Weston Super Saint

Excellent idea but no way to safely implement. They can't go on the roads as there will be too many fatalities, which leaves the footpaths which are barely fit for purpose for pedestrians, let alone kids hurtling around without any common sense at 15 - 20mph. Would need a major infrastructure upgrade across the country, but the cost would far outweigh any benefits. Not that anything I've said will make a blind bit of difference - already seeing plenty of them everyday and they are still technically illegal to use in public (unless part of the trial in very limited areas).

Lol The first time aintclever actually climbs off a fence and this happens! His woke meter will have a melt down!

It's why Soggy is now so angry all the time, all the humiliation of his past.

Or playing five a side....

It can take up to four weeks for the vaccines to reach their full effectiveness (90+%). Plus those figures don't indicate how old the people who died were, what was the reason for their death (it just means they tested positive before they died), nor does it factor in 'false positives' (although you would hope they would have double checked with a dead person, but you never know!).

They can have all the treatment they need, right up until someone who has had the vaccine needs it, then they can go and wait in the corridor. It's a moot point anyway as the whole country gets just another couple of weeks to make sure they stay safe.

Heard on the radio this afternoon that the delay is being agreed because there are over 2 million over 50s who haven't had the vaccine. Really? We're delaying so we can protect some selfish cunts that have refused to have the one thing that will protect them!

Just another four weeks then! https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57464097

I think the department of health and social care have lost their minds! As per the image below (taken from here), they want us to believe that we are already on course to hit over 40k infections per day by early July (that's my guess of the date as they conveniently don't label the scale after the 21st June!). That would put us on a par, infection wise, with the 2nd of January (a week after the lockdown was introduced!), at a time when barely anyone had received their vaccination. No idea how they've reached this conclusion!

Not sure where you get your figures from but stats were released last week that said 80% of the adult population have antibodies due to vaccine or previous infection. That's before we look at the road map that was released in Feb and didn't take into account the success of the vaccination programme. The road map was also based on one vaccination being circa 60% effective but current studies are showing that one dose is in the region of 80-85% effective. The number of hospitalisations is key. That number is still very low and predominantly made up of people who have been offered a vaccine but not had one. Those people are not going to change their minds in the next five weeks!!

I've previously stated that infections will continue until that point. The point regarding lockdowns was that they were only put in place to protect the NHS from collapsing. We've reached the point where ALL vulnerable people who are likely to overwhelm it are now vaccinated. There could be a million infections a day but if that doesn't result in hospitalisations there is no need for a lockdown...

The giraffe would eat the lemon tart There are NO stupid questions

And after that we'll be told that it won't be safe until everyone has had two jabs, so just a couple more months.

You're conflating two issues. Fundamentally flawed would indicate that there isn't an answer. Whether or not a question 'warrants' an answer is completely subjective and a question you feel may not warrant an answer may be one that everyone else demands to be answered. You've also lost sight of the fact that 'there are no stupid questions'.

Option 2 is safer for society! Although, as far as I'm aware, all stop and searches have to provide a record to the person being stopped and gives them the opportunity to make a complaint. Surely a better way to measure the statistic is to find out how many complaints about unfair / unreasonable stop and searches were upheld, which officers have the most compaints upheld against them and correct the behaviours that way rather than just reporting how many searches were carried out?

Yes. Can even stay the night or two.

Another example of things that weren't offensive at the time but need to be cancelled in accordance with today's standards : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57422751

I understand your point entirely, but it doesn't add up! The current figures show that around 80% of all UK adults have CoVid antibodies - whether through vaccination or previous infection. I understand that still leaves 20% of all UK adults that don't have the antibodies and are therefore at risk of community transmission. I fully accept that once all of the measures that are currently in place are lifted, it is inevitable that the number of cases will rise due to the number of people without antibodies, however, given that the virus has more serious effects in older people the chances of hospitalisation for under 50's is somewhere in the region of 2 per 100,000 people which diminishes the younger people are. My argument has been pretty clear and as yet you haven't answered the very simple question. Of the remaining people who are not fully immunised and are therefore at risk of community transmission, who, from this group will cause the NHS to be overloaded and thus force another lockdown? Simple question, but one which you have repeatedly avoided answering, yet continue to trot out the example of having to re-enter a lockdown if we don't wait another three weeks! I also understand your point that there are a tiny minority of people who are vulnerable but cannot be vaccinated, but once more I am happy to state that I don't think there is enough of them to overwhelm the NHS even if they all caught the virus on the 22nd June! I've also asked the question, when should individuals like this, who through no fault of their own find themselves in this position, take responsibility for their own health and well being (I suspect the answer to that question is that those with any sense are already doing this and probably have been long before CoVid became an issue as they are likely to be susceptible to a whole host of complaints!). Comparing our current situation with the time between the first and second waves last year, when no vaccine had even been invented, let alone a comprehensive programme succesfully rolled out, is utter lunacy and does you no favours!

The ECB has set a precedent now, those guys are going to have to be suspended whilst an investigation is carried out - to not do so will be treating Robinson diffently / unfairly.... I think the whole statue debacle of last summer has taught us that it's not acceptable to claim they weren't offensive at the time. Slavery wasn't (considered) offensive at the time yet we've spent the last year trying to destroy all links to it, especially in cities built on / by the slave trade like Bristol and Liverpool. Whilst I agree entirely with your point that those tweets / comments were made during 'different times', sadly the whole cancel culture brigade don't accept that as a valid reason and everybody throughout all of history needs to be judged by today's morals and standards!

Again, you use lots of rhetoric but don't actually quantify anything. Explain how another 3 weeks wait will avoid decimating the NHS compared to re-opening on the 21st? I appreciate that there will still be 'some' vulnerable people who cannot be vaccinated for one reason or another, but don't believe the cost of keeping millions of people away from their livelihoods is justifiable to protect such a small percentage of people. At what point do we hand responsibility back to the individual rather than dictate to the majority to protect the overwhelming minority? The whole point of lockdowns was to stop the NHS being overwhelmed. We could open everything up today and there isn't a scenario where that will happen anymore due to the fact that the biggest risks to the NHS have all been offered a vaccine.

For you, perhaps. For the millions of people who are still not able to work, facing redundancy, mounting debts etc, then another 3 weeks is a hardship.

Surely it will be the same risk even once we've hit the targets required to provide adequate protection to the majority, the two groups you mentioned aren't likely to be significantly impacted until around 95% of the population has had two vaccines? In which case shouldn't we extend the lockdown until that time?

Did you need an envelope or did you do a life size drawing on the stamp?

Seems about right to be fair. Efficacy of first dose is estimated to be between 50-85% but even then this will only happen gradually up until around week 4, so plenty of opportunities for the 28 with one dose to end up in hospital (and let's not forget this is just people in hospital who have tested positive who could have a completely unrelated medical issue). Then we have 3 who have had both doses - again they could have completely unrelated medical issues. Given there is another four week period for the vaccine to get to work they could be moving from 50-85% efficacy to around 99% efficacy over that period so still opportunities for them to catch the virus. Then there is the inevitable margin of error (false positives / negatives), which could also account for the other 9 for instance!

I agree, there are 'outliers' with every disease that end up in hospital with no real explanation as to why, however, the numbers of these tends to be very small. Similarly, I expect the number who are unable to receive the vaccine is also very small and very unlikely to 'overwhelm' the NHS even if they all contracted the virus on the same day. Not only that but I would expect that anyone who is unable to have the vaccine would take additional personal measures to protect themselves. I don't see enough people in those two groups to overwhelm the NHS.