• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

New lockdown in England, including school closures, announced by Johnson, 4/1/21

Status
Not open for further replies.

DannyMich2018

Member
Joined
19 Dec 2018
Messages
947
I'd love a source for that. As of 7/2, there were 4941 patients in ICUs across England. There are only averages per month available for last year but April's equivalent number was 3635



Given that every vaccine has still shown to be effective against all variants thrown up so far, I really do hate the way that everything has now latched on to mutations as the next big showstopper. At best we'd need to revaccinate the people who we also give the flu jab to - it's really not a show stopper, and can't be allowed to become one either
Yes sorry Domh245. I was meant to say patients on mechanical ventilator beds are down on last April's peak. Of course not all of these are in intestive care. The figures are on gov.uk. It's very encouraging the UK's total hospital figures are not a lot more than last April's peak. As already pointed out today's cases are lowest since early October with today's deaths lowest since Dec 26. It's progress.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,605
Location
Taunton or Kent
No restriction or vaccination in the under 50s at that point would see R hit 1.75-2.0 range so I think there will probably still be some! e.g. I suspect restrictions on larger gatherings will remain for a while longer after that and masks will still be required in quite number of situations e.g. shopping, public transport...
The whole point of rolling out vaccines for Covid is that should R go above 1 again, and at some point it certainly will, the severity of the illness is taken out of the equation with less hospitalisations and deaths, even if to achieve this we have to deploy boosters in future, in the same way we don't fantasise about the R number of season flu and colds.
 

Luke McDonnell

On Moderation
Joined
20 Mar 2019
Messages
144
No restriction or vaccination in the under 50s at that point would see R hit 1.75-2.0 range so I think there will probably still be some! e.g. I suspect restrictions on larger gatherings will remain for a while longer after that and masks will still be required in quite number of situations e.g. shopping, public transport...
Just asking if you have taken into account those that have already been infected in the under 50 age group - I did read a previous post from you that suggested even after all the over 50s have been offered the vaccine unmitigated transmission among the under 50 age cohorts could still result in difficulties re NHS capacity as you said that although the under 50s account for ~2% of deaths they account for a considerably higher (~25%) amount of admissions (was that just ICU or admissions in general) but I am just asking if you took not just seasonality but already pre existing natural immunity into that calculation which could be over 25% of the under 50s population. Also another thing you did not seem to take into account was if vaccines reduce transmission which evidence is pointing towards if this is the case will the unmitigated R be that high if the over 50s are a lot less likely to transmit it to the rest of the population.
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
5,612
And that is why the vaccine is being rolled out.

And we already have the requirement to quarantine if we're infected, so I don't see how that makes any difference - unless you're suggesting that we should forego all of our basic freedoms indefinately, otherwise if we don't, we might be forced to forego all our basic freedoms for two weeks - that would be a ludicrous argument.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==



We've been recruiting medical staff from abroad for years, so now seems a peculiar time to start having second thoughts.
No, I’m suggesting that if the restrictions are all lifted as requested, that would include the quarantine requirement.
 

Richard Scott

Established Member
Associate Staff
International Transport
Railtours & Preservation
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
4,587
No restriction or vaccination in the under 50s at that point would see R hit 1.75-2.0 range so I think there will probably still be some! e.g. I suspect restrictions on larger gatherings will remain for a while longer after that and masks will still be required in quite number of situations e.g. shopping, public transport...
Back to masks again, could understand if you'd mentioned social distancing but why masks? Also need to remember that quite a few people in that age range have also had the virus now so will slow down spread (maybe not by much but will still slow it).
 

philosopher

Established Member
Joined
23 Sep 2015
Messages
1,513
Back to masks again, could understand if you'd mentioned social distancing but why masks? Also need to remember that quite a few people in that age range have also had the virus now so will slow down spread (maybe not by much but will still slow it).
Personally I am expecting masks in shops and on public transport to be the last thing to go, mainly because they are far less disruptive than the social distancing measures and so are easier to justify. They may go earlier in hospitality though.
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
8,054
Location
Surrey
Just asking if you have taken into account those that have already been infected in the under 50 age group - I did read a previous post from you that suggested even after all the over 50s have been offered the vaccine unmitigated transmission among the under 50 age cohorts could still result in difficulties re NHS capacity as you said that although the under 50s account for ~2% of deaths they account for a considerably higher (~25%) amount of admissions (was that just ICU or admissions in general) but I am just asking if you took not just seasonality but already pre existing natural immunity into that calculation which could be over 25% of the under 50s population. Also another thing you did not seem to take into account was if vaccines reduce transmission which evidence is pointing towards if this is the case will the unmitigated R be that high if the over 50s are a lot less likely to transmit it to the rest of the population.
This chart from one of the SAGE papers released this week which shows <20% of those hospitalised have been below 50 and as you say less than 2% suffer mortality. So with both seasonal and vaccine impact also moderating the transmission levels there's no way R rate is going up.


1613341321775.png
 

DorkingMain

Member
Joined
25 Aug 2020
Messages
692
Location
London, UK
No restriction or vaccination in the under 50s at that point would see R hit 1.75-2.0 range so I think there will probably still be some! e.g. I suspect restrictions on larger gatherings will remain for a while longer after that and masks will still be required in quite number of situations e.g. shopping, public transport...
This is exactly the sort of statistic that's muddying the whole conversation around vaccination and lifting lockdown.

Yes - any lifting of restrictions is going to result in case numbers rising.
If those who are at risk of dying / hospitalisation are vaccinated and therefore protected, a rise in case numbers does not mean a great deal.

Besides, the "R number" (i.e. exponential rises in cases) can only rise significantly if there are viable targets for the virus to infect. Given a significant percentage of the "key worker" population will have already been exposed (I have been - three times now) + another ~50% of the population will have been vaccinated (32 million in Groups 1-9) we'll be rapidly approaching a herd immunity situation.
 

Bayum

Established Member
Joined
21 Mar 2008
Messages
3,299
Location
Leeds
That’s a fair point, and this is what we were told regarding the latest lockdown in particular. I would have thought though that the number of deaths and number of hospitalisations follow a similar trajectory? I’ve said before that I accept (albeit reluctantly) why the current lockdown was imposed, it may have provided some short term relief to the NHS, but strategically lockdowns are neither effective nor sustainable in my opinion (or that of most leading epidemiologists prior to March 2020!).
Treatment has come a long way in a year don’t forget. Recognition that steroids, anti arthritis drugs (monoclonal antibodies against IL-6) and other bits and pieces means patients are living longer - good - but not dying and freeing up bed space. This time round, don’t Roger a large proportion of cases were in those <45y/o. Likely to present with severe illness but not death, whilst the morality rate for those 60+ remains high. There’s many different reasons why the deaths and admissions don’t necessarily follow each other to a T, but there should be a reference to the other measure in the trend.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
44,442
Location
Yorks
No, I’m suggesting that if the restrictions are all lifted as requested, that would include the quarantine requirement.

I don't think that's set in stone. I could imagine that requirement continuing once other restrictions have been lifted.
 

Lampshade

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2009
Messages
3,779
Location
South London
This chart from one of the SAGE papers released this week which shows <20% of those hospitalised have been below 50 and as you say less than 2% suffer mortality. So with both seasonal and vaccine impact also moderating the transmission levels there's no way R rate is going up.
When schools open it WILL go up.
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
5,612
I don't think that's set in stone. I could imagine that requirement continuing once other restrictions have been lifted.
So could I - but their language is very absolute; an impression reinforced by the interview with Steve Baker on Today this morning.
 

kristiang85

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2018
Messages
2,745
Personally I find keeping 1-2 metres from others in public significantly less annoying than wearing masks.

Whilst I agree with that on a day to day walking to the shops level, this is the rule that stops football stadia, theatres, nightclubs, large weddings, etc to operate.
 

Class 33

Established Member
Joined
14 Aug 2009
Messages
2,362
So it would appear that lockdown easing is going to happen in three stages with education, non essential retail and hospitality, in that order. I would hope that the announcement on the 22nd also includes something about the unwinding of social distancing with a view to scrapping it altogether by early June, by which time the majority of the adult population will have had at least one dose of the vaccine, and there will be a reasonable level of immunity.

You and me both hoping that the "road map" announcement on the 22nd includes a mention about social distancing to be scrapped by early June. Sadly though I am expecting that chances are that an end date(or even approx end date at least) of this dreaded social distancing won't even get a mention in it. And if social distancing does get a mention, chances are it will be "We still have to keep up social distancing for the time being.". I really hope I am wrong and you are right!

Regarding this year's summers festivals. There are still a surprising number of festivals that are currently planning/intending on going ahead, even as early as the ones planned for May. There's hundreds still planned! I think chances are all the ones planned for May won't be able to go ahead, and probably all the ones in June too. The ones planned for July, August and September still have a slim-ish chance of going ahead I think though. But it all depends on when Johnson is going to announce an end date for social distancing, and when that end date is. The festivals organisers are anxiously waiting for this news. I think come 22nd February and there's still no end date announced, that within days there will be an absolute flood of festival cancellations announced, in particular all the ones intended for May and June. This would be very sad to see, and so much for Oliver Dowden saying he expects the festivals and events industry to be back to normal by Easter!
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,927
Location
First Class
Treatment has come a long way in a year don’t forget. Recognition that steroids, anti arthritis drugs (monoclonal antibodies against IL-6) and other bits and pieces means patients are living longer - good - but not dying and freeing up bed space. This time round, don’t Roger a large proportion of cases were in those <45y/o. Likely to present with severe illness but not death, whilst the morality rate for those 60+ remains high. There’s many different reasons why the deaths and admissions don’t necessarily follow each other to a T, but there should be a reference to the other measure in the trend.

There does appear to have been an ‘problem’ with the number of people requiring hospital treatment but ultimately recovering I agree, and as you say those people were taking up beds. I’m not sure I’d go so far as to say those under 45 are likely to become severely ill, or that the mortality rate in the over 60s is high though; Covid-19 remains a mild illness for the vast majority of people infected. The pattern we’ve seen throughout the pandemic is that an increase in cases leads to increased hospitalisations and then an increase in deaths. There may be potential nuances but this is what we’ve seen repeatedly.
 

Bayum

Established Member
Joined
21 Mar 2008
Messages
3,299
Location
Leeds
There does appear to have been an ‘problem’ with the number of people requiring hospital treatment but ultimately recovering I agree, and as you say those people were taking up beds. I’m not sure I’d go so far as to say those under 45 are likely to become severely ill, or that the mortality rate in the over 60s is high though; Covid-19 remains a mild illness for the vast majority of people infected. The pattern we’ve seen throughout the pandemic is that an increase in cases leads to increased hospitalisations and then an increase in deaths. There may be potential nuances but this is what we’ve seen repeatedly.
Well, the context of the discussion was hospital inpatients, so I’ve focussed on those rather than the general population.
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
8,054
Location
Surrey
When schools open it WILL go up.
Probably despite our great leader told us they were safe its been pretty evident they may not realise many hospitalisations from the age group but they act as a conduit for it to jump up the age groups. However, I suspect a fair few of them have had it by now so there is level of immunity building up in the teenagers. Then we have 1st dose vaccinations of the most vulnerable and don't forget over 6m of the 15m with 1st dose as well are in the health care groups as well as most will be below 60.

The bottom line is whether we are Zero Covid route or Manageable Covid Level - my take is the govt is firmly in the latter and the tension is now around what bandwidth is put on the trigger levels for relaxation. CRG goal is zero restrictions although deep down they know thats not practical yet but it keeps the pressure on so govt aren't too cautious.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,927
Location
First Class
Well, the context of the discussion was hospital inpatients, so I’ve focussed on those rather than the general population.

Ok I clearly misunderstood what you were saying, thanks.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Probably despite our great leader told us they were safe its been pretty evident they may not realise many hospitalisations from the age group but they act as a conduit for it to jump up the age groups. However, I suspect a fair few of them have had it by now so there is level of immunity building up in the teenagers. Then we have 1st dose vaccinations of the most vulnerable and don't forget over 6m of the 15m with 1st dose as well are in the health care groups as well as most will be below 60.

The bottom line is whether we are Zero Covid route or Manageable Covid Level - my take is the govt is firmly in the latter and the tension is now around what bandwidth is put on the trigger levels for relaxation. CRG goal is zero restrictions although deep down they know thats not practical yet but it keeps the pressure on so govt aren't too cautious.

I honestly don’t see why zero restrictions isn’t realistic over the coming months?
 

NorthOxonian

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
5 Jul 2018
Messages
1,671
Location
Oxford/Newcastle
Ok I clearly misunderstood what you were saying, thanks.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==



I honestly don’t see why zero restrictions isn’t realistic over the coming months?
I do think zero restrictions is realistic by the summer, but I think the CRG timescale (all gone by the end of April) is rather optimistic. I could be wrong, but I'd expect all restrictions to be eased only once the majority have had their first dose and the vulnerable have had their second - so probably no sooner than late May or early June.

Having said that, as Nicholas Lewis says, I appreciate the way Steve Baker is making the case for a faster timescale, because it's a counterbalance to all the scientists demanding restrictions for many months to come. It means that a reasonable but ambitious timescale, such as "No restrictions by mid June", becomes the compromise option.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,927
Location
First Class
I do think zero restrictions is realistic by the summer, but I think the CRG timescale (all gone by the end of April) is rather optimistic. I could be wrong, but I'd expect all restrictions to be eased only once the majority have had their first dose and the vulnerable have had their second - so probably no sooner than late May or early June.

Having said that, as Nicholas Lewis says, I appreciate the way Steve Baker is making the case for a faster timescale, because it's a counterbalance to all the scientists demanding restrictions for many months to come. It means that a reasonable but ambitious timescale, such as "No restrictions by mid June", becomes the compromise option.

I think we’re on the same page here, fingers crossed it actually materialises!
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
44,442
Location
Yorks
Negotiate from an ambitious starting point, then you have something to compromise from.

Afterall, the pro-lockdown camp are negotiating from the position of having the entire economy closed down and swingeing restrictions on people going about their business.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,927
Location
First Class
It does matter if anyone wants any sort of a life this year. Higher R = more/longer restrictions.

But it shouldn’t though as very few people will become ill enough to require hospital treatment. We’re not trying to protect people from cold-like symptoms, or at least I hope we’re not!
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
8,054
Location
Surrey
I honestly don’t see why zero restrictions isn’t realistic over the coming months?
I certainly hope the roadmap extends out to defining the conditions required for full relaxation and also believe it would be appropriate to define what the contingency measures are if things deteriorate again. I don't want masks anymore than you do but if during the summer I don't have to wear one but may have to if there is local spike im happy with that. I also suspect people will exercise there own caution on public transport for example and may continue to wear them.
 

takno

Verified Rep - Traksy
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,612
It does matter if anyone wants any sort of a life this year. Higher R = more/longer restrictions.
Only if the government overreacts to them. You might want to damp things down and stop things spreading *too* quickly until the over 50s are vaccinated, but past that point it stops mattering much.
 

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,605
Location
Taunton or Kent
Johnson has revealed the easing of lockdown plans to be "cautious but irreversible", while also saying there are target dates in mind but easements can be subject to delays:


The government's plan to move out of lockdown will be "cautious but irreversible", Boris Johnson has said.

The prime minister is due to set out the plan for ending restrictions next Monday.

He told reporters the roadmap will include dates for changes "if we possibly can", but warned high rates of infection could lead to delays.

It comes as a group of Tory MPs call for a commitment to a "free life" and ending of lockdown measures before May.

Senior backbencher Steve Baker said he wants the prime minister to "let us reclaim our lives, once and for all".

On Sunday, the government said it met its target to offer a vaccine to the 15 million most vulnerable people across the UK.

Labour said the government must "lock in the gains of the vaccine" and ensure more measures were introduced to reduce the spread of the virus - such as financial support for self-isolation and updated workplace guidance.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
20,464
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Johnson has revealed the easing of lockdown plans to be "cautious but irreversible", while also saying there are target dates in mind but easements can be subject to delays:


Unfortunately "irreversible" is now meaningless, as we've heard before that there wouldn't be repeat lockdowns.

This is the trouble with this government's clumsy and muddled presentation, and it's partly why we're doing particularly badly in terms of the economic effects.
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
5,612
Unfortunately "irreversible" is now meaningless, as we've heard before that there wouldn't be repeat lockdowns.

This is the trouble with this government's clumsy and muddled presentation, and it's partly why we're doing particularly badly in terms of the economic effects.
Which is why it is so important that the criteria for lifting lockdown are clearly evidence based, and not based on arbitrary assumptions about timescales. Having heard Steve Baker this morning, and despite his attempts to navigate round the point, "arbitrary" was the best I could have described his target date as being.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top