ChatterBank1 min ago
Do You Obey The Current Lock Down Restrictions Only Because Of The Threat Of A Fine?
Do people obey the current lock down restrictions simply because they don't want to get caught and fined or do they feel they have a moral obligation to obey? How many would break the restrictions in order to visit family and friends if it was not illegal to do so? Personally I admit that I would have probably made a personal judgement of the risks involved and gone ahead with visiting family if we considered it safe but of course we can't because it is illegal.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by dave50. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Agree Hancock should of been more cautious regarding what he said about his holiday plans but a think some are looking to be confused here. We just after decide for areselves. Am booking nothing this year but will visit freinds and family when its allowed and vaccinnated. But Hancocks holiday plans/Hope's dont seem relavant to the OP
//Its common sense that they wont know if the vaccines are working for a very long time past summer.//
Why won't we?
At the moment most of the over 70s have been vaccinated. By the end of this month most of the over 55s should have been vaccinated. If lockdown is lifted in the third week of March (allowing three weeks for those vaccinated on 28th February to gain immunity) and over 55s continue to contract the virus at the same rate as now, then some doubt must be cast over the efficacy of the vaccine. As I mentioned earlier, by the end of March half the population should have received the jab, including those who form 99% of those suffering the most severe symptoms. Why will it be long past the summer until we see whether vaccines are working. Unless, of course, restrictions are not eased, in which case we'll never find out and the programme of administration would have been largely a waste of effort.
Why won't we?
At the moment most of the over 70s have been vaccinated. By the end of this month most of the over 55s should have been vaccinated. If lockdown is lifted in the third week of March (allowing three weeks for those vaccinated on 28th February to gain immunity) and over 55s continue to contract the virus at the same rate as now, then some doubt must be cast over the efficacy of the vaccine. As I mentioned earlier, by the end of March half the population should have received the jab, including those who form 99% of those suffering the most severe symptoms. Why will it be long past the summer until we see whether vaccines are working. Unless, of course, restrictions are not eased, in which case we'll never find out and the programme of administration would have been largely a waste of effort.
14.38, Well if it is the case of what many hospitals are saying, that there are many more 40 year old's and under getting severe symptoms, and any further boosters needed for the SA variant that will not be ready any time soon. I can't see it happening, apart may be for all schools to be fully open.
Up to the 9th February there were 13,058,298 first doses administered. There are nineteen days to go to the end of the month. The current rate of administration (first doses only) is about 433,000 a day (averaged over the last seven days). This means by the end of the month a further 8.2m people should have been vaccinated, making the total 21.2m. In 2019 (the latest year I have a breakdown for) there were approximately 20.5m people aged 55 and over living in the UK.
//14.38, Well if it is the case of what many hospitals are saying, that there are many more 40 year old's and under getting severe symptoms, and any further boosters needed for the SA variant that will not be ready any time soon.//
And how is that anything to do with establishing whether the current vaccines are effective? Or are you saying that they might not be so we'd better stay locked down?
And how is that anything to do with establishing whether the current vaccines are effective? Or are you saying that they might not be so we'd better stay locked down?
good point NJ, except group includes people 16-65 with certain clinical conditions, or which I presume there are plenty, meaning health 55 year olds will probably have to wait a bit longer. Also, I wonder what the delay will be like when people have to start going for their 2nd doses in about march - they can't carry on doing 1/2 million new people each day
//Also, I wonder what the delay will be like when people have to start going for their 2nd doses in about march//
That won't start until the beginning of April (the first doses were administered in early January).
Yes, I'd left out the 7.3m 16-65 year olds with underlying health conditions. Thanks for the nudge.
Let's assume that none of those are over 50 (unlikely, but the worst case scenario for getting the healthy older people done) and that it is decided that they must be done first.
There are 3.4m 65-70 year olds who should be done next. That should take about 8 days. Then the 7.3m clinically vulnerable (17 days). That takes us up to 6th March. That leaves 25 days of March to crack on with the healthy under 65s. That means something over 10m of them should be vaccinated before the programme has to be adjusted to accommodate the second doses. There are 13 million people aged between 50 and 65 so the majority of them should receive the jab. However the prioritisation works there are 50 days between 9th February (the latest vaccination totals available - I haven't looked at yesterday's yet) and the end of march. This should take the total up to around 34 million first doses. If the government does not see fit to assess the efficacy of the vaccines by then I would suggest they are being irresponsible by continuing a programme of which they do not know the effectiveness. The only way to test that efficacy is by removing restrictions.
That won't start until the beginning of April (the first doses were administered in early January).
Yes, I'd left out the 7.3m 16-65 year olds with underlying health conditions. Thanks for the nudge.
Let's assume that none of those are over 50 (unlikely, but the worst case scenario for getting the healthy older people done) and that it is decided that they must be done first.
There are 3.4m 65-70 year olds who should be done next. That should take about 8 days. Then the 7.3m clinically vulnerable (17 days). That takes us up to 6th March. That leaves 25 days of March to crack on with the healthy under 65s. That means something over 10m of them should be vaccinated before the programme has to be adjusted to accommodate the second doses. There are 13 million people aged between 50 and 65 so the majority of them should receive the jab. However the prioritisation works there are 50 days between 9th February (the latest vaccination totals available - I haven't looked at yesterday's yet) and the end of march. This should take the total up to around 34 million first doses. If the government does not see fit to assess the efficacy of the vaccines by then I would suggest they are being irresponsible by continuing a programme of which they do not know the effectiveness. The only way to test that efficacy is by removing restrictions.
//first jabs were iven at the beginning of December. 12 weeks from then would make 2nd March. granted, a lot the first tranche probably already had their2nd doses before the policy changed from 3 weeks though.//
By 10th January (roughly the time the policy changed on the gap between doses) around 2.2m people had received their first dose. Up to Tuesday 519,000 had received a second dose. This leaves 1.7m who will need a second dose before 10th April. Second doses are currently being administered at the rate of something over 3,000 a day. That rate will not capture all of those second dosers so they will begin to eat into the number of first doses administered in early late March/early April. Of course all this assumes that the rates continue as they are currently.
By 10th January (roughly the time the policy changed on the gap between doses) around 2.2m people had received their first dose. Up to Tuesday 519,000 had received a second dose. This leaves 1.7m who will need a second dose before 10th April. Second doses are currently being administered at the rate of something over 3,000 a day. That rate will not capture all of those second dosers so they will begin to eat into the number of first doses administered in early late March/early April. Of course all this assumes that the rates continue as they are currently.
//I'm not continuing putting my life on hold just to protect those idiots.//
The trouble is, Dave, that the decision of whether or not to keep your life on hold is not yours to make. That's the whole problem. Even if you decide to break the current rules with which you must comply, there will be no chance of you resuming your life because most of the places you might want to go will remain closed by government orders.
I have simply no idea what plans they have to lift the current lockdown. I don't know what their strategy is; I don't know what criteria they will use to see if easing is possible. I don't know whether they have. If they don't plan to lift the restrictions when 50% of the population (including almost all those most likely to suffer severe symptoms) have been vaccinated, I don't know when they plan to.
The trouble is, Dave, that the decision of whether or not to keep your life on hold is not yours to make. That's the whole problem. Even if you decide to break the current rules with which you must comply, there will be no chance of you resuming your life because most of the places you might want to go will remain closed by government orders.
I have simply no idea what plans they have to lift the current lockdown. I don't know what their strategy is; I don't know what criteria they will use to see if easing is possible. I don't know whether they have. If they don't plan to lift the restrictions when 50% of the population (including almost all those most likely to suffer severe symptoms) have been vaccinated, I don't know when they plan to.
//I have simply no idea what plans they have to lift the current lockdown. I don't know what their strategy is; I don't know what criteria they will use to see if easing is possible. I don't know whether they have. If they don't plan to lift the restrictions when 50% of the population (including almost all those most likely to suffer severe symptoms) have been vaccinated, I don't know when they plan to.//
Am pretty sure theyve learned that starting lockdowns too late and lifting them too early as been a mistake. Better to be cautiuos and get it right this time rather than another stop/start.
Am pretty sure theyve learned that starting lockdowns too late and lifting them too early as been a mistake. Better to be cautiuos and get it right this time rather than another stop/start.
Latest Posts
News2 mins ago
Today I Heard My First . . . . .
ChatterBank2 mins ago
News2 mins ago
Other Sports3 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.