fcblackpool
Well-known member
1000 cases in the SE, responsible in part for the rise.
No news whether the vaccine works on this one...
Not good
No news whether the vaccine works on this one...
Not good
Typical. London have to be 'special' and have their own variant.1000 cases in the SE, responsible in part for the rise.
No news whether the vaccine works on this one...
Not good
Even the London centric MPs knew they had to put London into tier 3 when their rates are significantly higher than here where weve been in one form of highest level or another for 6 months.There seems to be a noticeable lack of outrage about London being singled out for special treatment in this instance. I wonder why?
Why do you think London are being singled out? I thought they had just been invited to join the same club that the poor folk up North have been in for about 7 out of the last 9 months.There seems to be a noticeable lack of outrage about London being singled out for special treatment in this instance. I wonder why?
Where we lead, others follow....Typical. London have to be 'special' and have their own variant.
Maybe it’s because they should have gone in it weeks ago.There seems to be a noticeable lack of outrage about London being singled out for special treatment in this instance. I wonder why?
No i thought it was already know there are two types of it in the wild?
Maybe it’s because they should have gone in it weeks ago.
Matt Hancock said there was no reason to think it won't work. I think the way this vaccine works would suggest that should actually be true. It's not like an antibiotic.1000 cases in the SE, responsible in part for the rise.
No news whether the vaccine works on this one...
Not good
Thx not kept up to date re variants thought there were 2 strains & this was a 3rd?I was under the impression that there were 3 strains previously identified, this seems to be a new 4th one.
It's part of the reason that some countries (Asia) got off so lightly in the first wave whilst others were hammered, they mostly got the type 1 virus, we got the type 3 which is far more infectious.
A type 4 (or whatever it's correctly known as) that's even more infectious is, erm, worrying.
London had a higher infection rate than many areas of the country that were placed in tier 3.Based on what exactly? Case numbers?
What's your take on case numbers in the over 60s, positivity rate, pressure on the NHS plus the rates of change of all of these 3 weeks ago?
We could also base it on the reports of the Cabinet meeting which downgraded London from Tier 3 to 2 as they debated the detrimental effect it would have on 500,000 jobs. That suggests where it should have been all long. Meanwhile the rest of the country didn’t get the same debate.London had a higher infection rate than many areas of the country that were placed in tier 3.
That’s what I’am basing my statement on plain and simple.
Of course we could.We could also base it on the reports of the Cabinet meeting which downgraded London from Tier 3 to 2 as they debated the detrimental effect it would have on 500,000 jobs. That suggests where it should have been all long. Meanwhile the rest of the country didn’t get the same debate.
Is it the Mink one?New variant only detected in UK and Denmark so far apparently.
No, a shade of yellow.Is it the Mink one?
Apparently not.Is it the Mink one?
London had a higher infection rate than many areas of the country that were placed in tier 3.
That’s what I’am basing my statement on plain and simple.
I base my comments on facts like when they put Lancashire in to tier 3 London at that time had a higher infection rate per 100,000 than Lancashire did yet it got put into tier 2.Unless you are focussing on very small areas, that is not true.
Well the government has publically said that case rate is one of 5 factors they base the tiering decision on, so you're wrong about the methodology as well.
I base my comments on facts like when they put Lancashire in to tier 3 London at that time had a higher infection rate per 100,000 than Lancashire did yet it got put into tier 2.
Spin it how you want to suit your agenda.
Lost with due respect where has this 4 strains of the virus come from and is there anything to say any of these 4 strains are resistant to the vaccines??I was under the impression that there were 3 strains previously identified, this seems to be a new 4th one.
It's part of the reason that some countries (Asia) got off so lightly in the first wave whilst others were hammered, they mostly got the type 1 virus, we got the type 3 which is far more infectious.
A type 4 (or whatever it's correctly known as) that's even more infectious is, erm, worrying.
Lost with due respect where has this 4 strains of the virus come from and is there anything to say any of these 4 strains are resistant to the vaccines??
I’am not quite sure where we’re going with all this to be honest.Did you not know that they use more than one metric, or do you think that they're wrong to do so?