant supposedly doing in more of the young but they don't know if that is because it is the young breaking the rules or the young going about their work or the young really being more likely to succumb?
I'm overdue speaking to my medic chums about it. I'm fairly confident they'll all say they've had it ergo they won't be taking the vaccine?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sure that even if you’ve had covid before, they still recommend you getting the vaccine?!
Think there’s been a study released showing that immunity is lasting more than 6 months, but taking the vaccine won’t do any damage and will help boost immunity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmmm, don't disagree. Just knowing the guys I know they almost always have an inside angle and it is almost always non-interventionist. They maybe aren't typical?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They may be letting others get their vaccine a bit quicker? You’ll know them better than I do, clearly!
Still find it odd that even people who’ve previously had covid still need to self isolate through track and trace. Boris had to do, Edouard is having to do it-why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe it's because you can still spread it. If you had it before, your anti body's will successfully fight it off so you don't get any symptoms, but you can still spread it.
That's just a guess.
posted on 14/1/21
comment by G3r5fan Oz (U6067)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 1 second ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 19 minutes ago
Indeed you just have to wait. Feel sympathy for all the various call for priority but it must be clinical evidence led. The one thing that might swing things is the new mutant supposedly doing in more of the young but they don't know if that is because it is the young breaking the rules or the young going about their work or the young really being more likely to succumb?
I'm overdue speaking to my medic chums about it. I'm fairly confident they'll all say they've had it ergo they won't be taking the vaccine?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sure that even if you’ve had covid before, they still recommend you getting the vaccine?!
Think there’s been a study released showing that immunity is lasting more than 6 months, but taking the vaccine won’t do any damage and will help boost immunity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmmm, don't disagree. Just knowing the guys I know they almost always have an inside angle and it is almost always non-interventionist. They maybe aren't typical?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They may be letting others get their vaccine a bit quicker? You’ll know them better than I do, clearly!
Still find it odd that even people who’ve previously had covid still need to self isolate through track and trace. Boris had to do, Edouard is having to do it-why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe it's because you can still spread it. If you had it before, your anti body's will successfully fight it off so you don't get any symptoms, but you can still spread it.
That's just a guess.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most people who’ve had it before though are supposed to be immune-that means they aren’t being reinfected. You might be thinking about what they believe is happening with vaccines.
posted on 14/1/21
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 5 minutes ago
I guess because they simply don't know for sure yet and can't risk the consequences of not playing safety first? One of the problems of rushing out the vaccine so fast is we may never have good data on infection driven antibodies & immunity!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, possibly. Like I said, I know I’ve read that they’re doing studies about immunity just now. There’s also date to be released I think in February about transmissibility after being vaccinated.
posted on 14/1/21
Ross McCrorie has twice tested positive for Covid.
He had it around March time when he was at Portsmouth and then he was one of the Scotland U21 players who had it I think around late November time.
posted on 14/1/21
Past Covid-19 infection may provide 'months of immunity' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55651518
posted on 14/1/21
I'm still dubious about false positives rates. Or, in the case of some teams, the lack of
posted on 14/1/21
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 41 minutes ago
Past Covid-19 infection may provide 'months of immunity' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55651518
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read that. Just think it’s was too early to say and we may be a year or so with getting anything that makes sense.
Still have to understand what term of immunity we will get from vaccines. If it’s less than a year then the world has a problem in that it won’t be able to hide away or run from through sporadic lockdowns.
posted on 14/1/21
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 41 minutes ago
Past Covid-19 infection may provide 'months of immunity' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55651518
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read that. Just think it’s was too early to say and we may be a year or so with getting anything that makes sense.
Still have to understand what term of immunity we will get from vaccines. If it’s less than a year then the world has a problem in that it won’t be able to hide away or run from through sporadic lockdowns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Calm down Negward. It’s only interim info just now.
There seems to be a growing hope (or signs) that the coronavirus will be seasonal, and also be endemic rather than pandemic as time goes on.
I think some of the restrictions will be about longer than we really need, but I’m hoping with some of the stuff I’ve read that when numbers have materially slowed down (and there’s already signs that the rate of positivity has slowed down) then we should be able to phase our way out of lockdown fairly quickly.
posted on 14/1/21
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 50 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 41 minutes ago
Past Covid-19 infection may provide 'months of immunity' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55651518
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read that. Just think it’s was too early to say and we may be a year or so with getting anything that makes sense.
Still have to understand what term of immunity we will get from vaccines. If it’s less than a year then the world has a problem in that it won’t be able to hide away or run from through sporadic lockdowns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Calm down Negward. It’s only interim info just now.
There seems to be a growing hope (or signs) that the coronavirus will be seasonal, and also be endemic rather than pandemic as time goes on.
I think some of the restrictions will be about longer than we really need, but I’m hoping with some of the stuff I’ve read that when numbers have materially slowed down (and there’s already signs that the rate of positivity has slowed down) then we should be able to phase our way out of lockdown fairly quickly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm fwcking calm right
Nah; I agree. I'm just hoping we aren't under restrictions of one kind or another for any longer than is necessary in this perpetual and ongoing mantra of "protecting the NHS".
A political decision will need to be made that accepts mortality for any kind of virus or disease and no matter when it is done it will be immediately launched upon by the lockdown brigade. That I'm afraid is part of life.
The NHS is there to protect us; and not the other way round so I hope we finally decide what we are going to do with it instead of funding a mismanaged mess of far too many contradictions and fund it properly and adequately in terms of money, systems , equipment and staff so that we minimise any risk of this happening again; regardless of who is in government or what the financial predicament is in the UK at any particular time.
I fear that yet again it will be a forlorn hope.
posted on 14/1/21
I think Lockdowns have their place in this pandemic, but I think we've used them as much as we need to - or should need to. I don't think there was any need to add to the restrictions yesterday by Sturgeon - just make sure the ones in place are being adhered to would have been enough.
Some of the narrative is changing - from some of the scientists and government officials anyway. There is more being said about 'having to live with it', so I expect more of that kind of chat over the coming weeks.
posted on 14/1/21
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 21 minutes ago
I think Lockdowns have their place in this pandemic, but I think we've used them as much as we need to - or should need to. I don't think there was any need to add to the restrictions yesterday by Sturgeon - just make sure the ones in place are being adhered to would have been enough.
Some of the narrative is changing - from some of the scientists and government officials anyway. There is more being said about 'having to live with it', so I expect more of that kind of chat over the coming weeks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’d like to think so but for the past year there has been a flat refusal to even acknowledge the hidden cost of lockdown (and I don’t mean just £ notes) other than the odd one or two incidents which were quickly stamped down on as not saving your gran.
The press and media have fallen into line demanding perpetual harsher lockdowns; the House is compliant with the same and anyone who rails against it is labelled a denier or who doesn’t care about saving lives.
I don’t ever recall any government in the western world not being held to question or account on laws being brought in overnight with such ease and acceptance before. Laws that may well stay in place for many years to come.
We are continually using a blunt tool we know will only lead to huge levels of debt, suffering, misery and painful deaths as well as the significant back step in research every time we do this.
They will last for many years after this.
posted on 14/1/21
Wealth tax and fuel inflation and it'll be all good
posted on 14/1/21
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 10 seconds ago
Wealth tax and fuel inflation and it'll be all good
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Many think that but a wealth tax in a simplistic form can never work.
The only thing I can think of is some kind of corporation tax on businesses who exceed profits by some percentage scale.
Then of course there is general taxation where everyone other than those on the lowest bracket take a proportionate hit (very unTory line so won’t happen).
Lastly a health and education tax which is ring fenced and set at a low percentage. If we’re serious about protecting the NHS and the future education of children then pay for it. Everyone.
Page 5 of 5