Will people go back to normal after a vaccine?

[LAX54]

It was 11,000+ TEU not containers as plenty of 40' included, about 7,000 TEU have now been moved from Felixstowe elsewhere including anywhere they in Suffolk with suitable level surfaces to stack them!

ok just the call I had a month or so ago was.... 'we need to move 10,000 containers'......

 

[bramling]

There will be utter hell on if restrictions continue in any great way much beyond Spring 2021, I would suggest

Yes it's been said before (on here and elsewhere) that a lot of people are treating the transition from 2020 to 2021 as a tidemark. I can just about stomach restrictions through the winter months of January and February, but once the clocks change in March that's it. I suspect it will be similar for many.

I am not prepared to lose another year of my life. None of us know how long we have left, and none of us are getting any younger.

 

[hwl]

ok just the call I had a month or so ago was.... 'we need to move 10,000 containers'......

Probably anticipating more turning up that the government had no idea what to do with and a load of empties with no chance of getting loaded on to ships any time soon as well.

I'm looking forward to the NAO investigation into the port fees accumulated leaving them at Felixstowe, a nice big earner for HP.

 

[kristiang85]

Yes it's been said before (on here and elsewhere) that a lot of people are treating the transition from 2020 to 2021 as a tidemark. I can just about stomach restrictions through the winter months of January and February, but once the clocks change in March that's it. I suspect it will be similar for many.

I am not prepared to lose another year of my life. None of us know how long we have left, and none of us are getting any younger.

Yes I do think maybe the one year point will be when a large swathe of the people will *finally* break and start questioning the government's policies (or when Rishi's tap stops flowing).

And January/February are usaully mentally the hardest months of the year for many - the coldest weather, the festive season is over, there's not much on to distract, etc. so I think there will be a lot of angst building up.

 

[Class 33]

If the Astra Zeneca one is not approved within the next couple of months to allow a mass vaccination of those under 50 in the spring then I reckon the restrictions will continue well into the summer and perhaps autumn.

Johnson and some others in the cabinet that life should be back to normal by the spring/Easter/"After Easter", with one of them(can't remember who) saying mid summer. As of yet, I'm not aware of any of them saying otherwise.

But if all these lockdowns and restrictions do drag on into next summer, I expect the hospitality and leisure industry will be pretty much wiped out by then, along with millions more unemployed, thousands more suicides, and serious chance of there being serious civil unrest across the country. There's only so much longer this can go on. By 1st April it would then have been 12 and a half months of this. That's more than long enough. We really have to start getting back to normal by then, otherwise this country is going to be a right state and not atall easy to repair.....

 

[Bantamzen]

Yes I do think maybe the one year point will be when a large swathe of the people will *finally* break and start questioning the government's policies (or when Rishi's tap stops flowing).

And January/February are usaully mentally the hardest months of the year for many - the coldest weather, the festive season is over, there's not much on to distract, etc. so I think there will be a lot of angst building up.

The dark winter months are often when people look towards things like holidays to keep them going. If there's no light at the end of the restriction tunnel by then, the mode will more & more match the weather.

 

[bramling]

Yes I do think maybe the one year point will be when a large swathe of the people will *finally* break and start questioning the government's policies (or when Rishi's tap stops flowing).

Absolutely. Though of course no matter how much the Rishi-tap flows, it doesn't make up for time lost. None of us can buy time.

And January/February are usaully mentally the hardest months of the year for many - the coldest weather, the festive season is over, there's not much on to distract, etc. so I think there will be a lot of angst building up.

I don't give a stuff sitting at home in January and February (though there's still things I'd like to be doing), but absolutely no chance after that. And if we ever even start to see a hint of a situation where old people are given some kind of passport and are able to enjoy a restriction-free life whilst younger unvaccinated people aren't, that will spark serious trouble.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Seeing whether there are any unforeseen side effects is the main point of the trials, which it has already passed.

So why did government deem it necessary to protect Pfizer from legal action? I’m not anti-vaccine, but alarm bells start ringing when you see that news...

Pfizer given protection from legal action over coronavirus vaccine by UK government

Pfizer’s UK boss refuses to explain why the business needs protection from legal action

www.independent.co.uk

 

[kristiang85]

Johnson and some others in the cabinet that life should be back to normal by the spring/Easter/"After Easter", with one of them(can't remember who) saying mid summer. As of yet, I'm not aware of any of them saying otherwise.

The problem is, earlier this year, Boris said we'd be back to normal by Christmas at one point. So I don't trust a word the man says.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Completely false comparison. You choosing to get on or not get on a 737 Max, only impacts you. You choosing not to take a vaccination offered to you impacts everyone you may come into for the rest of your life. Once again, instead of taking the tiny, infinitesimally small risk to yourself, you are choosing to load the wider population with a much bigger risk.

Show me the press release where Pfizer or anyone else claims a vaccinated person cannot transmit the virus, please...

 

[Class 33]

The problem is, earlier this year, Boris said we'd be back to normal by Christmas at one point. So I don't trust a word the man says.

Yes I know what you mean. Though in fairness he said that in mid July, before this blasted second wave happened and caused all these lockdowns again and restrictions dragging on for months longer.

This time we've got these vaccines being rolled out now, and by March/April cases and deaths should then be very low, and it's then time to start finally getting this country back to normal again.

 

[hwl]

Johnson and some others in the cabinet that life should be back to normal by the spring/Easter/"After Easter", with one of them(can't remember who) saying mid summer. As of yet, I'm not aware of any of them saying otherwise.

Boris changed from "normal" to "near normal" a fortnight ago as did several other cabinet members with similarly watered down versions of normal.

The economy has recovered to 92.1% of the 2019 level despite all the restrictions.

 

[DB]

Yes I know what you mean. Though in fairness he said that in mid July, before this blasted second wave happened and caused all these lockdowns again and restrictions dragging on for months longer.

This time we've got these vaccines being rolled out now, and by March/April cases and deaths should then be very low, and it's then time to start finally getting this country back to normal again.

It was entirely predictable that cases of a respiratory virus would increase going into winter, unless there was a reasonably high level of immunity by that point. It's very hard to believe that the governent didn't know this, but persisted in claiming that normality would return in a timescale which they thought the public would tolerate.

 

[Yew]

There will be utter hell on if restrictions continue in any great way much beyond Spring 2021, I would suggest

Nah, Witty will just produce a graph suggesting that 100,000,000 British people will die if we don't wear masks in our own homes.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Dec 2020 ==

It was entirely predictable that cases of a respiratory virus would increase going into winter, unless there was a reasonably high level of immunity by that point. It's very hard to believe that the governent didn't know this, but persisted in claiming that normality would return in a timescale which they thought the public would tolerate.

Indeed, as soon as we went from 'flattening the curve' to the delusional attempt to 'defeat' a virus we were doomed.

 

[DB]

The economy has recovered to 92.1% of the 2019 level despite all the restrictions.

The scale of the problem won't become fully apparent until the furlough scheme ends - that's masking the situation at the moment. Once it's gone, the number of jobs lost immediately and in the following months will probably be significant.

 

[hwl]

This time we've got these vaccines being rolled out now, and by March/April cases and deaths should then be very low, and it's then time to start finally getting this country back to normal again.

The vaccine roll out will take quite a while to have an impact (see discussions above).
The government isn't expecting low cases in March /April, what the governments said (the joint statement from the 4 CMOs for E, W, S and NI) last Friday was that they expected the first 3 months to be grim as the vaccine would have limited effect and that the NHS would be in for a bad winter.

 

[bramling]

The scale of the problem won't become fully apparent until the furlough scheme ends - that's masking the situation at the moment. Once it's gone, the number of jobs lost immediately and in the following months will probably be significant.

It's inevitable there's going to be a severe effect in the medium term. Notwithstanding furlough, many businesses simply aren't going to be able to wear the fact they've had a year with so much disruption to what would be their normal turnover and/or profit margins. Even many who weren't forcibly closed will have taken a hit.

 

[yorksrob]

Absolutely. Though of course no matter how much the Rishi-tap flows, it doesn't make up for time lost. None of us can buy time.



I don't give a stuff sitting at home in January and February (though there's still things I'd like to be doing), but absolutely no chance after that. And if we ever even start to see a hint of a situation where old people are given some kind of passport and are able to enjoy a restriction-free life whilst younger unvaccinated people aren't, that will spark serious trouble.

Indeed. It makes absolute sense to vaccinate those most clinically vulnerable first, but it would be stupidity in several orders of magnitude to then penalise those further down in the queue with continuing restrictions. One hopes that the government wouldn't be that stupid.

In terms of January/February, I've always found it the perfect time to visit country pubs away from the xmas rush.

 

[MikeWM]

It was entirely predictable that cases of a respiratory virus would increase going into winter, unless there was a reasonably high level of immunity by that point. It's very hard to believe that the governent didn't know this, but persisted in claiming that normality would return in a timescale which they thought the public would tolerate.

Even Ferguson's infamous paper in March explicitly showed that! I remember showing that to colleagues back in March as an argument as to why excessive measures taken in the spring would be a bad idea... But nobody seemed back then to be able to look past the spring 'hump'.

 

[trebor79]

So why did government deem it necessary to protect Pfizer from legal action? I’m not anti-vaccine, but alarm bells start ringing when you see that news...

Pfizer given protection from legal action over coronavirus vaccine by UK government

Pfizer’s UK boss refuses to explain why the business needs protection from legal action

www.independent.co.uk

Because it means Pfizer can say to their board "There's is no legal or compensatory risk associated with this investment [in developing and producing the vaccine]. That saves months, possibly years of internal examination, assessment, ranking and mitigation of legal and commercial of risk which is all about protecting commercial interests. It has zero impact upon the risk that any individual might have a bad reaction to the vaccine. It just saves a lot of time because the government is effectively taking on the risk of compensation claims if anything does go wrong.
So it's quicker then for Pfizer to get their board to press the green button and devote a lot more resource to researching, testing and producing the vaccine. that means we get our life back quicker. That's a good thing.

Taking your implicit point of view, why WOULD a government absolve a company of legal responsibility if their product was unsafe? What's the motivation?

 

[kristiang85]

The economy has recovered to 92.1% of the 2019 level despite all the restrictions.

Although I read that as you trying to be a bit positive about it, by the same token one can also day it's still down 7.9% despite all the restrictions.

Assuming you mean GDP, from 2008 Q1 to 2009 Q1 - during the financial crisis - it 'only' dropped 5.9%. And we felt the effects of that for much of the next decade.

 

[hwl]

Although I read that as you trying to be a bit positive about it, by the same token one can also day it's still down 7.9% despite all the restrictions.

Assuming you mean GDP, from 2008 Q1 to 2009 Q1 - during the financial crisis - it 'only' dropped 5.9%. And we felt the effects of that for much of the next decade.

Yes, despite all the doom and gloom plenty is doing ok. While Andy Burnham tried to claim the sky would fall in if the pubs in GM had to close, it hasn't!

The difference then is we were still heading downwards at this point a decade + ago, we had five declining quarters (nearly 6) in a row. This time we had two declining quarters (1 very deep) and have been recovering since (70% of drop recovered) and many parts of the economy are doing ok and the financial system is in good shape this time. The effects are very uneven. We also had a record recession free period since then, so may be we got a bit too used to the economy always doing well?
There is a very high chance that the total reduction in GDP will be less (excluding lack of free trade deal and other 1/1/21 impacts) than last time with better ability to grow as the financial system is in better state.

Many retail groups were already close to the edge (e.g. Debenhams already in administration once pre Covid and questions already being asked about the rest of Green empire too) and many private equity owned restaurant chains were already making sweeping closures pre-Covid so it is hard to say what the true impact is. In some cases Covid may have brought forward the inevitable for some firms.
When the shops have been open post Covid, the relative change in physical vs internet market share has been equivalent to 4-5 years of typical internet retail growth.

The 2020 Q2 GDP figures may be quite warped as the ONS got no survey returns from quite a few firms as the staff were furloughed / too busy hence the picture may be revised slightly in the future.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Dec 2020 ==

So why did government deem it necessary to protect Pfizer from legal action? I’m not anti-vaccine, but alarm bells start ringing when you see that news...

Pfizer given protection from legal action over coronavirus vaccine by UK government

Pfizer’s UK boss refuses to explain why the business needs protection from legal action

www.independent.co.uk

Same as for other vaccines for several decades, which is why the boss was struggling to answer because it has always been the case for a long time in the UK (and lots of other countries too). The reporter needs to be better informed and stop ignorant scaremongering.

It isn't news, if the headline matched reality and was "Pfizer vaccine treated like every other approved vaccine" it would have been used as bit of space filler if they still had print edition and nothing more...

The FT wouldn't have published this as it would have failed their internal fact checking processes.

 

[The Ham]

So basically, you are saying that those who disagree with you are antisocial. How charming.

To take just one of your examples, I don't own a car and use public transport, but I don't go around delivering partronising lectures to car drivers telling that they should all do the same.

An he reaslly hasn't misunderstood you - you are clearly saying that everyone should have the vaccine to protect the miniscule number who are both at serious risk and can't have the vaccine themselves. Are you going to be demanding that everyone has the flu vaccine? Because exactly the same will apply there and those who can't have the Covid vaccine may well not be able to have the flu one either!

However we do demand that those with a low risk of complications from flu have a vaccine, otherwise my children and almost every child at their schools wouldn't be given it, as they are super spreaders and by stopping them from getting it those at risk then

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, despite all the doom and gloom plenty is doing ok. While Andy Burnham tried to claim the sky would fall in if the pubs in GM had to close, it hasn't!

The difference then is we were still heading downwards at this point a decade + ago, we had five declining quarters (nearly 6) in a row. This time we had two declining quarters (1 very deep) and have been recovering since (70% of drop recovered) and many parts of the economy are doing ok and the financial system is in good shape this time. The effects are very uneven. We also had a record recession free period since then, so may be we got a bit too used to the economy always doing well?
There is a very high chance that the total reduction in GDP will be less (excluding lack of free trade deal and other 1/1/21 impacts) than last time with better ability to grow as the financial system is in better state.

Many retail groups were already close to the edge (e.g. Debenhams already in administration once pre Covid and questions already being asked about the rest of Green empire too) and many private equity owned restaurant chains were already making sweeping closures pre-Covid so it is hard to say what the true impact is. In some cases Covid may have brought forward the inevitable for some firms.
When the shops have been open post Covid, the relative change in physical vs internet market share has been equivalent to 4-5 years of typical internet retail growth.

The 2020 Q2 GDP figures may be quite warped as the ONS got no survey returns from quite a few firms as the staff were furloughed / too busy hence the picture may be revised slightly in the future.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Dec 2020 ==


Same as for other vaccines for several decades, which is why the boss was struggling to answer because it has always been the case for a long time in the UK (and lots of other countries too). The reporter needs to be better informed and stop ignorant scaremongering.

It isn't news, if the headline matched reality and was "Pfizer vaccine treated like every other approved vaccine" it would have been used as bit of space filler if they still had print edition and nothing more...

The FT wouldn't have published this as it would have failed their internal fact checking processes.

In terms of hospitality, we don't know how many businesses will come back. Every week of enforced closure is another turn of the screw.

 

[HSTEd]

However we do demand that those with a low risk of complications from flu have a vaccine, otherwise my children and almost every child at their schools wouldn't be given it, as they are super spreaders and by stopping them from getting it those at risk then

They give out flu vaccines at school now?

 

[philosopher]

The difference then is we were still heading downwards at this point a decade + ago, we had five declining quarters (nearly 6) in a row. This time we had two declining quarters (1 very deep) and have been recovering since (70% of drop recovered) and many parts of the economy are doing ok and the financial system is in good shape this time. The effects are very uneven. We also had a record recession free period since then, so may be we got a bit too used to the economy always doing well?
There is a very high chance that the total reduction in GDP will be less (excluding lack of free trade deal and other 1/1/21 impacts) than last time with better ability to grow as the financial system is in better state.

The current quarter is almost certain to see a decline in GDP given the tier system and November lockdown will have occurred in this quarter. So that will be at least three quarters of declining GDP.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

They give out flu vaccines at school now?

In Scotland all primary school children get given a nasal flu vaccine. I'm not sure what the procedure is in the other nations.

 

[The Ham]

Have any studies shown that the current crop of vaccines have any effect on transmission? You can wax lyrical about the emotive cases you want, but if science doesn't back up your assertions then it's all in vain.

The vaccines will impact on transmission, I can say this because of there's no measurable level of virus then people can't transmit it on to others.

Therefore if the unrestricted R value was 3, with 100% take up and no restrictions the R value would be 0.9 at a 70% efficiency value. That would mean a shrinking number of cases.

Even at 60% of people having had the vaccine the R value would be (at most) 1.6 (1 unvaccinated person and 30% of the remaining people). However even fairly small other changes would likely keep the number of cases low, maybe even falling.

As such for those who want us to return to normal, it could be argued that the best way to achieve that is for as many people as possible to have the vaccine.

The problem with testing to see if there's transmission from those with Covid but having had the vaccine is that the numbers getting Covid is too low to be able to prove anything, especially given the number of cases in the wider population (i.e. you could be never sure of the source of the infection).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Dec 2020 ==

In Scotland all primary school children get given a nasal flu vaccine. I'm not sure what the procedure is in the other nations.

Likewise in England.

Children's flu vaccine

Find out about the children's flu vaccine, including who should have it, how to get it and side effects.

www.nhs.uk

The nasal spray flu vaccine is free on the NHS for:

• children aged 2 or 3 years on 31 August 2020 – born between 1 September 2016 and 31 August 2018
• all primary school children (reception to year 6)
• all year 7 in secondary school
• children aged 2 to 17 years with long-term health conditions

 

[HSTEd]

Likewise in England.

Apparently uptake is only around 60%

 

[87electric]

Because it means Pfizer can say to their board "There's is no legal or compensatory risk associated with this investment [in developing and producing the vaccine]. That saves months, possibly years of internal examination, assessment, ranking and mitigation of legal and commercial of risk which is all about protecting commercial interests. It has zero impact upon the risk that any individual might have a bad reaction to the vaccine. It just saves a lot of time because the government is effectively taking on the risk of compensation claims if anything does go wrong.
So it's quicker then for Pfizer to get their board to press the green button and devote a lot more resource to researching, testing and producing the vaccine. that means we get our life back quicker. That's a good thing.

Taking your implicit point of view, why WOULD a government absolve a company of legal responsibility if their product was unsafe? What's the motivation?

Why should any pharmaceutical company not be made accountable if any of their products cause harm, illness or suffering? Switching accountability to a Government for possible lawsuits is insanity as in effect the population will be paying for the monetary damages. These companies have far too much power and influence. It's a billion dollar enterprise.
I remember the year when the Ronald Reagan administration bowed down to these companies that wanted indemnity. I still find it shocking.