When will it all end?

Micky 32

Irish Stones wrote: »

You have no evidence that it will be otherwise either

With vaccines etc the odds are against your prophet of doom.

landofthetree

It works: 0 deaths, only 4 severe cases among 523,000 fully vaccinated Israelis

HMO data a week after 2nd dose shows 93% effectiveness, ‘unequivocally’ proving vaccine’s success and leaving ‘no doubt’ it’s saved many Israeli lives, says Maccabi official.


https://www.timesofisrael.com/hmo-sees-only-544-covid-infections-among-523000-fully-vaccinated-israelis/

:cool:

Micky 32

landofthetree wrote: »

It works: 0 deaths, only 4 severe cases among 523,000 fully vaccinated Israelis

HMO data a week after 2nd dose shows 93% effectiveness, ‘unequivocally’ proving vaccine’s success and leaving ‘no doubt’ it’s saved many Israeli lives, says Maccabi official.


https://www.timesofisrael.com/hmo-sees-only-544-covid-infections-among-523000-fully-vaccinated-israelis/

:cool:

.

Wait for it 5….4……3……2…..1

latency89

landofthetree wrote: »

It works: 0 deaths, only 4 severe cases among 523,000 fully vaccinated Israelis

HMO data a week after 2nd dose shows 93% effectiveness, ‘unequivocally’ proving vaccine’s success and leaving ‘no doubt’ it’s saved many Israeli lives, says Maccabi official.


https://www.timesofisrael.com/hmo-sees-only-544-covid-infections-among-523000-fully-vaccinated-israelis/

:cool:

Great news

Is that Pfizer, can't open link?

Are they using any other vaccines in Israel, be nice to compare in real world

El_Duderino 09

landofthetree wrote: »

It works: 0 deaths, only 4 severe cases among 523,000 fully vaccinated Israelis

HMO data a week after 2nd dose shows 93% effectiveness, ‘unequivocally’ proving vaccine’s success and leaving ‘no doubt’ it’s saved many Israeli lives, says Maccabi official.


https://www.timesofisrael.com/hmo-sees-only-544-covid-infections-among-523000-fully-vaccinated-israelis/

:cool:

That’s great news. I wonder if the weather in Israel will make the results a bit different to here. But still great news overall.

hatrickpatrick

markodaly wrote: »

Very very low covid infection rates, locally, regionally and worldwide.
We can open up locally if we get Ireland down to single-digit infection rates.

Leo's comments this week suggested otherwise, he was saying that even with vaccinations and low rates, they'd see surges if they opened everything again.

I really don't think a lot of people are quite understanding the existential dread brought on by the commentary this week around there being more or less no hope of ever getting out of this. Frankly, the kind of absolute horse sh!te showcased on Claire Byrne this week (and she's entertained this kind of crap several times during the pandemic) about going to concerts in Zorb balls etc, doesn't help.

Anyone who is young and single is more distressed by this kind of open ended social distancing commentary than at any other time during the pandemic - at least from my anecdotal experience. The damage that the last fortnight's worth of commentary has done to morale among people in my demographic who have hitherto been extremely well behaved for the most part cannot be understated.

hatrickpatrick

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

He said that "If things work out with the summer, [there’s]the possibility of returning to things like football matches, and maybe even concerts and festivals and gatherings too". He had three caveats in that sentence and you seem to have read it as a guarantee of a return to normality. It's a simple case of reading what you wanted to read. I read government statements and I read that as a theoretical possibility IF everything goes 100% in our favour - in other words, possible but not likely. Why did you take it as a guarantee?

People seem to both accept the reality that the government doesn't know exactly what will happen because nobody knows exactly what will happen, and simultaneously act shocked when government doesn't know what will happen and can't set the schedule for what will happen in the future.

Reality is that they don't know the criteria (as load of people have pointed out). Setting criteria in the absence of data is a terrible idea. They don't know. You know they don't know. So why are acting surprised that they don't know?

Would you be happier if they spaffed-off a set of criteria now, just to shut you up, and then simply ignore them later when the actual evidence comes in?

If they don't know the criteria, frankly they should keep their mouths shut. Floating the idea of social distancing for years to come is simply not an acceptable or palatable answer, society's mental health will entirely disintegrate and my very real worry is that this kind of commentary hastens the arrival of a sort of anarchistic nihilism. If people are essentially told that living like a recluse is an indefinite long term "new normal", a lot of those people will say "f*ck it, I'm meeting my friends / going on a date" right now. When there was a target for ending this, people were by and large willing to play ball. The shifting of the goal posts and the vague statements implying that social distancing is some sort of quasi-permanent fact of life now will push people either to self-harm or to mass non-compliance.

Those are the only two ways this can go. Either people will stop obeying the rules or they'll check themselves out by their own hand. Because asking people to remain touch starved and socially isolated in perpetuity is asking people to defy four billion years of evolution. It's simply not going to happen.

El_Duderino 09

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If they don't know the criteria, frankly they should keep their mouths shut....

I’ll stop you there and refer you to your post which I quoted. In t he full version of that post you asked repeatedly to know what the criteria are. But here you say that if they don’t know, they should keep their mouths shut.

They can’t answer your questions, for all the obvious reasons, so they shouldn’t tell us anything about what they do know or what they think the future will likely hold?

I really can’t agree with that position. I would like to know that the government is thinking and what they think the future most likely holds based on the info they have at the moment.

But I would also suggest you read the last couple of posts again. You want to hold Leo to a comment he made where he said things you like (stadiums, concerts) ignoring the caveats he peppered the statement with, and you then want to completely dismiss the more recent statement because they don’t know for sure. In other words, “give me good news or don’t give me any news”.

Will you answer why you thought he statement you quoted (about stadium and concerts) was some kind of guarantee of what would happen this summer?

ingo1984

Micky 32 wrote: »

If the vaccines work the government will have no other choice to start opening up. They’ll be under huge political pressure. There will be a lot of tension between the people and governments if we’re no longer getting sick and still closed up. That won’t work fullstop.

Regarding SD if no one is getting sick anymore best of luck trying to stop people riding all around them :pac:

This government know already that they won't be getting re-elected. So they can twist the knife as much as they please.

landofthetree

landofthetree wrote: »

It works: 0 deaths, only 4 severe cases among 523,000 fully vaccinated Israelis

HMO data a week after 2nd dose shows 93% effectiveness, ‘unequivocally’ proving vaccine’s success and leaving ‘no doubt’ it’s saved many Israeli lives, says Maccabi official.


https://www.timesofisrael.com/hmo-sees-only-544-covid-infections-among-523000-fully-vaccinated-israelis/

:cool:

@el_duderino, this seems like good news, but how does this compare to the infection rate in a similar period in the general population? This seems to be missing from the article.

markodaly

Micky 32 wrote: »

Once again choosing the parts of the post you only want to hear. I meant if we are vaccinated by September and disease is low people won’t be as compliant about SD.

You seem to be stuck back in 2020 when there were no vaccines, once again.

The bit in bold is the important thing.
Sure, if we get down to very low infection rates, if not, we will not open up as quickly as some may like.

markodaly

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Leo's comments this week suggested otherwise, he was saying that even with vaccinations and low rates, they'd see surges if they opened everything again.

I really don't think a lot of people are quite understanding the existential dread brought on by the commentary this week around there being more or less no hope of ever getting out of this. Frankly, the kind of absolute horse sh!te showcased on Claire Byrne this week (and she's entertained this kind of crap several times during the pandemic) about going to concerts in Zorb balls etc, doesn't help.

Anyone who is young and single is more distressed by this kind of open ended social distancing commentary than at any other time during the pandemic - at least from my anecdotal experience. The damage that the last fortnight's worth of commentary has done to morale among people in my demographic who have hitherto been extremely well behaved for the most part cannot be understated.

I think Leo is tempering expectations. We have been here a few times before. Sure, look at this thread as an example. People more or less demanding we open right up once we get x% of old people vaccinated and we can go on our merry way to an All-Ireland final, or on the piss with the lads to Tenerife. In other words, we need to take this much more slowly.

I cant comment on the media, as they do what they do best, sell bad news, BUT put it this way. The same people itching to open up now were the same people itching to open up last summer and last Christmas and where has that gotten us?

People think vaccines are a silver bullet, but they aren't. An important weapon, sure and a good one to have BUT again it is fantasy talk to want to open up completely again come May or even September.

The last few weeks has put manners on people and is a much more realistic take on things. The CDC, WHO, ECDC among others all agree with this take, that this pandemic won't be over this year. It may be hard to hear, and bad news is often hard to hear, but would you rather people just lie and say, "ah sure it will be grand" While going into lockdown number 4?

This SHOULD be our last lockdown with any luck and if we do it right, if we don't do it right, it won't be our last lockdown.

As an aside, it is too easy to dismiss experts and scientists as cranks when they tell you something you don't want to hear. It's akin to Climate Change denial frankly, while posters on boards.ie really are the experts in how to handle global pandemics.

El_Duderino 09

[Deleted User] wrote: »

@el_duderino, this seems like good news, but how does this compare to the infection rate in a similar period in the general population? This seems to be missing from the article.

Token scepticism of apparently good news noted. Check that box. You won't get any hop in this thread with that kind of scepticism of that side of the equation. Not your fault.

hatrickpatrick

markodaly wrote: »

The last few weeks has put manners on people and is a much more realistic take on things. The CDC, WHO, ECDC among others all agree with this take, that this pandemic won't be over this year. It may be hard to hear, and bad news is often hard to hear, but would you rather people just lie and say, "ah sure it will be grand" While going into lockdown number 4?

My point is that absolutely no alternative is being proposed, and that's the problem. So we've established in this debate that mass vaccination is not as you say the end of the line. Grand. Accepted.

Point is, what is the end of the line? Because if it isn't vaccination, which we have been told repeatedly this week, that leaves us in a limbo in which, according to official statements, there essentially is no end of the line.

At what point do we allow people to live without keeping two metres from everyone who isn't in their bubble? If we accept that mass vaccination isn't that point, then what is?

The simple fact that I'm trying to state here is that "we don't, we live like this forever" is not an acceptable or palatable answer. It will either lead to mass civil disobedience or an epidemic of suicide like the world has never seen.

And answers to these questions need to come sooner rather than later, because morale is disintegrating at a far more rapid pace than many seem to realise.

bigsuge1

Got about 6 pages of reading to catch up on but at least politicians now starting to state the obvious:

https://youtu.be/i_GF3nj3A8U

Can’t disagree with anything said here.

hatrickpatrick

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I’ll stop you there and refer you to your post which I quoted. In t he full version of that post you asked repeatedly to know what the criteria are. But here you say that if they don’t know, they should keep their mouths shut.

They can’t answer your questions, for all the obvious reasons, so they shouldn’t tell us anything about what they do know or what they think the future will likely hold?

I really can’t agree with that position. I would like to know that the government is thinking and what they think the future most likely holds based on the info they have at the moment.

The problem is that the combination of what they have told us and what they refuse to speculate on leads to this vaccuum of "social distancing until we're dead" being somehow the de facto accepted status quo until told otherwise. And that is crushing people psychologically.

If that literally is the answer, it's not acceptable. I have close friends and relatives in the highest category of risk so I absolutely do take this pandemic seriously as I'd hope the rest of my posts have made clear. But asking everybody else to live as social and sexual hermits for time spans measured in years or decades is unacceptable. It will kill far more people than the pandemic unless some kind of exit strategy is proposed.

I am not being hyperbolic in saying this. Among folks I know, I'm very often the person people text when they're feeling like sh!t and need to talk. And from that alone, I have seen people who have hitherto been titans of perseverance during this whole saga completely lose hope over the last couple of weeks, on the basis that they're essentially being told that they might be old and frail by the time they get to hug or kiss another human again. It's simply not a sustainable situation. People will break the rules or end up in A&E if they're not reassured that this is not a permanent paradigm, because for the majority of young, single people, life without physical contact or socialising is not life. They can hack this if it's temporary, but it has to be definitively temporary. Once the spectre of this as a long term paradigm is raised in the manner that it has been this week, peoples' mental health and their resolve to stick with the guidelines fall apart rapidly in more or less equal measure.

But I would also suggest you read the last couple of posts again. You want to hold Leo to a comment he made where he said things you like (stadiums, concerts) ignoring the caveats he peppered the statement with, and you then want to completely dismiss the more recent statement because they don’t know for sure. In other words, “give me good news or don’t give me any news”.

Will you answer why you thought he statement you quoted (about stadium and concerts) was some kind of guarantee of what would happen this summer?

That's not what I'm saying. I never, ever held Leo to comments about events this summer specifically, I held him to comments about events after mass vaccination. In other words, that mass vaccination - accepting that it could take far longer than the optimistic forecasts - was the ultimate criteria for being able to live as a social species again. It's not about the summer, it's not about when we might achieve mass vaccination - it's about mass vaccination being the gateway to the removal of social distancing rules.

Now we're being told that it is not - that even when everyone is vaccinated, we still have to maintain social distancing. That's the issue. If that is the case, and if no new criteria is presented for the removal of same, it implies that social distancing is simply how we live as humans on this island in perpetuity. And that is not acceptable or palatable to anyone.

Le Bruise

To quote exactly what Leo said in the Irish Times interview from earlier in the week:

“I don’t see mass gatherings happening, I don’t see people filling stadiums and things like that, at least until we have 70 or 80 percent of the population vaccinated and we know that it works in terms of reducing hospitalisations and deaths. Then we’re in a totally different space.

My best guess ... is that we’ll have a relatively normal summer in that the shops will be open, personal services will be open and domestic tourism will be a real possibility. And potentially outdoor gatherings of 10 to 15 people, maybe even 50 but nothing beyond that until we have a critical mass vaccinated of 70 to 80 percent; we’re aiming for September for that"

Twice he says until we have 70 to 80 percent vaccinated. Vaccination is still the end game here, whether that be September or later due to supply issues. They obviously just have a slight reservation as to how the vaccines will work in a real world setting (although looking good so far) and so can't give absolute confirmation on a return to complete normality.

El_Duderino 09

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

My point is that absolutely no alternative is being proposed, and that's the problem. So we've established in this debate that mass vaccination is not as you say the end of the line. Grand. Accepted.

Point is, what is the end of the line? Because if it isn't vaccination, which we have been told repeatedly this week, that leaves us in a limbo in which, according to official statements, there essentially is no end of the line.

At what point do we allow people to live without keeping two metres from everyone who isn't in their bubble? If we accept that mass vaccination isn't that point, then what is?

The simple fact that I'm trying to state here is that "we don't, we live like this forever" is not an acceptable or palatable answer. It will either lead to mass civil disobedience or an epidemic of suicide like the world has never seen.

And answers to these questions need to come sooner rather than later, because morale is disintegrating at a far more rapid pace than many seem to realise.

Just to confirm, you want them to tell us what the end criteria are, unless they’re not certain what the criteria are , in which case they should not tell us until they do know.

Is that right?

El_Duderino 09

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The problem is that the combination of what they have told us and what they refuse to speculate on leads to this vaccuum of "social distancing until we're dead" being somehow the de facto accepted status quo until told otherwise. And that is crushing people psychologically.

If that literally is the answer, it's not acceptable. I have close friends and relatives in the highest category of risk so I absolutely do take this pandemic seriously as I'd hope the rest of my posts have made clear. But asking everybody else to live as social and sexual hermits for time spans measured in years or decades is unacceptable. It will kill far more people than the pandemic unless some kind of exit strategy is proposed.

I am not being hyperbolic in saying this. Among folks I know, I'm very often the person people text when they're feeling like sh!t and need to talk. And from that alone, I have seen people who have hitherto been titans of perseverance during this whole saga completely lose hope over the last couple of weeks, on the basis that they're essentially being told that they might be old and frail by the time they get to hug or kiss another human again. It's simply not a sustainable situation. People will break the rules or end up in A&E if they're not reassured that this is not a permanent paradigm, because for the majority of young, single people, life without physical contact or socialising is not life. They can hack this if it's temporary, but it has to be definitively temporary. Once the spectre of this as a long term paradigm is raised in the manner that it has been this week, peoples' mental health and their resolve to stick with the guidelines fall apart rapidly in more or less equal measure.




That's not what I'm saying. I never, ever held Leo to comments about events this summer specifically, I held him to comments about events after mass vaccination. In other words, that mass vaccination - accepting that it could take far longer than the optimistic forecasts - was the ultimate criteria for being able to live as a social species again. It's not about the summer, it's not about when we might achieve mass vaccination - it's about mass vaccination being the gateway to the removal of social distancing rules.

Now we're being told that it is not - that even when everyone is vaccinated, we still have to maintain social distancing. That's the issue. If that is the case, and if no new criteria is presented for the removal of same, it implies that social distancing is simply how we live as humans on this island in perpetuity. And that is not acceptable or palatable to anyone.

I’m not going to comment on the stuff about your mates and their mental health. It’s a serious topic and I admire you for doing what you can to help.

But I have to say, you’re not very faithfully representing what people like Leo have said. I asked you you think there was some kind off guarantee of a return to normality. You quoted Leo saying that IF things go well MAYBE we could xy and PERHAPS even z. And you are now saying that you didn’t take it as any kind of guarantee. So why did you bring it up?

Back to the original question, where did you get the impression that things would return to normal this year? Who told you that would happen?

El_Duderino 09

Le Bruise wrote: »

...
Twice he says until we have 70 to 80 percent vaccinated. Vaccination is still the end game here, whether that be September or later due to supply issues. They obviously just have a slight reservation as to how the vaccines will work in a real world setting (although looking good so far) and so can't give absolute confirmation on a return to complete normality.

Vaccination is the best chance of getting back to normal but it’s not the only factor. If the vaccine works out brilliantly and is rolled out before the cold weather, then the results could be great and a return to normality would be quite soon. But nobody knows how it will work out and I think that lack of certainty has different effects on different people.

Some exaggerate and misremember being told that we would all be vaccinated in a few weeks and return to normal. I don’t think anyone ever made such a claim and if they did, i doubt they were ever likely to be right.

I listened to a whole range of speakers and realised that there was almost certainly not going to be a quick solution - though I don’t claim to know what will actually happen.

Look at what happens in these threads. The same posters will dismiss bad news and say “they don’t know what will happen” when a speaker delivers bad news, but will hold the same speaker to their word (even when misremembered) when they say something positive. The Leo interview this week is a case in point. People dismiss the up to date info because it’s not what they hey want to hear, and try to hold him to an interview from before the vaccine rollout began (omitting the caveats in that statement).

Micky 32

markodaly wrote: »

The bit in bold is the important thing.
Sure, if we get down to very low infection rates, if not, we will not open up as quickly as some may like.

The thing is if the vaccines work disease will stay low regardless. Things will change by the autumn a lot more than you think. I believe compliance is starting to wane a little as it is. There’s evidence of people beginning to move around more now.

As i said SD going to be a hard sell once autumn comes .

markodaly

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

My point is that absolutely no alternative is being proposed, and that's the problem. So we've established in this debate that mass vaccination is not as you say the end of the line. Grand. Accepted.

Point is, what is the end of the line? Because if it isn't vaccination, which we have been told repeatedly this week, that leaves us in a limbo in which, according to official statements, there essentially is no end of the line.

At what point do we allow people to live without keeping two metres from everyone who isn't in their bubble? If we accept that mass vaccination isn't that point, then what is?

The simple fact that I'm trying to state here is that "we don't, we live like this forever" is not an acceptable or palatable answer. It will either lead to mass civil disobedience or an epidemic of suicide like the world has never seen.

And answers to these questions need to come sooner rather than later, because morale is disintegrating at a far more rapid pace than many seem to realise.

The end of the line, so to speak is low daily infection rates, locally, regionally and worldwide. People need to be patient. Why are we in lockdown again? Because people lost their heads over Christmas, and they thought with the vaccines around the corner, that was the end of the matter. How wrong were they! Now the same people are banging on about reopening ASAP. Foolish and naive.

No one is saying this is going to go on forever, that is hyperbole. But it's not going to end in a few months either.

leahyl

Colm Henry was on the News at One on RTE radio today and mentioned the great results that they've had so far from vaccination in Israel - 60% reduction in hospitalisations - that's amazing. Looking forward to when we have those results here.

latency89

landofthetree wrote: »

It works: 0 deaths, only 4 severe cases among 523,000 fully vaccinated Israelis

HMO data a week after 2nd dose shows 93% effectiveness, ‘unequivocally’ proving vaccine’s success and leaving ‘no doubt’ it’s saved many Israeli lives, says Maccabi official.


https://www.timesofisrael.com/hmo-sees-only-544-covid-infections-among-523000-fully-vaccinated-israelis/

:cool:

Read it

Not everyone who was vaccinated was exposed to the virus, so the fact that they didn't get infected can't be attributed to the vaccine.

To get the 93% they compared the vaccinated group with a similar unvaccinated group, which they presume has similar rates of those exposed to the virus and those not exposed.

This seems to be a weakness with the 93% statistic.

What you think?

markodaly

Micky 32 wrote: »

The thing is if the vaccines work disease will stay low regardless. Things will change by the autumn a lot more than you think. I believe compliance is starting to wane a little as it is. There’s evidence of people beginning to move around more now.

As i said SD going to be a hard sell once autumn comes .

If people are moving around more than that prolongs the lockdown.
Are you suggesting that because some people are getting tired of the lockdown we should just abandon it? What medical advice is that from, is that from your own locker?

The key point, if the vaccines work.

Well that depends and it depends how well they are at stopping transmission (no one knows), how long efficacy lasts (no one knows) and how well they do against new and future varients (no one knows)

Too many variables at play to give a definite month that all will be well.

To be honest, I don't know who to blame but there was a lot of hype about the vaccines as a silver bullet to all ills, I guess governments are to blame for that, but we know its a bit more complicated than that now. People swallowed the easy solution like kool-aid, and now have a hangover of reality biting.

Micky 32

markodaly wrote: »

Because people lost their heads over Christmas, and they thought with the vaccines around the corner, that was the end of the matter

Absolute bollix talk about the vaccine.. The first part i agree but any decent human being would understand wanting to be with their families after a tough year, especially when the government threatened to shut up shop afterwards. People took the small window of opportunity. Human nature. That was the real reason.

BTW i am in no way condoning what happened at xmas.

hatrickpatrick

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I really don't think a lot of people are quite understanding the existential dread brought on by the commentary this week around there being more or less no hope of ever getting out of this. Frankly, the kind of absolute horse sh!te showcased on Claire Byrne this week (and she's entertained this kind of crap several times during the pandemic) about going to concerts in Zorb balls etc, doesn't help.

Yeah the government really needs to get their messaging sorted out because literally in the last week pretty much everyone in my social circle seems completely beat.
While we can't make 100% accurate predictions we saw last year plenty of seasonality in the transmission of the virus. Unless there's a new strain infecting 10k a day there's no reason to not be at Level 3 for the summer, vaccine or no vaccine.
By September we should be in a much stronger position to start getting properly back to normal and to start making plans. I appreciate the government won't want big events to be planned for day 1 of restrictions lifted but we need some kind of hope.

And at the end of the day if we have everyone vaccinated, hospitals aren't going to be over-run and we have a couple of hundred deaths a year I really don't think people are going to put up with restrictions any longer.

Multipass

bigsuge1 wrote: »

Got about 6 pages of reading to catch up on but at least politicians now starting to state the obvious:

https://youtu.be/i_GF3nj3A8U

Can’t disagree with anything said here.

This is the viewpoint missing in the Irish press. Absolute common sense.

markodaly

markodaly wrote: »

I think Leo is tempering expectations. We have been here a few times before. Sure, look at this thread as an example. People more or less demanding we open right up once we get x% of old people vaccinated and we can go on our merry way to an All-Ireland final, or on the piss with the lads to Tenerife. In other words, we need to take this much more slowly.

I cant comment on the media, as they do what they do best, sell bad news, BUT put it this way. The same people itching to open up now were the same people itching to open up last summer and last Christmas and where has that gotten us?

People think vaccines are a silver bullet, but they aren't. An important weapon, sure and a good one to have BUT again it is fantasy talk to want to open up completely again come May or even September.

The last few weeks has put manners on people and is a much more realistic take on things. The CDC, WHO, ECDC among others all agree with this take, that this pandemic won't be over this year. It may be hard to hear, and bad news is often hard to hear, but would you rather people just lie and say, "ah sure it will be grand" While going into lockdown number 4?

This SHOULD be our last lockdown with any luck and if we do it right, if we don't do it right, it won't be our last lockdown.

As an aside, it is too easy to dismiss experts and scientists as cranks when they tell you something you don't want to hear. It's akin to Climate Change denial frankly, while posters on boards.ie really are the experts in how to handle global pandemics.

When we're all vaccinated and there's a chance a thousand people may die over the following 5 years from what will then be a mostly seasonal illness I think they vast, vast majority of people will be happy to say "**** off" to restrictions.

latency89 wrote: »

Read it

Not everyone who was vaccinated was exposed to the virus, so the fact that they didn't get infected can't be attributed to the vaccine.

To get the 93% they compared the vaccinated group with a similar unvaccinated group, which they presume has similar rates of those exposed to the virus and those not exposed.

This seems to be a weakness with the 93% statistic.

What you think?

You're a loss to the scientific community.

Micky 32

markodaly wrote: »

If people are moving around more than that prolongs the lockdown.
Are you suggesting that because some people are getting tired of the lockdown we should just abandon it? What medical advice is that from, is that from your own locker?

.

It’s obvious you really are hoping the vaccines don’t work and enjoying this with glee, does it irk you that people jet off to Lanza? Or what is your obsession with Lanza? Did you see the good news from Israel BTW?

I’m not suggesting we open everything up i was merely pointing out people are going to get pissed off and compliance will get harder and when the vaccines are administered and disease is low best of luck preventing SD.