When will restrictions finally end?

[brad465]

First of all, do you actually have any evidence that there were fewer flu cases this winter? Or is it just an assumption?
Genuine question - I haven't seen the numbers. What I have seen is quite a few friends getting flu like symptoms but testing negative for COVID - which implies to me the common flu is still around.

Secondly, let me assume you are correct and there have been less flu cases. There are a few possible explanations:

• The social distancing etc measures we have for COVID also helps with the flu (sure, it isn't going to prevent it all, but you can't possibly claim there is no impact at all).
• The very fact that people just aren't out and about as much as they usually are would have reduced the spread too.
• It is my understanding that we had a larger uptake of the flu jab this year (which is why it was difficult to get for some groups of people who aren't priority for it).

Considering that, it is a pretty large jump to go straight to the "COVID isn't real its just flu" conspiracy theory.
So I will ask - is there any evidence at all to suggest that flu cases are being reported as COVID cases to spread fear (as was originally being claimed in the post I replied to)?

Well there needs to be an explanation of why flu has gone down to practially zero in comparitive terms, not just in the UK but the whole world.

Whilst there is no scientific explanation being made public, then the theory of flu being mis-reported (intentionally or not) as COVID should be on the table.

If there is a scientific explanation, then this is good news - the usual flu death burden can be taken off the expected COVID death burden and the outcomes in general look a lot better...

Edit: In response to your question above, the flu data is here: https://www.who.int/influenza/surveillance_monitoring/updates/2020_12_21_surveillance_update_383.pdf (page 3 for the graph for the northern hemisphere).

For comparison, here is a report from Jan 2020: https://www.who.int/influenza/surve...s/2020_01_06_surveillance_update_358.pdf?ua=1

I wouldn't rule out the prospect that some flu infections are being logged as covid ones, however the basic reproduction number of seasonal flu seems to be much lower than Covid: according to journal articles found via Wikipedia as a central point, seasonal flu is around 0.9-2.1, while Covid is estimated at around 3.28-5.7. Therefore the social distancing measures may actually be very effective at controlling flu due to it being less infectious, but for Covid it's much harder to control and can still spread at an increasing rate. There has also been debates about whether in a majority of cases Covid can block out flu strains while infecting a host, but even without that the R0 values alone seem a plausible enough explanation to why we don't hear as much about flu currently.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

But this doesn’t explain why the government would prioritise people in their 80s over someone in their 50s who is clinically extremely vulnerable, which AIUI is the current plan. Given that situation, I’d say it’s quite reasonable to float the possibility of political bias, when that’s something we know is already an entrenched part of our politics.

In part because of the screw up made with care homes last year they now need to make amends for this group to prevent further mortality. Also as the biggest level of hospitalisations is in the over 80's im surmising there view is this is the quickest way to get on top of the problem and begin an easing of restrictions.

Well there needs to be an explanation of why flu has gone down to practially zero in comparitive terms, not just in the UK but the whole world.

Whilst there is no scientific explanation being made public, then the theory of flu being mis-reported (intentionally or not) as COVID should be on the table.

If there is a scientific explanation, then this is good news - the usual flu death burden can be taken off the expected COVID death burden and the outcomes in general look a lot better.

Interesting I wonder if any academics have looked at flu cases being analysed with a PCR test for Covid to see what result they get. Problem though is you can't get away from the level of patient admissions which are running above even a bad flu season although not by a huge amount (yet)

 

[Domh245]

So where are the flu cases then?

Multiple things will be affecting the lack of flu cases. Firstly a higher flu vaccine take up than usual in the most usually affected groups

(graph from weekly covid/influenza surveillance report - fig 53)

Secondly the R for influenza is lower than it is for covid, measures that are barely containing covid would be enough to severely limit flu. Thirdly, it could just be a very mild year in terms of the predominant flu variants.


It is also worth noting however that we don't swab and test for flu like we do for Covid, but incidence is instead generally modelled with various different means (Influenza like illnesses referrals to GPs, google searches for symptoms, mortality analysis, etc)

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Look, we clearly disagree, but this quote - just come on.
The rest of the post is pretty sensible, but this line just goes right into conspiracy theory madness.

Accepted. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I am just struggling to understand or explain how flu cases this winter seem to be way below the 5year average.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jan 2021 ==

I wouldn't rule out the prospect that some flu infections are being logged as covid ones, however the basic reproduction number of seasonal flu seems to be much lower than Covid: according to journal articles found via Wikipedia as a central point, seasonal flu is around 0.9-2.1, while Covid is estimated at around 3.28-5.7. Therefore the social distancing measures may actually be very effective at controlling flu due to it being less infectious, but for Covid it's much harder to control and can still spread at an increasing rate. There has also been debates about whether in a majority of cases Covid can block out flu strains while infecting a host, but even without that the R0 values alone seem a plausible enough explanation to why we don't hear as much about flu currently.

Yet government and others are constantly patronising us and saying it’s our own fault Coronavirus is spreading because we ‘are not obeying the rules’. If social distancing and rules on sizes of gatherings are being ignored, it follows that flu would still be at similar levels to other years

 

[The Ham]

Accepted. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I am just struggling to understand or explain how flu cases this winter seem to be way below the 5year average.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jan 2021 ==


Yet government and others are constantly patronising us and saying it’s our own fault Coronavirus is spreading because we ‘are not obeying the rules’. If social distancing and rules on sizes of gatherings are being ignored, it follows that flu would still be at similar levels to other years

With the flu children are super spreaders (which is why they are offered the vaccine), this isn't the case with Covid-19 and so this is where perhaps we need to look to see why flu cases are down.

Firstly, whilst they are going to school they are only spreading it to those within their class rather than to anyone in the school.

Next up they are going to far less out of school activities (including birthday parties) which is going to further reduce the spread and reduce the spread between schools.

Chances are there's been a higher percentage uptake within children, however even if there's not in recent years it's been expanded to cover more children (as an example a 2 years ago a 3 year old at the start of the flu season wasn't offered it, now a child turning 3 within the flu season is being given it), which is going to help reduce spread further.

Likewise there's fewer people coming on holiday, so you've got got children going away and mixing with people from all over the place during the October half term break, which would stop it from spreading within countries and between countries.

Finally (although there are probably other reasons, but these cover the main ones) they are seeing family a lot less, which means that is not getting spread from the young to the old.

Whilst in some countries I could accept that there's likely to be cases of flu being recorded as Covid-19 that's certainly not the case on the whole in the UK. As the UK are showing similar patterns of flu then it's likely that the reporting of flu as Covid-19 is likely to be fairly limited.

As others have highlighted Covid-19 has a much higher R value than the flu, and so it takes a lot less to reduce the R value to below 1. Also given that case numbers would be lower from last year and with less ability to spread the flu between hemispheres then the starting case numbers would likely be lower as well.

 

[Mintona]

I see David Davis on the radio this morning says the lockdown will last until late March or April.

And you guys laughed at me when I said restrictions won’t be completely removed until next April! We’ll be lucky if it’s then to be quite honest. Buckle up for the long haul.

 

[hwl]

Accepted. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I am just struggling to understand or explain how flu cases this winter seem to be way below the 5year average.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jan 2021 ==


Yet government and others are constantly patronising us and saying it’s our own fault Coronavirus is spreading because we ‘are not obeying the rules’. If social distancing and rules on sizes of gatherings are being ignored, it follows that flu would still be at similar levels to other years

Australia saw flu at just 7% of 5 year average during their winter (over our summer). California is seeing about 10% of expect Flu cases so far this winter.

Covid is much more transmissible that flu. The latest estimates of R0 in the UK in Feb and March 2020 for Covid are 3.9. The Typical R0 of a new flu strain so far this century is just 1.3. [R0 = new virus/strain with no immunity and no mitigation measures]

A large proportion of flu (40-60%) tends to be spread by physical contact rather than airboune transmission, hence the government's initial use of the flu play book to focussing on cutting contact spread and the use of hand washing and alcohol gels which proved to be slightly misguided in the light on lower contact covid transmission.

A higher R0 is indicative of a greater level of airborne transmission.

Work in Australia and UK 4 months ago put covid contact transmission rates at 10-20%, much lower than flu.

Distancing actually happens to be more effective an reducing flu rates because flu is less effective at airbourne transmission than Covid.

The hand washing, gels, hygiene and distancing measures the government has implemented are far more effective at reducing flu (easy adversary) than covid (a moderate adversary) hence no surprise that flu has been hammered this winter. [Severe adversary = Measles or Chicken Pox with R0 >10]

It is pretty easy to get an R0 of 1.3 down to an R of (well) below 1 with measures, much harder to get an R0 of 3.9 (or more for the new strain) down to 1.

The R0 for the new covid strain will be higher than the 3.9 from Feb/March 2020.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Jan 2021 ==

I see David Davis on the radio this morning says the lockdown will last until late March or April.

And you guys laughed at me when I said restrictions won’t be completely removed until next April! We’ll be lucky if it’s then to be quite honest. Buckle up for the long haul.

I wasn't laughing as I've been saying the same things. Many larger business weren't laughing either a that was their expectation too.
Gove on R4 Today saying the same as Davis and emphasising March is probable start point for reducing restrictions.

 

[brad465]

Australia saw flu at just 7% of 5 year average during their winter (over our summer). California is seeing about 10% of expect Flu cases so far this winter.

Covid is much more transmissible that flu. The latest estimates of R0 in the UK in Feb and March 2020 for Covid are 3.9. The Typical R0 of a new flu strain so far this century is just 1.3. [R0 = new virus/strain with no immunity and no mitigation measures]

A large proportion of flu (40-60%) tends to be spread by physical contact rather than airboune transmission, hence the government's initial use of the flu play book to focussing on cutting contact spread and the use of hand washing and alcohol gels which proved to be slightly misguided in the light on lower contact covid transmission.

A higher R0 is indicative of a greater level of airborne transmission.

Work in Australia and UK 4 months ago put covid contact transmission rates at 10-20%, much lower than flu.

Distancing actually happens to be more effective an reducing flu rates because flu is less effective at airbourne transmission than Covid.

The hand washing, gels, hygiene and distancing measures the government has implemented are far more effective at reducing flu (easy adversary) than covid (a moderate adversary) hence no surprise that flu has been hammered this winter. [Severe adversary = Measles or Chicken Pox with R0 >10]

It is pretty easy to get an R0 of 1.3 down to an R of (well) below 1 with measures, much harder to get an R0 of 3.9 (or more for the new strain) down to 1.

The R0 for the new covid strain will be higher than the 3.9 from Feb/March 2020.

At what point do we realise we have to learn to live with this? If the vaccine rollout gets what we need brilliant, but when an R0 value is a high as it seems to be for Covid, we are kidding ourselves if we can completely control it.

 

[Ianno87]

I see David Davis on the radio this morning says the lockdown will last until late March or April.

And you guys laughed at me when I said restrictions won’t be completely removed until next April! We’ll be lucky if it’s then to be quite honest. Buckle up for the long haul.

You'll get to the point where some people will have had two consecutive birthdays in harsh lockdowns (spoken as somebody with an April birthday...)

 

[hwl]

At what point do we realise we have to learn to live with this? If the vaccine rollout gets what we need brilliant, but when an R0 value is a high as it seems to be for Covid, we are kidding ourselves if we can completely control it.

We have been pretty good at controlling Measles (R0 12 - 18) with the aid of very effective vaccines.

 

[kristiang85]

You'll get to the point where some people will have had two consecutive birthdays in harsh lockdowns (spoken as somebody with an April birthday...)

I'm late March so that's me screwed...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Jan 2021 ==

Australia saw flu at just 7% of 5 year average during their winter (over our summer). California is seeing about 10% of expect Flu cases so far this winter.

Covid is much more transmissible that flu. The latest estimates of R0 in the UK in Feb and March 2020 for Covid are 3.9. The Typical R0 of a new flu strain so far this century is just 1.3. [R0 = new virus/strain with no immunity and no mitigation measures]

A large proportion of flu (40-60%) tends to be spread by physical contact rather than airboune transmission, hence the government's initial use of the flu play book to focussing on cutting contact spread and the use of hand washing and alcohol gels which proved to be slightly misguided in the light on lower contact covid transmission.

A higher R0 is indicative of a greater level of airborne transmission.

Work in Australia and UK 4 months ago put covid contact transmission rates at 10-20%, much lower than flu.

Distancing actually happens to be more effective an reducing flu rates because flu is less effective at airbourne transmission than Covid.

The hand washing, gels, hygiene and distancing measures the government has implemented are far more effective at reducing flu (easy adversary) than covid (a moderate adversary) hence no surprise that flu has been hammered this winter. [Severe adversary = Measles or Chicken Pox with R0 >10]

It is pretty easy to get an R0 of 1.3 down to an R of (well) below 1 with measures, much harder to get an R0 of 3.9 (or more for the new strain) down to 1.

The R0 for the new covid strain will be higher than the 3.9 from Feb/March 2020.

This makes sense. Thanks for posting.

So this begs the questions - for effective control of COVID, do our current policies do enough, and if not what will be enough?

If you need to do 4m social distancing and physcially keep people in their bedrooms to stop this spreading, then obviously that is completely unrealistic. But that means the current measures are not effective enough, and it's impossivle to make them effective, what's the point in them?

They might help a bit, but if the proportion of transmission reduction is lower than the proportion of collatoral effects to peoples' non-COVID health and the economy, then there's an argument for having minimal restrictions (i.e. lots of public advice on hygiene and distancing where possible, like in early March) rather than more draconian restrictions.

I personally think we have got the balance completely wrong.

 

[DustyBin]

At what point do we realise we have to learn to live with this? If the vaccine rollout gets what we need brilliant, but when an R0 value is a high as it seems to be for Covid, we are kidding ourselves if we can completely control it.

Who knows.... Assuming we manage to drive infection rates down via the vaccines, the goalposts may well move to ‘zero covid’. There will certainly be calls for it, whether they are listened to is another matter but based on events to date I wouldn’t be surprised....

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I see David Davis on the radio this morning says the lockdown will last until late March or April.

And you guys laughed at me when I said restrictions won’t be completely removed until next April! We’ll be lucky if it’s then to be quite honest. Buckle up for the long haul.

This runs counter to what Boris said in last nights briefing but anyhow I feel that as vaccination brings immunisation to the populace they will progressively gain confidence but we still don't know how well this will work so the last thing we need is people running around prematurely so no bad thing. That said we do have a path to some sort of normality this spring/summer but we will need caution going into this Autumn but by 2022 full immunisation should be achieved.
The govt should show us the plan however imperfect it is and how well we are doing against the goal and then people will have a reason to keep the faith and follow the rules.

 

[brad465]

The live music sector is demanding a restart date for their industry:

Music festivals could be cancelled this month, MPs told

Organisers are facing "dire straits" if the 2021 music festival season is scrapped, MPs are told.

www.bbc.co.uk

Concerts and festivals need government assistance to get "back on their feet," says the music industry trade body UK Music.

It is calling on MPs to name a "restart date", after which gigs can go ahead, following months of cancellations.

The body is also asking the government to introduce Covid cancellation insurance for live events, and to extend a VAT cut on concert tickets.

The government said it was working "flat out" to support the sector.

UK Music's call to action came in a report called "Let the Music Play: Save Our Summer 2021," which outlined a range of measures that could help the industry get back up and running.

It was published to coincide with an inquiry into the viability of festivals this summer, which launches in Parliament on Tuesday.

Organisers of the Parklife and Boomtown festivals, as well as UK Music CEO Jamie Njoku-Goodwinm are due to give evidence at the first session on Tuesday morning.

 

[philjo]

We have been pretty good at controlling Measles (R0 12 - 18) with the aid of very effective vaccines.

Measles vaccine is given to young infants.

The current COVID vaccines are only licensed by MHRA for use in adults.
The Pfizer vaccine is licensed for age 16 years and above,
The AStraZeneca/Oxford vaccine is licenced for age 18 and above.
more clinical trial data is required before a product can be licenced for children as approved doses will be different according to age.

 

[The Ham]

Measles vaccine is given to young infants.

The current COVID vaccines are only licensed by MHRA for use in adults.
The Pfizer vaccine is licensed for age 16 years and above,
The AStraZeneca/Oxford vaccine is licenced for age 18 and above.
more clinical trial data is required before a product can be licenced for children as approved doses will be different according to age.

Until the recent variant children were at low risk of contracting Covid-19, as such there was limited benefit in testing to allow the vaccine to be used in those under 16/18.

In that we'd get better outcomes (fewer deaths and less impact on hospitals) by giving it to those who are most likely to contact it.

Given that initially pregnant and breastfeeding women weren't to have it, in time chances are more testing would be undertaken to allow children to have the vaccine. However at this stage is still fairly low down the list of priorities (other than for those with underlying heath conditions).

 

[Dave91131]

I stated a similar thing (I forget in which thread) a few weeks ago;

As someone in his early 30's with no known underlying health conditions making me any more than at very very low risk from the virus, I have been informed by someone who I consider a reliable source (friend who works at Peterborough City hospital) not to expect to be offered my vaccine until late 2021 or early 2022.

Given that there will be millions in the same boat, I fail to see 2021 being much different to 2020 in terms of being a total washout for big events and gatherings etc.

I certainly will not be making any plans this year which require booking and paying in advance, as I simply can't be doing with the hassle of trying to get my money back if restrictions don't ease or do ease but then gave to be reimposed etc. And I suspect many people are of the same view.

I really hope all of what I've said above turns out to be wrong, but sadly I fear it won't.

 

[Dent]

In that we'd get better outcomes (fewer deaths and less impact on hospitals) by giving it to those who are most likely to contact it.

Given that initially pregnant and breastfeeding women weren't to have it, in time chances are more testing would be undertaken to allow children to have the vaccine. However at this stage is still fairly low down the list of priorities (other than for those with underlying heath conditions).

Why would you get fewer deaths and less impact on hospitals from vaccinating healthy people who will not die or end up in hospital even if they do catch it, than giving it to the people who are actually vulnerable?

 

[kristiang85]

I stated a similar thing (I forget in which thread) a few weeks ago;

As someone in his early 30's with no known underlying health conditions making me any more than at very very low risk from the virus, I have been informed by someone who I consider a reliable source (friend who works at Peterborough City hospital) not to expect to be offered my vaccine until late 2021 or early 2022.

Given that there will be millions in the same boat, I fail to see 2021 being much different to 2020 in terms of being a total washout for big events and gatherings etc.

But to that I would ask: why would we need to cancel events if the vulnerable are vaccinated by late spring? There needs to be a point where the goverment says to these groups "Right, you and the rest of the country have given up a year of your/their lives to keep you all safe, now you have the vaccine it's up to you what risks you take in terms of going out and living your lives. We won't mandate anything anymore".

 

[NorthOxonian]

But to that I would ask: why would we need to cancel events if the vulnerable are vaccinated by late spring? There needs to be a point where the goverment says to these groups "Right, you and the rest of the country have given up a year of your/their lives to keep you all safe, now you have the vaccine it's up to you what risks you take in terms of going out and living your lives. We won't mandate anything anymore".

They'll find a new justification. I wouldn't be surprised if they used "Long Covid" as a way to justify maintaining restrictions until everyone has been vaccinated.

 

[The Ham]

I stated a similar thing (I forget in which thread) a few weeks ago;

As someone in his early 30's with no known underlying health conditions making me any more than at very very low risk from the virus, I have been informed by someone who I consider a reliable source (friend who works at Peterborough City hospital) not to expect to be offered my vaccine until late 2021 or early 2022.

Given that there will be millions in the same boat, I fail to see 2021 being much different to 2020 in terms of being a total washout for big events and gatherings etc.

I certainly will not be making any plans this year which require booking and paying in advance, as I simply can't be doing with the hassle of trying to get my money back if restrictions don't ease or do ease but then gave to be reimposed etc. And I suspect many people are of the same view.

I really hope all of what I've said above turns out to be wrong, but sadly I fear it won't.

Once we've vaccinated those who make up the 2/3rds or more of the hospitalisations then the number of deaths is going to be fairly reduced (fairly easily a reduction to 50% of what would otherwise be the case). Those aged under 50 make a small number of the deaths, if you exclude those who are high risk (as they would also have been vaccinated) then the numbers of deaths start to be tiny.

Although to eradicate it then as many of us to be vaccinated as possible (especially as there's quite a few who won't be able to have the vaccine).

Why would you get fewer deaths and less impact on hospitals from vaccinating healthy people who will not die or end up in hospital even if they do catch it, than giving it to the people who are actually vulnerable?

Sorry I wasn't clear I meant those who were high risk of death rather than children who are much lower risk.

 

[hst43102]

But to that I would ask: why would we need to cancel events if the vulnerable are vaccinated by late spring? There needs to be a point where the goverment says to these groups "Right, you and the rest of the country have given up a year of your/their lives to keep you all safe, now you have the vaccine it's up to you what risks you take in terms of going out and living your lives. We won't mandate anything anymore".

If only. Unfortunately this government has proven time and time again that they don't use common sense, so I don't see that happening at all this year...

 

[theblackwatch]

To go back to the topic, I'd go for easing in March/April, end towards the end of the year.

Realistic, optimistic, or pessimistic?

 

[6862]

To go back to the topic, I'd go for easing in March/April, end towards the end of the year.

Realistic, optimistic, or pessimistic?

I think a review in March/April time is possible. I doubt they'll change anything then, and given that it took until May/June last year for them to open up, I'd suggest it's likely that we will be in full lockdown until May/June, with a brief period of relaxation over the summer then a real hard crackdown in September. I think they'll argue that they won't know the vaccine's effectiveness until we've gone through a winter with all the vulnerable people vaccinated. So I'm going to guess April/May 2022 for as close to normality as we will ever see again. Alongside all this there'll be plenty of scaremongering surrounding so-called 'long Covid' and scary new mutations which they'll use to beat us over the head with at regular intervals.

 

[yorksrob]

I think a review in March/April time is possible. I doubt they'll change anything then, and given that it took until May/June last year for them to open up, I'd suggest it's likely that we will be in full lockdown until May/June, with a brief period of relaxation over the summer then a real hard crackdown in September. I think they'll argue that they won't know the vaccine's effectiveness until we've gone through a winter with all the vulnerable people vaccinated. So I'm going to guess April/May 2022 for as close to normality as we will ever see again. Alongside all this there'll be plenty of scaremongering surrounding so-called 'long Covid' and scary new mutations which they'll use to beat us over the head with at regular intervals.

Now that is pessimistic.

 

[6862]

Now that is pessimistic.

I base it on the government's track record of keeping the goalposts moving, such we are always about 6 months from 'normality'. Remember normality by November (they told us that in early summer)? Then normality by Easter (that came out in late November/early December I think). So based on that, the earliest we can expect to see anything change is early summer. And about next winter, do you really think they're going to trust the vaccine to last for a long time, after they have spent so much time telling us that it might not stop transmission and might not last very long?

Personally, I think they should rapidly remove restrictions ASAP. I hope I'm wrong about all of the above. But we're in a classic case of the sunk cost fallacy and such a situation only goes one way.

 

[MattA7]

With the announcement of the 3rd lockdown I’m honestly now starting to wish I went to live with my fathers side of the family abroad back when all of this began. But I didn’t because I had no idea it would become this ridiculous. Over there they had a lockdown in March then started easing most restrictions in May (without going backwards at any point) and have near normality. Despite having around the same number of cases as the UK for a long time.They also started their mass vaccination program 3 weeks ago. Muzzle laws aren’t as strictly enforced as far as I’m aware.

 

[hwl]

Measles vaccine is given to young infants.

The current COVID vaccines are only licensed by MHRA for use in adults.
The Pfizer vaccine is licensed for age 16 years and above,
The AStraZeneca/Oxford vaccine is licenced for age 18 and above.
more clinical trial data is required before a product can be licenced for children as approved doses will be different according to age.

The simple point I was answering was: is it possible to control high R0 infections with a vaccine and gave an example.
Luckily Covid has an intermediate R0 so needs a much smaller number vaccinated so in theory you shouldn't need to vaccinate children to achieve the numbers required (unlike measles and you also need to protect the children with measles ).
In early December the US government funded a trial of the Moderna vaccine in 12-18 age group.

When we get the data in a few months on the effectiveness of the vaccines in reducing transmission, it will also inform our ability to control covid using vaccination and the level of vaccination required.

 

[hst43102]

I think a review in March/April time is possible. I doubt they'll change anything then, and given that it took until May/June last year for them to open up, I'd suggest it's likely that we will be in full lockdown until May/June, with a brief period of relaxation over the summer then a real hard crackdown in September. I think they'll argue that they won't know the vaccine's effectiveness until we've gone through a winter with all the vulnerable people vaccinated. So I'm going to guess April/May 2022 for as close to normality as we will ever see again. Alongside all this there'll be plenty of scaremongering surrounding so-called 'long Covid' and scary new mutations which they'll use to beat us over the head with at regular intervals.

I really hope you're wrong there, but I fear you might be correct.

 

[Gadget88]

I stated a similar thing (I forget in which thread) a few weeks ago;

As someone in his early 30's with no known underlying health conditions making me any more than at very very low risk from the virus, I have been informed by someone who I consider a reliable source (friend who works at Peterborough City hospital) not to expect to be offered my vaccine until late 2021 or early 2022.

Given that there will be millions in the same boat, I fail to see 2021 being much different to 2020 in terms of being a total washout for big events and gatherings etc.

I certainly will not be making any plans this year which require booking and paying in advance, as I simply can't be doing with the hassle of trying to get my money back if restrictions don't ease or do ease but then gave to be reimposed etc. And I suspect many people are of the same view.

I really hope all of what I've said above turns out to be wrong, but sadly I fear it won't.

I tried one of those vaccine checkers online and it said summer 2022 aswell.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Jan 2021 ==

I read even with vaccination we can expect hospital admissions come December will the numbers be large?