Increasing infection rates

What's Hot
1356713

Comments

  • AdeyAdey Frets: 1279
    John_A said:
    NelsonP said:
    crunchman said:
    NelsonP said:
    My son has tested positive today, along with 14 other kids who were on a school trip last week. 4 kids on his local football team have it, and 2 of those have passed it on to their (double vaxxed) parents. My niece has it, and has passed it on to her (double vaxxed) dad.

    Basically it's spreading like wildfire amongst younger kids in schools, and they are passing it on to their families. The vaccines were only ever about 70% effective, and the immunity that they creates is now waning.

    I think we are once again reaching the point where action is needed.

    Most obvious solution would be mandatory face masks, and potentially home schooling for unvaccinated kids, for the rest of this term. If they get infected then they'll be at home for a couple of weeks anyway. Then 3rd boosters at 6 months for all, and first dose of vaccine for younger kids. I mean, how hard is this?

    Sajid Javid appears to be asleep at the steering wheel.

    Complete overreaction.

    Firstly, you need to be careful how you spout facts.  The vaccines are around 70% effective at stopping infection, but they are well over 90% effective at stopping people getting ill enough to need hospital treatment.

    Second, the vast majority of kids have now had it, and it will burn itself out in schools in the next few weeks.  Look at that article I linked to above.  In London, we are already at the point where it is barely increasing.   Other regions may be 2 or 3 weeks behind, but keeping unvaccinated kids at home for the rest of term is a grotesque overreaction.  It's only a few weeks since the JCVI said that the benefits of vaccinated 12 to 15 year olds were so marginal that they didn't recommend it.
    Maybe, maybe not. I said potentially keep them out, not definitely.

    The waning immunity part is the big unknown currently. Of the 20 or so kids that I know who have tested positive in the last week, about 1/4 of them have passed it on to their (double vaxxed) parents. So 1 in 4 'breakthrough' infections. Whether those adults develop serious illness remains to be seen. But regardless of that, the economic impact is still significant and could, in many cases, be avoided.

    Where are you seeing the data that the majority of kids have had it? That doesn't seem right to me.
    I know about 10 kids that have had it, in every single case they have passed it to their double vaccinated parents

    Why do we think that this wouldn't be the case though?

    The vaccine isn't providing some sort ofi visible barrier that the virus can't get through. They are almost bound to catch it. Their immune system, aided by the vaccine created immune response, will start fighting it. You're almost bound to pick up the potentially short lived infection by testing if you test so constantly.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
  • John_AJohn_A Frets: 3752
    @adey That was a response to the previous post that suggested transmission from kids was about 1 in 4.  
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • crunchmancrunchman Frets: 8390
    NelsonP said:


    Where are you seeing the data that the majority of kids have had it? That doesn't seem right to me.

    I saw something from Whitty saying that around 50% of kids had probably had it, and that was about a month ago.

    SAGE have consistently underestimated how many have had it, which is one of the reasons why their predictions have been so wrong all the time.  50% was probably an underestimate if anything.  Even with the 50% estimate, it would be at least 70% with the cases over the last month, and it's probably higher than that.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • BillDLBillDL Frets: 704
    What I need to know right now is whether to start stocking up on toilet roll and fags.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • chris78chris78 Frets: 5983
    NelsonP said:
    My son has tested positive today, along with 14 other kids who were on a school trip last week. 4 kids on his local football team have it, and 2 of those have passed it on to their (double vaxxed) parents. My niece has it, and has passed it on to her (double vaxxed) dad.

    Basically it's spreading like wildfire amongst younger kids in schools, and they are passing it on to their families. The vaccines were only ever about 70% effective, and the immunity that they creates is now waning.

    I think we are once again reaching the point where action is needed.

    Most obvious solution would be mandatory face masks, and potentially home schooling for unvaccinated kids, for the rest of this term. If they get infected then they'll be at home for a couple of weeks anyway. Then 3rd boosters at 6 months for all, and first dose of vaccine for younger kids. I mean, how hard is this?

    Sajid Javid appears to be asleep at the steering wheel.
    Sorry to hear about the cases.
    Im confused about the rest of your post though.
    About 20% of eligible school children (remember under 12s aren’t) have had the jab. That’s the fault of the roll out. You’re suggesting that 80% of secondary school and all primary and infants forgo their education in order to protect double vaxxed adults. Really?

    Youre stating action is needed because the vaccine protection will wane. That means it always well so effectively you’re suggesting we live in a state of permanent restrictions. Is that how you want to live?

    The issue we have is with people who haven’t been double jabbed. Only 1.2% of deaths are from double vaccinated people. Any restrictions at this stage would be to protect those who have chosen not to be vaccinated. That can’t be right? I’m all in favour of personal choice and fully respect the rights of those who have chosen not to be vaccinated. Where I draw the line though is protecting them through restrictions. If they’ve chosen not to have the jab, sorry, they need to live with the consequences
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 3reaction image Wisdom
  • crunchmancrunchman Frets: 8390
    Doing more damage to vulnerable kids is the last thing we should be doing:


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • ColsCols Frets: 4243
    crunchman said:
    Doing more damage to vulnerable kids is the last thing we should be doing:


    Aye.  In retrospect, maybe it wasn’t the best idea to spend the summer ensuring that case numbers were nice and high right at the start of term, and removing all but the most basic COVID controls from schools.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • crunchmancrunchman Frets: 8390
    Cols said:
    crunchman said:
    Doing more damage to vulnerable kids is the last thing we should be doing:


    Aye.  In retrospect, maybe it wasn’t the best idea to spend the summer ensuring that case numbers were nice and high right at the start of term, and removing all but the most basic COVID controls from schools.

    I think you missed my point.  I was responding to the misguided idea above that we should be keeping unvaccinated kids of of school.

    A large part of that article is talking about the social interaction, and how important it is.  We have done so much damage to our children.  They should have been back in school a lot sooner after the March 2020 lockdown, and they should have been back in school after the February half term this year.

    Talk of further closures, or keeping healthy kids off, is utterly wrong.  
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
  • chris78chris78 Frets: 5983
    Cols said:
    crunchman said:
    Doing more damage to vulnerable kids is the last thing we should be doing:


    Aye.  In retrospect, maybe it wasn’t the best idea to spend the summer ensuring that case numbers were nice and high right at the start of term, and removing all but the most basic COVID controls from schools.
    In retrospect, kids should never have been made to miss a single day of education for a disease that kills the elderly
    2reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 3reaction image Wisdom
  • ColsCols Frets: 4243
    Define elderly, please.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • John_AJohn_A Frets: 3752
    edited October 2021
    chris78 said:
    Cols said:
    crunchman said:
    Doing more damage to vulnerable kids is the last thing we should be doing:


    Aye.  In retrospect, maybe it wasn’t the best idea to spend the summer ensuring that case numbers were nice and high right at the start of term, and removing all but the most basic COVID controls from schools.
    In retrospect, kids should never have been made to miss a single day of education for a disease that kills the elderly
    And the immunosuppressed like me, we’re still sending our 2 year old to nursery, but it’s a worry!  Double jabbed and no antibodies 

    also “ Only 1.2% of deaths are from double vaccinated people”. Where did you get that from?
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • chris78chris78 Frets: 5983
    Cols said:
    Define elderly, please.
    The average age of death has risen to 85. I’d say that’s elderly 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • chris78chris78 Frets: 5983
    John_A said:
    chris78 said:
    Cols said:
    crunchman said:
    Doing more damage to vulnerable kids is the last thing we should be doing:


    Aye.  In retrospect, maybe it wasn’t the best idea to spend the summer ensuring that case numbers were nice and high right at the start of term, and removing all but the most basic COVID controls from schools.
    In retrospect, kids should never have been made to miss a single day of education for a disease that kills the elderly
    And the immunosuppressed like me, we’re still sending our 2 year old to nursery, but it’s a worry!  Double jabbed and no antibodies 

    also “ Only 1.2% of deaths are from double vaccinated people”. Where did you get that from?
    ONS- take a look at their latest figures: they’re deaths from January to July
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • FastEddieFastEddie Frets: 375
    chris78 said:
    Cols said:
    crunchman said:
    Doing more damage to vulnerable kids is the last thing we should be doing:


    Aye.  In retrospect, maybe it wasn’t the best idea to spend the summer ensuring that case numbers were nice and high right at the start of term, and removing all but the most basic COVID controls from schools.
    In retrospect, kids should never have been made to miss a single day of education for a disease that kills the elderly
    Totally agree. Kids should have been left in school. Our youngest had an awful time. Really missed the social side of school. Lots of the parents were kicking the backside out of 'critical job status'. The school were not good either in how they managed that and also the quality of work and interaction with children at home was very poor.

    We're taking our son out of his school and putting him a prep school when a place becomes available. Lots of families feel really let down, and rightly so.

    So far as infection is concerned, my eldest sons are both serving soldiers and both their units were hit by covid. They just carried on and the ones suffering the worst were bedded down in the med centre. No-one was allowed on camp, but they still went on exercise, deployments, and even got to get involved in the final days in Kabul. Covid didn't stop them. 

    The Gov (it was the Armed forces led by a veterans called Jeff) built those emergency hospitals of which none where used.

    I also heard that the natural death rate was lower now than it normally is. 

    Too much locking down and restricting for my liking. 
    If I had talent, I'd be talented.
    Persistent and inconsistent guitar player.
    A lefty, hence a fog of permanent frustration

    Not enough guitars, pedals, and cricket bats.
    USA Deluxe Strat - Martyn Booth Special - Electromatic
    FX Plex - Cornell Romany
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 4reaction image Wisdom
  • NelsonPNelsonP Frets: 2387
    chris78 said:
    Cols said:
    Define elderly, please.
    The average age of death has risen to 85. I’d say that’s elderly 
    One of the mums from my son's school died this year from covid. She was early 40s. Of course this is an exception, but it's ridiculous to ignore it.

    I was not suggesting that all kids stay off school.  If kids have been vaccinated then they should stay in school. However, currently no kids under 12 have, and it is this cohort that are getting sick. It isn't 'misguided' to suggest that maybe putting them together in school isn't the smartest move, if you are trying to prevent covid infections from rising. More infections = longer time before we get this shit under control. Doesn't matter which demographic.

    I'll say it again, but I said 'potentially'. I don't have all the data and it isn't my decision to make.

    The immunity waning is real, and the consequences of that are currently unknown, in terms of potential for serious illness and hospitalisations. Sadly I think covid will now be endemic, at least for the next couple of years, and therefore measures will need to be taken to control it, for longer than any of us would like.

    As ever, the depth of those measures is a tightrope, and one which Sajid Javid is in danger of falling off.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • chris78chris78 Frets: 5983
    That’s all lovely fear and everything, but you haven’t addressed the points made:

    Are you advocating restrictions forever or a considerable period- say 5-10 years or more?

    Should healthy kids be kept off school when the vaccine hasn’t been made available to them to protect the elderly?
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
  • NelsonPNelsonP Frets: 2387
    edited October 2021
    1. Until we are able to successfully control the consequences of the virus.
    2. Potentially
    3. Isn't there a forum rule about don't be a dick? Referring to someone's death as 'lovely fear' definitely crosses that line.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • chris78chris78 Frets: 5983
    Wow. Respect your view, but sounds like fanaticism to me.

    One thing I can’t bear is using children as a human shield for adults. That’s society gone wrong. Adults should protect kids, not the other way round
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 4reaction image Wisdom
  • NelsonPNelsonP Frets: 2387
    edited October 2021
    Whatever
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • John_AJohn_A Frets: 3752
    chris78 said:
    Wow. Respect your view, but sounds like fanaticism to me.

    One thing I can’t bear is using children as a human shield for adults. That’s society gone wrong. Adults should protect kids, not the other way round
    Agree and and the thought of not being able to look after my child if something were to happen to me is a very real fear
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
Sign In or Register to comment.