Author Topic: Coronavirus  (Read 240217 times)

SusanDoris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8265
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3675 on: December 30, 2020, 03:41:30 PM »
Most of England Tier 4 from midnight, all other areas apart from the Isles of Scilly, tier 3

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55489932
Can you tell me, please, what tier New Forest (west hampshire) is in?
The Most Honourable Sister of Titular Indecision.

ekim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5803
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3676 on: December 30, 2020, 03:43:51 PM »
Can you tell me, please, what tier New Forest (west hampshire) is in?
Tier 4 from Thursaday.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63710
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3677 on: December 30, 2020, 03:45:23 PM »
Can you tell me, please, what tier New Forest (west hampshire) is in?
Moved into Tier 4

SusanDoris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8265
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3678 on: December 30, 2020, 05:32:40 PM »
Tier 4 from Thursaday.
Thank you for your help, much appreciated. Will hairdressers be allowed to open, do you know?

ETA: thank you too NS for your reply.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2020, 05:34:52 PM by SusanDoris »
The Most Honourable Sister of Titular Indecision.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63710
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3679 on: December 30, 2020, 05:37:41 PM »
Thank you for your help, much appreciated. Will hairdressers be allowed to open, do you know?

ETA: thank you too NS for your reply.
No, hairdressers will be shut

SusanDoris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8265
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3680 on: December 30, 2020, 05:45:11 PM »
No, hairdressers will be shut
thank you for reply. Oh dear, back to washing it myself! No means of making it look even vaguely smart, but since nobody much is going to see it, I suppose that doesn't matter either!!
The Most Honourable Sister of Titular Indecision.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63710
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3681 on: December 30, 2020, 10:27:19 PM »
Gavin Williamson/Ted Rogers guide to schools opening in Tier 4

“Now if year 12 you be, but not in Tier 3
You’ll be back on the 5th if tested, you’ll see
For Tier 4 pre school there’s one more new rule
On the 18th you’ll return, new subjects to learn”
« Last Edit: December 30, 2020, 10:31:19 PM by Nearly Sane »

ad_orientem

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7899
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3682 on: December 31, 2020, 05:13:40 AM »
What the hell is year 12?
Peace through superior firepower.
Do not believe anything until the Kremlin denies it.

Roses

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7970
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3683 on: December 31, 2020, 10:35:11 AM »
What the hell is year 12?

The most senior high school year in which pupils do their A levels.
"At the going down of the sun and in the morning we will remember them."

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63710
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3684 on: December 31, 2020, 12:22:43 PM »

SusanDoris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8265
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3685 on: December 31, 2020, 01:15:32 PM »
The most senior high school year in which pupils do their A levels.
Secondary school starts at year 7, so five years to O levels= year 11 and two years on for A levels = year year 13 ?
The Most Honourable Sister of Titular Indecision.

Roses

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7970
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3686 on: December 31, 2020, 01:48:44 PM »
Secondary school starts at year 7, so five years to O levels= year 11 and two years on for A levels = year year 13 ?

WHOOPS of course you are right! :-[
"At the going down of the sun and in the morning we will remember them."

Udayana

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5478
  • βε ηερε νοω
    • The Byrds - My Back Pages
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3687 on: December 31, 2020, 02:18:48 PM »
Surely this is a nonsense and dangerous decision by the govt?


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9099049/Questions-Britains-decision-drop-two-dose-vaccine-regimen.html

More here:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/dec/31/covid-vaccine-uk-doctors-criticise-rescheduling-of-second-doses

Health workers having had one dose of the Pfizer vaccine are finding their appointments for the second are being cancelled.

It could be fine, but making these decisions without convincing evidence from clinical tests is reckless risk taking. One also suspects that the MHRA has been leant on, compromising trust further. 

Still, if everything goes to pot (yet again!) I expect Johnson could blame it all on Blair.

 
Ah, but I was so much older then ... I'm younger than that now

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63710
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3688 on: January 01, 2021, 03:06:01 PM »
Struggling to see the rationale behind this


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-55507001

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32230
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3689 on: January 01, 2021, 05:00:56 PM »
Surely this is a nonsense and dangerous decision by the govt?


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9099049/Questions-Britains-decision-drop-two-dose-vaccine-regimen.html

They're panicking. I think the reasoning is that one dose does confer some resistance and that might be enough to curb the sudden increase in infections we are seeing. I think it's the wrong decision, but it is not nonsense.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32230
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3690 on: January 01, 2021, 05:03:46 PM »
More here:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/dec/31/covid-vaccine-uk-doctors-criticise-rescheduling-of-second-doses

Health workers having had one dose of the Pfizer vaccine are finding their appointments for the second are being cancelled.

It could be fine, but making these decisions without convincing evidence from clinical tests is reckless risk taking. One also suspects that the MHRA has been leant on, compromising trust further. 
It is with front line health service staff who are in constant danger of contracting the virus. If there's one group of people we should not be shafting at this time, it's them.

This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

jakswan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12484
    • Preloved Ads
Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.
- Voltaire

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63710

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63710
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3693 on: January 01, 2021, 10:17:46 PM »

jakswan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12484
    • Preloved Ads
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3694 on: January 02, 2021, 09:37:45 AM »
Your point? That Pfizer are saying that the 3 months is an issue is surely a problem?

You asked two questions.
1. Surely this is a nonsense?
and
2. dangerous decision by the govt?

No and possibly, however;

Quote
The 4 UK Chief Medical Officers agree with the JCVI that at this stage of the pandemic prioritising the first doses of vaccine for as many people as possible on the priority list will protect the greatest number of at risk people overall in the shortest possible time and will have the greatest impact on reducing mortality, severe disease and hospitalisations and in protecting the NHS and equivalent health services.

4 Chief Medical Officers!
Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.
- Voltaire

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17491
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3695 on: January 02, 2021, 12:32:43 PM »
4 Chief Medical Officers!
The devolved nations have a Chief Medical Officer too, so there are four in total.

Aruntraveller

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10962
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3696 on: January 02, 2021, 05:42:14 PM »
We are also now allowing patients to receive different vaccines at first and second vaccination points. Against all medical protocols.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/01/health/coronavirus-vaccines-britain.html?

Led by donkeys.
Before we work on Artificial Intelligence shouldn't we address the problem of natural stupidity.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63710
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3697 on: January 02, 2021, 06:24:09 PM »
We are also now allowing patients to receive different vaccines at first and second vaccination points. Against all medical protocols.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/01/health/coronavirus-vaccines-britain.html?

Led by donkeys.
I think the NYTimes doesn't quite give the full story. This is a contingency for when there has been a delay and the person is high risk. It's not a policy for general

jakswan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12484
    • Preloved Ads
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3698 on: January 03, 2021, 09:24:10 AM »
We are also now allowing patients to receive different vaccines at first and second vaccination points. Against all medical protocols.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/01/health/coronavirus-vaccines-britain.html?

Led by donkeys.

https://www.ft.com/content/afa31d12-c393-402b-9677-1fb312cfa1cf

Quote
UK health officials rejected suggestions that the guidance implied a change of tactics. One said: “The UK has not moved to a mix-and-match regimen.” The approach would be used in exceptional circumstances where the only alternative was not to complete a vaccination course, they said. In practice it would be used rarely if at all, the official added
Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.
- Voltaire

Stranger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8236
  • Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #3699 on: January 03, 2021, 11:51:31 AM »
I think the NYTimes doesn't quite give the full story. This is a contingency for when there has been a delay and the person is high risk. It's not a policy for general

Indeed: Coronavirus: BMJ urges NYT to correct vaccine 'mixing' article
x(∅ ∈ x ∧ ∀y(yxy ∪ {y} ∈ x))