Like most of the nation, I’m heartedly sick of lock-down, and becoming increasingly impatient for restrictions to be lifted. I’m in need of a haircut, a new pair of shoes, plus some new walking boots, and related to the latter is the ability to walk further afield than an eight-mile radius of my home.
It seems incredulous that things as everyday as hopping on a train and heading off for a spot of walking in the English countryside, have been denied to us, as have the opportunity of extending the walk with a couple of overnight stops along the way.
I understand the reasons why freedoms we once took for granted have been temporarily removed from us, but that still doesn’t make it any easier, but not wishing to dwell on this, and looking forward to a return to some semblance of reality, I’ve been doing a lot of reading on the subject and asking a lot of questions.
Countries such as Israel, where the government’s stated aim is to provide a coronavirus vaccine to everyone over the age of 16, by the end of March, are already feeling the benefit. The bars and restaurants are reopening, with night clubs said to be hot on their heels. Closer to home, the devolved nations of Scotland and Wales, have also started easing restrictions, several weeks in advance of what is planned for England.These developments have been made possible by the continuing roll out of the vaccine, and with more vaccines set for approval, there is no reason why the United Kingdom as a whole, cannot follow Israel’s shining example.
Why then was the UK’s chief medical officer, Professor Chris Whitty, so downbeat when he addressed the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, at the beginning of last week? Po-faced Whitty, who looks as if he’s about to burst into tears at any moment, told MP’s he was expecting a further surge in Covid-19 infections, “Involving significant numbers, but much fewer deaths.” This would occur either in the summer or, more likely, the autumn/winter, and would be due to the vulnerability of significant numbers of people who either couldn’t have the vaccine, or because they had refused it.
I really don’t know what it is with this man who, along with his cohorts Sir Patrick Valance and Professor Van-Tam, takes such a delight in being a harbinger of doom. The reported 90 percent vaccine take-up rate doesn’t tally with Whitty’s “significant numbers” of vaccine refuseniks and, more to the point, seems to contradict the idea of so-called “herd immunity” put forward by him and Valance, just a year ago.
Last March, our learned “experts” were saying the pandemic wouldn’t fade away until around 60 percent of the population had been infected, or immunized – even though no vaccine existed back then. Authorities in the US have since upped this to 85 percent if, as seems likely, the more transmissible "Kent variant" becomes the dominant strain of Covid. But with real life studies demonstrating that just a single dose of either the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine is 80 percent effective in preventing hospitalisation among the over-eighties, it is hard to see where this pair of jokers are coming from.
It’s now five weeks since Mrs PBT’s and I received our first dose of the vaccine, and whilst we feel much more relaxed about the situation, we will continue to follow guidelines such as mask wearing and avoiding close contact with others. We do wonder though, why we are not now permitted to meet up with friends and family members who have also been vaccinated, especially as we suspect there is no valid scientific reason for this ban.
It all calls into question the snail’s pace of Johnson’s “road map” out of lock-down. I would go as far as saying that significant numbers of people are now only paying lip-service to the restrictions, although the evidence for this is still anecdotal. There are certainly far more people out and about, and a lot more traffic on the roads – back to pre-March 2020 levels in the mornings, with the return of the school run.
This all begs the question, who is right and why haven’t factors such as the damage to the economy caused by lock-downs, and the serious effects on people’s mental health, caused by locking them away inside their own homes, been taken into account by those driving government policy.
Whitty and Valance also need to come clean and explain why their previous predictions for herd immunity haven’t so far come to pass, a disturbing question given the predictions was based on the same type of computer modelling they are still using to scare us into staying at home and living like hermits - answers that are long overdue.
Much of the Covid-related information in this post came from an article that appeared earlier last week in the Spectator, a publication seemingly unafraid of asking a few searching questions, of those who would rule over us.
19 comments:
Well said, Paul. I think in the private sphere large numbers of people have now abandoned lockdown; they are just restricted by the forcible closure of businesses and leisure and tourism attractions. Three months to get back into pubs with any modicum of normality is a very long wait...
Three more months until pubs can be back to normal seems ludicrous right now. It will simply look more stupid as every week passes. Locally we're almost "Covid free". Even though the weather is awful today, huge numbers are out in groups. The "rule" of only walking in twos is quietly being ignored. When the weather picks up, we'll be having parties in the gardens - and any distancing will be out the window.
This is a great video on many levels (except maybe vaccine passports):
https://unherd.com/2021/03/lord-sumption-civil-disobedience-has-begun/
"Sometimes the most public spirited thing that you can do with despotic laws like these is to ignore them. I think that if the government persists long enough with locking people down, depending on the severity of the lockdown, civil disobedience is likely to be the result. It will be discrete civil disobedience in the classic English way — I don’t think that we are likely to go onto the streets waving banners. I think we will just calmly decide that we are not going to pay any attention to this. There are some things you have to pay attention to: you can’t go to a shop if it’s closed. On the other hand, you can invite friends round for a drink, whatever Mr Hancock says. People are doing that to some extent already."
A very well-constructed post, Paul.
When you left a comment on my blog the other night I was incandescent with rage at the delight a member of Independent SAGE seemed to be taking at a small upturn in cases caused by testing schoolchildren, and urging that "hospitality" be kept closed longer (possibly forever).
One thing strikes me, and Mrs RM summed it up well. Many of her friends in their 40s and 50s ARE back to normal. Their children are back to school, they live a distance from family and only saw them occasionally anyway, they never went to pubs or gigs or football, and are happy to stay at home watching Netflix eating takeaways and drinking wine and having an annual holiday in France or Spain, never travelling in the UK.
They can't see the problem with Lockdown.
Folk like you and me and other pub enthusiasts are the EXACT opposite; feeling imprisoned in our localities and missing the joy of pubs and real life.
Three months is a ludicrously long time but, with luck, the journey to end these restrictions for good, will build up a momentum of its own and become an unstoppable force.
People on the whole, have been remarkably compliant, although whether this has been due to having the cr*p sacred out of them by the government, remains open to question. Personally, I think this was the case during the first lock-down, but now the evidence increasingly points to people having had enough.
The most disturbing point for me, apart from being robbed of our ancient liberties, is the draconian, and totally disproportionate level of fines that the police can hand out. Up to £10,000 for a first offence and, as fines can be levied on a “fixed penalty” basis, the police are in effect acting as prosecuting counsel, judge, and jury. This is an appalling state of affairs, which doesn’t reflect kindly on the people whose idea this was in the first place.
This leads nicely on to your point Rob, about discrete civil disobedience which, at the end of the day, is the best way to deal with these absurd laws that attempt to micro-manage every aspect of our lives. Fortunately, the police cannot be everywhere, and if they think a heavy-handed approach will make people sit up and take notice, they are very much mistaken.
There is an innate sense of natural justice present in most people, so it’s hardly surprising that when a minor infringement of the letter of the law is met with an over-the-top interpretation of that law, many will share and indeed empathise with those on the receiving end of the injustice. The two women in Derbyshire fined, for enjoying a coffee together, whilst out walking in the open air, is a case in point.
Martin, I would agree that the lock-down has made very little difference to the “stay at home” types you refer to. I also wonder whether it is their voices in support of it continuing, that has unduly influenced both government and scientific opinion. I suppose if you have already cocooned yourself comfortably away, then there is no reason to change, and no understanding that many of us are itching to get out and about again.
I think that Chris Whitty's down beat comments and predictions of up to 30,000 more deaths later in the year are an instance of him getting his defence/plausible deniability in early. Let me explain.
Of ALL the people I know personally (it's not a great number, ~20 or so)I am the only one who has refused the vaccine and have no intention of taking it for at least 2 years. (I'm not anti-vax - I had a pneumonia jab in December.) Normally, a vaccine is tested on animals prior to human trials...none of these has had that done before this roll out. So, what everyone is being injected with is an experimental drug that may have serious effects in the longer term.
When scientists were trying to develop a vaccine against SARS-Cov-1 (the predecessor virus to this current pandemic and with a 78% genetic similarity) they developed four different vaccines that showed an excellent antibody response in the lab, much as the current vaccines have done.
However, when they went on to animal trials (some in mice, some in ferrets) all four had to be abandoned because of Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE). It works like this - some time after the subjects have been injected, they were exposed to live virus (not necessarily SARS) and they all showed serious lung damage, akin to the cytokine storm damage seen with COVID-19. This is also why there is no vaccine for Ebola or Dengue Fever.
Here are a couple of links for you to have a look at (or not): -
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-00789-5
https://sciencewithdrdoug.com/2020/08/01/is-a-coronavirus-vaccine-a-ticking-time-bomb/amp/
I really do hope that I'm wrong and that everything works out fine, but Chris Whitty's statement makes me suspect that if this does happen they will try and cover it up as either a new strain...or blame those of us that haven't had the vaccine. (Whitty et al MUST know of this possibility, as do the vaccine manufacturers [who won't be liable!] and yet they've gone ahead with this mass vaccination!)
I too am looking forward to the pubs reopening and hope that I won't need a passport to partake!
@petesquiz. I'd suggest you probably are anti-vax, especially when you claim there are no vaccines against Ebola and Dengue Fever. There are.
@electricpics - let's clarify a couple of points.
Firstly, I'm not anti-vax, I'm anti-this-vax (i.e. the SARS-COV-2 vaccines) and I'm only anti-this-vax until a decent amount of long term data is available. If it proves to be safe by then, I will have it (and I do hope that I'm wrong about all of this!) in about 2 years time.
Second, I wasn't aware of the Ebola vaccine, but it was only approved 15 months ago (December 2019)- my mistake.
Third (I can't count either...lol!) the Dengue Fever vaccine exists, but with caveats as to it's use. This is a quote from the Wikipedia page for Dengue Vaccine - "The value of the vaccine is limited by the fact that it may increase the risk of severe dengue in those who have not previously been infected." (That looks like potential ADE to me!)
My main point was not to try and convert people to my point of view (I would never try that) but to highlight the fact that of my friends, not one of them has seemingly looked at the potential downsides of rushing out such a vaccine!
Hi Pete, thanks for the links, but as someone who is now nearly six weeks into his first shot of the vaccine, and the same period of time away from the second dose, I shan’t be clicking on them.
If what you say is true then there’s nothing I can do about it - I can’t remove the vaccine from my body, and if isn’t, then there’s no point in scaring myself unnecessarily. Either way, it would be a totally futile exercise. I would go further and say stories like this are unhelpful, as evidenced by the, as yet, unsubstantiated claims about blood clots, allegedly associated with the AstraZeneca jab.
The current crop of vaccines have all undergone rigorous testing and have been approved for use by highly esteemed authorities such as the FDA, the MHRA and the EMA. In the course of my work I have had dealings with the first two of these bodies, and believe me they are extremely thorough in what they do. They are also totally independent of governments.
So, my question is, what would you do to bring the pandemic to an end? I’m sure you would agree that we cannot continue the destructive cycle of stop-starting the economy, and with people already sick and tired of lock-downs, vaccines offer the best and most efficacious way out of the current and unsustainable situation.
Hi Paul,
Thanks for your comments - and I apologise for raising this on your blog, but it seemed appropriate based on the content of this entry. As far as all the claims go regarding immediate side effects, those don't concern me. With such a mass vaccination campaign there are going to be some adverse reactions which may seem like a lot, but are within the expected percentages.
I was unaware of ADE until a few weeks ago, but I was always going to wait for a couple of years because, however good/diligent/thorough those regulatory bodies are, NO-ONE can know for sure how any medicine is going to react out in the field until the long term trials have been concluded.
Your final question is an interesting one because I don't believe that ending the pandemic is in our hands (unless we had a 95 - 100% efficacious vaccine, which none of these are). Pandemics are global, natural phenomena and we've had the good fortune to live most of our lives without having to face such an event, which I believe has contributed to the panic/over the top response to this one. My only way to proceed is to open everything up and get back on with normal life - I'm happy to take my chances! (Fortunately for all concerned, I'm nowhere near the levers of power...lol!)
Hope to see you in a pub (or several) sometime in the near future...assuming that they'll let me in!
Remember that last year it was thought there was little chance of developing an effective vaccine until well into 2022 at the earliest. So we would have had to do what was done for every other pandemic in history - treat the sick, protect the vulnerable, keep the economy going as far as possible, and wait for it to eventually burn itself out, as they all do in the end.
Lockdowns are a policy choice, not an ineluctable consequence of Covid. Sweden has had a slightly lower rate of deaths per capita than the UK, and a far better economic performance, without any strict lockdowns. If the government had had to borrow money at historically normal rates, rather than at near-zero, it might have concentrated their minds rather more. In a sense, vaccines are like the cavalry coming over the hill to save the lockdown policy.
(FWIW I am not opposed to vaccines in principle, and have had a first dose, although not without some misgivings. I regarded it as more of a civic duty than something that was personally advantageous.)
Thank-you PetesQuiz and Mudge. You both raise some interesting points, irrespective of whatever views we might all hold on vaccines. Pandemics do eventually burn themselves out, although that approach might have ended up costing many more lives – as happened with the so-called Spanish Flu. On the other hand, given a free run, the virus might have mutated into a far more benign form.
The trouble is, no-one knows for sure, and no amount of mathematical modelling can predict this. The gift of hindsight is a wonderful thing, and yes, we perhaps should have adopted a different approach, but we’re not sufficiently remote from the event itself, at present, to know which path would have been the right one to follow.
For example, there are conflicting reports on the effectiveness of Sweden’s approach, compared to those say of South Korea or Taiwan, whilst there’s some evidence from India that suggests the virus may well have mutated into a far milder form.
The frustrating thing is the UK WAS well prepared to manage a pandemic, but that was a decade or so ago, and since then successive governments have taken their eye off the ball and allowed themselves to be distracted, thereby squandering the planning and preparation that had taken place during the opening decade of the century.
During the four years following the 2016 referendum, one issue alone dominated UK politics to the exclusion of all others, regardless of the way people may have voted. An arrogant and pig-headed government, combined with an ineffectual and totally useless opposition allowed this to happen, and until our antiquated, first past the post parliamentary system is reformed, two parties will continue to dominate British politics, to the detriment of the country as a whole.
Okay, I’ve drifted off topic, but I’m sure we’ll all agree that some incredibly bad decisions have been made along the way; certainly, to the detriment of how the pandemic should, and could have been handled.
Finally, and getting back to the spirit and the thinking behind the blog, I look forward to sharing a pint or three with you both, in a pub, somewhere in the UK, and sometime in the not-too-distant future!
One thing that I think we can all agree on - the pub is a much better place for such a discussion rather than online! I'll raise a glass to that!
You have brought up a very fantastic points, thankyou for the post.
I need to to thank you for this great read!!
Great article I enjoy reading your thoughts.
And naturally, thanks for your sweat!
incorporated you guys to our blogroll.
Thank you for sharing again.
Thanks and Best of luck to your next Blog in future.
Post a Comment