Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2/Covid-19 Megathread

[celedhring]

People that passing on the chance to take the vaccine should not receive any efforts from the rest of society to protect them from their own idiocy. They want to roll the dice, they should suffer the consequences.

You are also protecting others from their idiocy.

[alfred russel]

People that passing on the chance to take the vaccine should not receive any efforts from the rest of society to protect them from their own idiocy. They want to roll the dice, they should suffer the consequences.

You are also protecting others from their idiocy.

I assume at this point everyone has had ample opportunity to get the vaccine? I'm not sure who those "others" are.

[Barrister]

People that passing on the chance to take the vaccine should not receive any efforts from the rest of society to protect them from their own idiocy. They want to roll the dice, they should suffer the consequences.

While I understand the sentiment, I disagree.  We still treat alcoholics for their liver damage, people who participate in extreme sports for their broken bones, and all manner of other risky behaviour.  I can't imagine seeing someone with a treatable illness and going "too bad - you made your choice, now suffer the consequence".

[Sheilbh]

I've seen lots of no-mask wearing individuals throughout the period when it was mandatory indoors. Similarly isn't it one of the cabinent ministers who exclaimed that he'll be happy to stop wearing a mask as soon as he is able / he thinks many people will feel the same.

Yeah - I think the poll shows he's wrong.

I'm not saying I've not seen people not wear masks (though the vast majority do), but I've not seen people kicking off about it one way or the other.

I basically agreed with Chris Whitty's point that he'd wear the mask in three circumstances: if in a crowded indoor space, if required by relevant authorities, or if someone else was uncomfortable. I think that's about right - I think Johnson also endorsed that approach as a "matter of simple courtesy" rather than a government mandate giving the example of sitting on an empty train carriage. And if those poll numbers are right - that will probably be what happens.

But again I think masks are a relatively limited part of this and re-opening indoor venues will have a bigger impact.

People that passing on the chance to take the vaccine should not receive any efforts from the rest of society to protect them from their own idiocy. They want to roll the dice, they should suffer the consequences.

Not everyone is able to take the vaccine, not everyone is being offered the vaccine (most kids and teens for example) and not everyone has yet been able to get two doses in this country - which is probably only going to happen by September.

Flipside is for young people at least, they are less at risk and the side effect and risks with the vaccines may outweigh the risks of covid (that's the point made by the academic I posted earlier who is on the JCVI).

But I don't think we are yet anywhere near the point where we can basically say - people have rolled the dice so fuck'em because. My guess is we'll probably get to 90% of adults vaccinated but that's another 4-6 weeks away and we're some way away from everyone having the second dose (which is really important for the delta variant).

I assume at this point everyone has had ample opportunity to get the vaccine? I'm not sure who those "others" are.

No. In the UK we've only been open for all adults to get one dose in the last fortnight or so and people still need to book. We're not quite there yet - I think the difference with the US is that up-take is far higher in the UK and, I think, the rest of Europe so far (Romania and Bulgaria excused - slightly worried France is starting to plateau too).

Edit: Also in terms of the "other" - people with allergies, pregnant women, undr 18s. That's why it matters for as many of everyone else to get the vaccine so we reduce the risk to those people who can't get vaccinated.

[celedhring]

People that passing on the chance to take the vaccine should not receive any efforts from the rest of society to protect them from their own idiocy. They want to roll the dice, they should suffer the consequences.

You are also protecting others from their idiocy.

I assume at this point everyone has had ample opportunity to get the vaccine? I'm not sure who those "others" are.

There are many people that probably haven't got vaccinated because of legitimate reasons (i.e. my sister-in-law is pregnant and she was advised not to take it), plus it's not safe to the overall public health to allow an infectious disease with still unknown long term effects run rampant through part of the population.

[garbon]

I think that's about right - I think Johnson also endorsed that approach as a "matter of simple courtesy" rather than a government mandate giving the example of sitting on an empty train carriage. And if those poll numbers are right - that will probably be what happens.

If no one asks someone not wearing a mask to put one on, how will they know their lack of courtesy? It also puts onus on everyone else to basically police behaviour.

It seems like there is limited harm to keeping that mandate in place except...well?

Also, I don't really worry all that much about the rare occurrence in London of empty carriages.

[Sheilbh]

If no one asks someone not wearing a mask to put one on, how will they know their lack of courtesy? It also puts onus on everyone else to basically police behaviour.

Yeah but isn't that how societies normally function. You know there's no law mandating queues, or that you wait outside the bus/train to let people off first etc. And some people break those social rules, but I don't think they're actively policed by other people and you can't be fined by the police for breaking them - it happens because it's a social convention or courtesy. I expect that is the way masks will go - I imagine they'll be pretty common crowded public transport for ever now.

And I think if a business wants you to wear masks when you're stood up then that's fine (although I've always slightly wondered if it makes any difference in, say, a restaurant where you take of your mask when you're at the table but put it back on to go to the loo etc - if there's no ventilation, does it matter?)

It seems like there is limited harm to keeping that mandate in place except...well?

I don't think there should generally laws that the police can punish you for relating to what you wear or don't - as a general principle. I think there can be an exception for public health in the context of a pandemic.

Relevant to that is case numbers, but also hospitalisations and deaths. But it's a case of balancing the risks, though I do think there should be a bias to lifting restrictions and they should be only what is necessary and proportionate. So I don't have much sympathy with people who basically don't thing some of these restrictions should ever be lifted because they were exceptional to the circumstances of the last 18 months and shouldn't become a norm.

Also, I don't really worry all that much about the rare occurrence in London of empty carriages.

In fairness the specific was "you're on the way home from a late night at work and you look up and the carriage is empty". So niche.

[alfred russel]

There are many people that probably haven't got vaccinated because of legitimate reasons (i.e. my sister-in-law is pregnant and she was advised not to take it),

Hmmm...I don't think that is the scientific advice here.

plus it's not safe to the overall public health to allow an infectious disease with still unknown long term effects run rampant through part of the population.

The solution is not to burden the responsible elements of society with requirements. The solution is to require vaccination to access public facilities. Want to serve in the military, go to a school or university, access a public building including to work, access public transport or use an airport, go to a sporting event or concert, or receive government benefits? Prove vaccination.

I bet that would solve the problem really quickly.

[garbon]

I don't think there should generally laws that the police can punish you for relating to what you wear or don't - as a general principle. I think there can be an exception for public health in the context of a pandemic.

Relevant to that is case numbers, but also hospitalisations and deaths. But it's a case of balancing the risks, though I do think there should be a bias to lifting restrictions and they should be only what is necessary and proportionate. So I don't have much sympathy with people who basically don't thing some of these restrictions should ever be lifted because they were exceptional to the circumstances of the last 18 months and shouldn't become a norm.

Sure but again why do it now? If we are near the finish line, why suddenly make it more difficult? Note, you'll see I'm not specifically say don't remove any of the final restrictions but question the nature of remove all restrictions when we are so close.

In fairness the specific was "you're on the way home from a late night at work and you look up and the carriage is empty". So niche.

So entirely irrelevant, particularly as it wasn't a big source of contention during the past year while it was mandated.

[alfred russel]

People that passing on the chance to take the vaccine should not receive any efforts from the rest of society to protect them from their own idiocy. They want to roll the dice, they should suffer the consequences.

While I understand the sentiment, I disagree.  We still treat alcoholics for their liver damage, people who participate in extreme sports for their broken bones, and all manner of other risky behaviour.  I can't imagine seeing someone with a treatable illness and going "too bad - you made your choice, now suffer the consequence".

I'm not arguing they shouldn't be treated in the hospital. I'm arguing the general population shouldn't be forced to keep in place preventative measures for their benefit.

I would be in favor of making it possible for insurance companies and medicare/medicaid to pursue the unvaccinated for reimbursement for the cost of any medical treatment for covid.

[Sheilbh]

Sure but again why do it now? If we are near the finish line, why suddenly make it more difficult? Note, you'll see I'm not specifically say don't remove any of the final restrictions but question the nature of remove all restrictions when we are so close.

Yeah although I think we have not very many restrictions left anyway and the thing I'd like to see is the new models which will be out at the end of this week (but I'd note that on hospitalisations we're still trending below the most optimistic of the last models, even though cases are in line with their expectations). And it would be helpful to see what is the marginal impact of each of these measures. What is the extra risk for lifting limits on indoor and outdoor events? What is the extra risk for lifting the mask mandate etc?

In terms of why now - if lifting them isn't going to materially shift the hospitalisation/death rate then I think that's enough of an argument.

They also mentioned lifting them now when schools are on holiday, it is (allegedly) summer so there will be more outdoorsy things. But that this flu season will be difficult because, for a start not many people got flu last year so we are more at risk and there may be a resurgence in covid as well - I think only the high risk groups are getting booster shots and I think there's a trial on whether you can get your flu and covid jab at the same time (currently you have to wait at least 7 days I think).

Edit: For example - this quadruples the capacity of indoor venues from where they are now which I think is a bigger deal than the mask mandate - but I don't know how much and it'd be useful to seem some data spelling that out.

So entirely irrelevant, particularly as it wasn't a big source of contention during the past year while it was mandated.

I thought it was a useful example. If you're on a crowded carriage you should (but won't legally be required to wear a mask), if you're on an empty carriage it's up to you but you won't be breaking the law if you don't.

But I try to follow rules - so when I went on holiday I did get on trains that were empty for a big chunk and I still wore a mask

[Tamas]

Can't help feeling sour from having my wife turned away from getting 2nd Pfizer shot 5 weeks after the first just 2 days before the Big Reopening announcement.

[mongers]

But I try to follow rules - so when I went on holiday I did get on trains that were empty for a big chunk and I still wore a mask

I conducted a bit of an experiment over the previous couple of weekends and some of the late afternoons/evenings of the weekdays, I did about 1,250 miles on the trains and another 250 miles on buses.

I pretty much did what you did, though if it was an empty carriage with lots of ventilation I did let my mask down a bit.

Most of the time other people behaviour wasn't too bad, but certain types of person seemed far more likely to not bother with masks at all.   

And coming back from Cardiff on a Saturday night wasn't a great idea, after a couple of drink most people don't seem to care and think it fine to shout (talk.v.loudly) without a mask.

[Barrister]

So my local health authority, Edmonton-Twin Brooks, has a total population of 75,685.  During the pandemic we have seen 2,800 total cases, and 27 deaths.

Right now we have 5 active cases.

[garbon]

Can't help feeling sour from having my wife turned away from getting 2nd Pfizer shot 5 weeks after the first just 2 days before the Big Reopening announcement.

I also feel it sort of belies JCVI's recent statement of the importance of an 8-12 week gap given that under-40s are moving to the 8 week gap as well.