Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[Enzo Chiefo]

2 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

 

The PHE data has been updated today with info up to 25 July. The Scotland figures are as at 27 July, but there are very few catchup vaccinations being carried out in the over 50s and not enough to make a difference over two days data beyond 0.1%.  The table shows the percentage of adults in each age cohort that has received both doses.

 

Cohort	England	Scotland
50-54	88.6%	91.9%
55-59	94.4%	95.3%
60-64	97.0%	98.2%
65-69	93.6%	98.2%
70-74	96.3%	98.2%
75-79	100.0%	98.3%
80+	91.6%	94.9%

 

The above stats show that the vaccination take up rate in Scotland is higher than in England at almost every cohort and I expect that the same pattern will repeat itself at younger age groups when the double dose vaccination programme is complete.

 

There are no political points to be scored by the differences. I'm certain that all home nations are trying their best to encourage more people to get vaccinated at all age groups.  I suspect that the primary reason for the variations in take up rates lies in the demographics of the respective populations, i.e. a higher incidence of BAME individuals in England, who are associated with greater hesitancy.  

Thanks for posting, FF. Interesting stats and, yes, I agree the incidence of BAME individuals and the more diverse nature of the English population, probably account for part of the hesitancy. 👍

[Victorian]

15 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

My views on lockdown and the reliability of scientific modelling have been consistent from the start. Others disagree.

 

Some pontificate vociferously and speculate and end up having to back-flip and, for example, delete tweets -step forward Mrs, sorry, more likely Msss Sridhar - or execute a complete u-turn, as performed by Prof Ferguson just a few days ago 

 

Again, no offence intended, you do tend to have a blind spot about reaching "preferred conclusions". 

I assess the evidence and "reach" a conclusion.

You are entitled to place your trust in the pronouncements of the scientific experts. Many people do so.

 

 

 

You seem to have drawn the wrong conclusion from my careful use of language.  I said I am more inclined to give more credibility to an expert's theory than a non-expert counter theory,  not placing trust in pronouncements of experts.  "Placing trust" suggests one implicitly believes things from a default position.  You maybe need to look nearer to home to find someone like that. 

 

[Taffin]

Was JVT talking about England, the UK or globally?

 

He didn't seem too sure at the time he made the comment, has it been cleared up yet?

 

Edit: decided not to be lazy and just looked it up. England. Quite amazing how effective the vaccine is to prevent 22 million infections. I know some people have caught it more than once and it will have stopped unvaccinated people catching to...but just to highlight the impressiveness of the effect, if you put those to things to the side it's prevented nearly every single person who was double vaccinated from catching it!!!

Edited July 29, 2021 by Taffin

[ScotsAndy]

2 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

 

The PHE data has been updated today with info up to 25 July. The Scotland figures are as at 27 July, but there are very few catchup vaccinations being carried out in the over 50s and not enough to make a difference over two days data beyond 0.1%.  The table shows the percentage of adults in each age cohort that has received both doses.

 

Cohort	England	Scotland
50-54	88.6%	91.9%
55-59	94.4%	95.3%
60-64	97.0%	98.2%
65-69	93.6%	98.2%
70-74	96.3%	98.2%
75-79	100.0%	98.3%
80+	91.6%	94.9%

 

The above stats show that the vaccination take up rate in Scotland is higher than in England at almost every cohort and I expect that the same pattern will repeat itself at younger age groups when the double dose vaccination programme is complete.

 

There are no political points to be scored by the differences. I'm certain that all home nations are trying their best to encourage more people to get vaccinated at all age groups.  I suspect that the primary reason for the variations in take up rates lies in the demographics of the respective populations, i.e. a higher incidence of BAME individuals in England, who are associated with greater hesitancy.  

England 1    Scotland 6 

 

Pretty conclusive Victory - prob due to Demographics as FF states plus more civic responsibilty bias up here.

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Taffin said:

Was JVT talking about England, the UK or globally?

 

He didn't seem too sure at the time he made the comment, has it been cleared up yet?

 

Definitely within UK.  He wasn't certain if UK or England.  But given the proportion of the UK that England represents,  it's a peripheral point imo.  

 

I thought it was an interesting theory when you consider the estimated level of efficacy against transmission of infection that the vaccines offer (60% or so for AZ).  Also that vaccines have only reached arms during the past 8 months or so and amidst ongoing social distancing measures.  

[Taffin]

2 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Definitely within UK.  He wasn't certain if UK or England.  But given the proportion of the UK that England represents,  it's a peripheral point imo.  

 

I thought it was an interesting theory when you consider the estimated level of efficacy against transmission of infection that the vaccines offer (60% or so for AZ).  Also that vaccines have only reached arms during the past 8 months or so and amidst ongoing social distancing measures.  

 

Yeh I just looked it up, was referring to England.

 

Just edited my post after I stopped being lazy and looked it up.

 

Putting aside people catching it more than once and those unvaccinated it's also stopped getting it (which you can't do of course) but just to highlight the scale of its effectiveness that's the equivalent of it preventing an infection in almost every single person double vaccinated. It's quite incredible!! And encouraging.

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

2 hours ago, fancy a brew said:

 

I can't speak for the poster you responded to, but what I took from his post was that some people criticise without any scientific basis. EG there have only been 150 Covid deaths in Portugal, easily verified BS that comes from YouTube/Facebook/Russian bot farms.

 

From having a wee look I've found a few tweets that that Devi woman has deleted, but they seem political rather than scientific, eg relating to Brexit, Dominic Cummings or the Union, but I wouldn't claim that's an exhaustive list.

Carl Heneghan has deleted everything he tweeted before April this year, maybe he wasn't one of the respected scientists you had in mind, but he was a prominent voice against lockdown. 

Scrubbing a large part of his digital history smacks of 1984, and reduces his credibility in my eyes.

 

in this case I think back to 2005 was querying the sensitivity of the pcr tests - I think he worded it wrongly but might have had a fundamental point (albeit that point might be able to be answered by mitigating measures within the process) however his post was just met with derision less so by the the person who answered but more so by others 

 

in a more adult context the query could have been clarified and possibly fully answered along the lines of yes you have a point but here’s the mitigating measures to partially/fully address that point - we can all do better at times of course but that would have involved conceding that the conspiracy nut job might have had at least part of a point

 

im not interested in who’s deleted the most tweets or their content - devi lady appears to be sidelined these days (tho I’m not on twitter etc so unless it’s on here or the main news I wouldn’t know tbf) and if ch has lost credibility in your eyes he might be more concerned who else he’s lost credibilty with - worrying times

 

 

 

 

[Savage Vince]

37 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

Thanks for posting, FF. Interesting stats and, yes, I agree the incidence of BAME individuals and the more diverse nature of the English population, probably account for part of the hesitancy. 👍

 

I know loads of English Prime Gammon that have declined the jab too. 

[Victorian]

3 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

Yeh I just looked it up, was referring to England.

 

Just edited my post after I stopped being lazy and looked it up.

 

Putting aside people catching it more than once and those unvaccinated it's also stopped getting it (which you can't do of course) but just to highlight the scale of its effectiveness that's the equivalent of it preventing an infection in almost every single person double vaccinated. It's quite incredible!! And encouraging.

 

I agree.  The range of functions and the performance of the vaccines has been outstanding.  An absolute miracle.  I believe that societies and future generations owe and will continue to owe these vaccines a monumental debt.  

[Nucky Thompson]

30 minutes ago, Savage Vince said:

 

I know loads of English Prime Gammon that have declined the jab too. 

FFS

[Enzo Chiefo]

53 minutes ago, Savage Vince said:

 

I know loads of English Prime Gammon that have declined the jab too. 

Diversionary tactic. We all know the communities that are most reluctant to take the jab. The fact that, genetically, they are more susceptible to catching it, doesn't appear to influence their thought process. 

You've proved your wokeness though...anti-social media will be proud of you tonight. 👍

[Savage Vince]

1 minute ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

Diversionary tactic. We all know the communities that are most reluctant to take the jab. The fact that, genetically, they are more susceptible to catching it, doesn't appear to influence their thought process. 

You've proved your wokeness though...anti-social media will be proud of you tonight. 👍

 

Seriously 😁

[Nucky Thompson]

9 minutes ago, Savage Vince said:

 

Seriously 😁

Comparison on uptake between BAME and white people

 

 

Covid: BAME inequalities remain in vaccine uptake - BBC News

 

Sorry, no stats for gammon

[Enzo Chiefo]

4 minutes ago, Nucky Thompson said:

Comparison on uptake between BAME and white people

 

 

Covid: BAME inequalities remain in vaccine uptake - BBC News

 

Sorry, no stats for gammon

Oh don't rain on poor Vincent's parade by introducing these pesky facts😀

[Savage Vince]

3 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

by introducing these pesky facts😀

 

That's right up there. 😁😊

 

[Enzo Chiefo]

6 minutes ago, Savage Vince said:

 

That's right up there. 😁😊

 

Glad to help👍

[Beni]

2 hours ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

 

in this case I think back to 2005 was querying the sensitivity of the pcr tests - I think he worded it wrongly but might have had a fundamental point (albeit that point might be able to be answered by mitigating measures within the process) however his post was just met with derision less so by the the person who answered but more so by others 

 

in a more adult context the query could have been clarified and possibly fully answered along the lines of yes you have a point but here’s the mitigating measures to partially/fully address that point - we can all do better at times of course but that would have involved conceding that the conspiracy nut job might have had at least part of a point

 

im not interested in who’s deleted the most tweets or their content - devi lady appears to be sidelined these days (tho I’m not on twitter etc so unless it’s on here or the main news I wouldn’t know tbf) and if ch has lost credibility in your eyes he might be more concerned who else he’s lost credibilty with - worrying times

 

 

 

 

 

I asked him about the PCR tests apparently giving false positives all over the world except in Australia and New Zealand. Coincidentally these countries also have vanishingly low numbers of clinical cases and death rates. 🤔

Having done a bit of reading, it seems different laboratories have different protocols, which mean they run different numbers of cycle thresholds, which fits in with what another poster said. It seems knowing the number of cycle thresholds tells you nothing about the accuracy of the test. 

I didn't reply to the 2005 poster even though I asked the question, but given the apparent misunderstanding implicit in his question I don't think he has much of a grasp of the subject beyond a few phrases.

 

Putting that Devi lady and professor Heneghan and their credibility to one side, who do you think are well respected scientists that offered an alternative view to the consensus?

 

 

 

Edited July 29, 2021 by fancy a brew

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

2 hours ago, fancy a brew said:

 

I asked him about the PCR tests apparently giving false positives all over the world except in Australia and New Zealand. Coincidentally these countries also have vanishingly low numbers of clinical cases and death rates. 🤔

Having done a bit of reading, it seems different laboratories have different protocols, which mean they run different numbers of cycle thresholds, which fits in with what another poster said. It seems knowing the number of cycle thresholds tells you nothing about the accuracy of the test. 

I didn't reply to the 2005 poster even though I asked the question, but given the apparent misunderstanding implicit in his question I don't think he has much of a grasp of the subject beyond a few phrases.

 

Putting that Devi lady and professor Heneghan and their credibility to one side, who do you think are well respected scientists that offered an alternative view to the consensus?

 

 

 

 

i thought there was guidance issued by the who on mitigating against over-sensitive tests - I also thought there was some disclosure issue too on some of the tests - not being a technical expert on it I asked the science poster on here but unfortunately they didn’t reply - as I said even if guidance was necessary and it’s properly followed then it probably answers back to 2005 question anyway just in a more adult way - I was asking generally nothing specific to aus or nz ie totally separate to your debate if that’s what you were talking about

 

im not as into it as you and many others appear to be so I don’t know many names of the top scientists other than right said Fred but when I say qualified / respected I mean they appear to manage to hold down prestige jobs in what appears to be recognised universities etc so theyre either fairly decent although some of them i suppose could be winging it

 

not sure why it matters who they are as you said yourself there is no consensus - not sure the tight definition of that word but there appears to be a majority of them who agree in general with how it’s been tackled but a significant minority who would have done some things differently

 

 

[Unknown user]

5 hours ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

 

i thought there was guidance issued by the who on mitigating against over-sensitive tests - I also thought there was some disclosure issue too on some of the tests - not being a technical expert on it I asked the science poster on here but unfortunately they didn’t reply - as I said even if guidance was necessary and it’s properly followed then it probably answers back to 2005 question anyway just in a more adult way - I was asking generally nothing specific to aus or nz ie totally separate to your debate if that’s what you were talking about

 

im not as into it as you and many others appear to be so I don’t know many names of the top scientists other than right said Fred but when I say qualified / respected I mean they appear to manage to hold down prestige jobs in what appears to be recognised universities etc so theyre either fairly decent although some of them i suppose could be winging it

 

not sure why it matters who they are as you said yourself there is no consensus - not sure the tight definition of that word but there appears to be a majority of them who agree in general with how it’s been tackled but a significant minority who would have done some things differently

 

 

Not sure why you're so keen that absolute gobshites not be challenged, and I feel like you're missing the point of my post that kicked this off.

 

I used the word consensus but don't get too hung up on it. The point of the consensus comment wasn't that governments all act the same, or that all experts think exactly the same, but that with the available evidence there's a broad consensus on what were dealing with and how things work.

 

The poster I replied to came rattling into this thread, slagging people for blindly believing what they're told, then showed that it's EXACTLY what he does himself. Except rather than listen to educated experts, he does it with conspiracy websites who provide "proof" like a document he can't actually read.

 

But he'll take some other gobshite's word for what it says, while dismissing the thousands of highly educated and dedicated medical and scientific experts doing their best with their education and expertise.

 

Consensus will change, based on the ever growing pool of knowledge and understanding available, not because of the wankers that have his ear.

[Beni]

5 hours ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

 

i thought there was guidance issued by the who on mitigating against over-sensitive tests

 

They issued a guidance notice, probably worth reading it given the arms and legs it seemed to grow, and it's a quick read.

 

https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05

 

Worthwhile reading this too, as it deals with some of the myths the statement spawned.

 

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2A429W

 

Having read that, I think I was getting cycles and threshold cycles mixed up, but the point stands about different laboratories using different numbers of cycles.

If the poster who first raised the numbers of cycles in relation to Australia and New Zealand ever returns from 2005, we'll maybe find out why they think it's so crucial to the accuracy of the tests, but it's not the slam dunk they imagine.

 

5 hours ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

im not as into it as you and many others appear to be so I don’t know many names of the top scientists other than right said Fred but when I say qualified / respected I mean they appear to manage to hold down prestige jobs in what appears to be recognised universities etc so theyre either fairly decent although some of them i suppose could be winging it

 

not sure why it matters who they are as you said yourself there is no consensus - not sure the tight definition of that word but there appears to be a majority of them who agree in general with how it’s been tackled but a significant minority who would have done some things differently

 

Without knowing who you mean it's difficult to know what their objections to government policy are, or their preferred alternative.

I'll just use my imagination. Prestigious job, recognised university:

 

Spoiler

 

 

[Taffin]

Army deployed to enforce lockdown in Sydney according to the BBC 😂😂

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

51 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

 

Not sure why you're so keen that absolute gobshites not be challenged, and I feel like you're missing the point of my post that kicked this off.

 

I used the word consensus but don't get too hung up on it. The point of the consensus comment wasn't that governments all act the same, or that all experts think exactly the same, but that with the available evidence there's a broad consensus on what were dealing with and how things work.

 

The poster I replied to came rattling into this thread, slagging people for blindly believing what they're told, then showed that it's EXACTLY what he does himself. Except rather than listen to educated experts, he does it with conspiracy websites who provide "proof" like a document he can't actually read.

 

But he'll take some other gobshite's word for what it says, while dismissing the thousands of highly educated and dedicated medical and scientific experts doing their best with their education and expertise.

 

Consensus will change, based on the ever growing pool of knowledge and understanding available, not because of the wankers that have his ear.

 

if you can point anything that I’ve written which infers I don’t think he should be challenged - anything

 

I’m not hung up on the word of consensus. at all fancy a brew in a related post inferred there was no consensus then seemed to use it in another post so just trying to keep the point general

[Unknown user]

3 minutes ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

 

if you can point anything that I’ve written which infers I don’t think he should be challenged - anything

 

I’m not hung up on the word of consensus. at all fancy a brew in a related post inferred there was no consensus then seemed to use it in another post so just trying to keep the point general

 

Implies. If that's not what you intended then fair enough but that's what I got from it.

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

38 minutes ago, fancy a brew said:

 

They issued a guidance notice, probably worth reading it given the arms and legs it seemed to grow, and it's a quick read.

 

https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05

 

Worthwhile reading this too, as it deals with some of the myths the statement spawned.

 

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2A429W

 

Having read that, I think I was getting cycles and threshold cycles mixed up, but the point stands about different laboratories using different numbers of cycles.

If the poster who first raised the numbers of cycles in relation to Australia and New Zealand ever returns from 2005, we'll maybe find out why they think it's so crucial to the accuracy of the tests, but it's not the slam dunk they imagine.

 

 

Without knowing who you mean it's difficult to know what their objections to government policy are, or their preferred alternative.

I'll just use my imagination. Prestigious job, recognised university:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

never said back to 2005 had a slam dunk of a point in fact pretty much said the opposite - it was a discussable point tho rather than some just made up stuff that people got all excited about - again the general point nothing to do with aus or nz

 

regarding Devi lady or “the dentist” as another example I’m not sure just where their expertise lie but on the face of it they both apparently have stuff on their CV which would suggest people should take a wee bit of breath before dismissing their credentials - there will be a few like them within the group some will be better / more suitable than others but at a high level experts in jobs at recognised sites - seems like both have got things wrong at times flip-flopped on things banged the drum on things and then gone quiet later but what scientist or group of scientists have got everything right ? using the loosest definition of right

 

what we do / did have is people claiming that certain scientists are right and others (at a high-level equally or more qualified) are wrong - that’s fine as an opinion it’s also fine to discuss the risks in making such claims

 

 

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

11 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Implies. If that's not what you intended then fair enough but that's what I got from it.

 

Ive  said he has a discussable point I’ve said he might not have the point he thinks he has and I’ve said if he does have part of a point it may be mitigated in other parts of the process - not sure how more clear that could be

 

i understand he may cause frustration to you and others but in this case I believed he had a discussable point - that’s all

[DETTY29]

I put up a link last week with Travelling Tabby's overview of the week in Scotland.

 

Here is this week's.

 

Pretty much all heading in correct direction.  

 

 

Edited July 30, 2021 by DETTY29

[Unknown user]

31 minutes ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

 

Ive  said he has a discussable point I’ve said he might not have the point he thinks he has and I’ve said if he does have part of a point it may be mitigated in other parts of the process - not sure how more clear that could be

 

i understand he may cause frustration to you and others but in this case I believed he had a discussable point - that’s all

 

And I believed it was a perfect illustration of how he doesn't understand much about the subjects at hand and is completely unaware of it.

[Taffin]

Question for any fellow residents of England - I can now access my vaccine passport in the app, but it says it expires tomorrow. Does this mean to use it I'll need to log into the app each day and generate a new one?

 

Hoping not but have requested a paper version just in case 👍

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

3 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

And I believed it was a perfect illustration of how he doesn't understand much about the subjects at hand and is completely unaware of it.

 

you appreciate now that I wasn’t actually putting up barriers to them being challenged as you first thought?

[Beni]

22 minutes ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

never said back to 2005 had a slam dunk of a point in fact pretty much said the opposite - it was a discussable point tho rather than some just made up stuff that people got all excited about - again the general point nothing to do with aus or nz

 

I was referring to 2005 with the slam dunk comment. Another poster said he was talking nonsense about something he didn't understand, you thought he had a discussable point, having looked into it I share the other poster's opinion, because the information he asked for would have got us no closer to answering the question I asked about Australia and New Zealand, and if he understood the process he would have realised that.

 

30 minutes ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

 

 

regarding Devi lady or “the dentist” as another example I’m not sure just where their expertise lie but on the face of it they both apparently have stuff on their CV which would suggest people should take a wee bit of breath before dismissing their credentials - there will be a few like them within the group some will be better / more suitable than others but at a high level experts in jobs at recognised sites - seems like both have got things wrong at times flip-flopped on things banged the drum on things and then gone quiet later but what scientist or group of scientists have got everything right ? using the loosest definition of right

 

what we do / did have is people claiming that certain scientists are right and others (at a high-level equally or more qualified) are wrong - that’s fine as an opinion it’s also fine to discuss the risks in making such claims

 

By necessity a lot of policy has had to be made on the hoof with very little hard data to go on, I mentioned the changing advice on masks earlier as an example, whether those calls were right, wrong or somewhere in between will be up to the public enquiries to judge.

As you say people give their opinions, and it would be a pretty dull forum if everyone agreed.

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

8 minutes ago, fancy a brew said:

 

I was referring to 2005 with the slam dunk comment. Another poster said he was talking nonsense about something he didn't understand, you thought he had a discussable point, having looked into it I share the other poster's opinion, because the information he asked for would have got us no closer to answering the question I asked about Australia and New Zealand, and if he understood the process he would have realised that.

 

 

By necessity a lot of policy has had to be made on the hoof with very little hard data to go on, I mentioned the changing advice on masks earlier as an example, whether those calls were right, wrong or somewhere in between will be up to the public enquiries to judge.

As you say people give their opinions, and it would be a pretty dull forum if everyone agreed.

 

i was talking about the general point not anything to do with aus or nz so we can have different opinions on the validity of  the point without actually disagreeing

 

the rest of it looks like we broadly agree - so a bit dull in this case 🙁

 

Edited July 30, 2021 by MoncurMacdonaldMercer

[Dennis Reynolds]

1 hour ago, DETTY29 said:

I put up a link last week with Travelling Tabby's overview of the week in Scotland.

 

Here is this week's.

 

Pretty much all heading in correct direction.  

 

 

 

👍

[Ray Gin]

2 hours ago, Smithee said:

 

 

Not sure why you're so keen that absolute gobshites not be challenged, and I feel like you're missing the point of my post that kicked this off.

 

I used the word consensus but don't get too hung up on it. The point of the consensus comment wasn't that governments all act the same, or that all experts think exactly the same, but that with the available evidence there's a broad consensus on what were dealing with and how things work.

 

The poster I replied to came rattling into this thread, slagging people for blindly believing what they're told, then showed that it's EXACTLY what he does himself. Except rather than listen to educated experts, he does it with conspiracy websites who provide "proof" like a document he can't actually read.

 

But he'll take some other gobshite's word for what it says, while dismissing the thousands of highly educated and dedicated medical and scientific experts doing their best with their education and expertise.

 

Consensus will change, based on the ever growing pool of knowledge and understanding available, not because of the wankers that have his ear.

 

👍

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 hour ago, Taffin said:

Question for any fellow residents of England - I can now access my vaccine passport in the app, but it says it expires tomorrow. Does this mean to use it I'll need to log into the app each day and generate a new one?

 

Hoping not but have requested a paper version just in case 👍

Screenshot it and save it and send it to your email 

[Taffin]

2 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Screenshot it and save it and send it to your email 

 

That's what I want to do (on your top tip the other week!!)

 

But when you screenshot it or download it as a PDF it says it expires in 24 hours time...despite at the bottom saying it's valid for 30 days 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Taffin said:

 

That's what I want to do (on your top tip the other week!!)

 

But when you screenshot it or download it as a PDF it says it expires in 24 hours time...despite at the bottom saying it's valid for 30 days 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️

Strange ! But can’t u still screenshot it ? It’ll be just as valid surely 

[Taffin]

Just now, JamesM48 said:

Strange ! But can’t u still screenshot it ? It’ll be just as valid surely 

 

Hopefully, I'm just foreseeing the person who checks going 'that expired last week' and then having to log back into the app and generate another one everyday. Which isn't a drama as long as you've got your phone, a signal and data to do so (albeit the app is clunky with multiple screens before you get to it) which is why I liked your idea of a screenshot.

 

I've requested a hard copy to be posted which begs the question...will that also have to be posted afresh every 30 days. What an administrative palava for them to have to deal with if so.

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

Hopefully, I'm just foreseeing the person who checks going 'that expired last week' and then having to log back into the app and generate another one everyday. Which isn't a drama as long as you've got your phone, a signal and data to do so (albeit the app is clunky with multiple screens before you get to it) which is why I liked your idea of a screenshot.

 

I've requested a hard copy to be posted which begs the question...will that also have to be posted afresh every 30 days. What an administrative palava for them to have to deal with if so.

I have paper copy of mine too . 

[Taffin]

1 minute ago, JamesM48 said:

I have paper copy of mine too . 

 

Does it expire every 30 days? I appreciate it isn't necessarily the same between Scotland and England. I assumed a passport for double vax would last 6 months and once you had it, you had, not getting a new one everyday/30 days.

[milky_26]

9 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

That's what I want to do (on your top tip the other week!!)

 

But when you screenshot it or download it as a PDF it says it expires in 24 hours time...despite at the bottom saying it's valid for 30 days 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️

Is the 24 hour bit for those who have a negative PCR test and if you are double d'd the 30 days applies? I've not seen one so the above is just a guess

[Taffin]

2 minutes ago, milky_26 said:

Is the 24 hour bit for those who have a negative PCR test and if you are double d'd the 30 days applies? I've not seen one so the above is just a guess

 

I'll screenshot one with the QR code obscured and stick it up as I appreciate I'm asking questions of people who are in a different set up who haven't seen what I'm talking about. I do appreciate the help and suggestions though.

 

Edit: Actually there's not much point as you're just left with a line that says 'your vaccine passport expires:' then a date and time 24 hours from when you generated it.

 

It's also only valid in England. Not sure how they plan on making that work!!!

 

 

Edited July 30, 2021 by Taffin

[kila]

As if the vaccine passports will be properly enforced though - I think it's an incentive to get those unsure jagged in the UK.

 

Queuing to get into the stadium and it'll be some guy checking the expiry dates of our vaccine passports like this:

 

[Taffin]

2 minutes ago, kila said:

As if the vaccine passports will be properly enforced though - I think it's an incentive to get those unsure jagged in the UK.

 

Queuing to get into the stadium and it'll be some guy checking the expiry dates of our vaccine passports like this:

 

 

Why bother then? That's my thoughts on it too but if you're going to make a song and dance about it then at least make it workable 😂😂

 

Vaccine passport that you need to generate every single day and is only valid in one country of the UK. Cretinous design.

[JudyJudyJudy]

13 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

Does it expire every 30 days? I appreciate it isn't necessarily the same between Scotland and England. I assumed a passport for double vax would last 6 months and once you had it, you had, not getting a new one everyday/30 days.

I don’t know I haven’t checked the fine print . I don’t assume it will ? 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Taffin said:

 

Why bother then? That's my thoughts on it too but if you're going to make a song and dance about it then at least make it workable 😂😂

 

Vaccine passport that you need to generate every single day and is only valid in one country of the UK. Cretinous design.

Yes I have wondered about the logistical nightmare of ensuring everyone has a valid vaccine passport when attending football in particular . Takes long enough for people to get through normally due to the turnstiles etc so how the hell will they manage . Unless they tell people they need to be there way earlier which will

completely change match days for people as many like to go to the pub first or the bookies or both ! ( I only go to the pub now and then before a match as I remember couple years back being too Pissed at the hearts Celtic game I nearly fell down the stairs trying to locate my seat ! 😂) besides I like to savour the football spectacle without it being a blurry memory the next day . 

[Enzo Chiefo]

3 hours ago, Taffin said:

Army deployed to enforce lockdown in Sydney according to the BBC 😂😂

What a chilling prospect and a truly dangerous response from a beleaguered Govt.

[Taffin]

16 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Yes I have wondered about the logistical nightmare of ensuring everyone has a valid vaccine passport when attending football in particular . Takes long enough for people to get through normally due to the turnstiles etc so how the hell will they manage . Unless they tell people they need to be there way earlier which will

completely change match days for people as many like to go to the pub first or the bookies or both ! ( I only go to the pub now and then before a match as I remember couple years back being too Pissed at the hearts Celtic game I nearly fell down the stairs trying to locate my seat ! 😂) besides I like to savour the football spectacle without it being a blurry memory the next day . 

 

The cross-border bit is going to be the real challenge. There's plenty folk come up from South of the border for games (any many other things too) and they'll all have these England only passports...will the Scottish scanners recognise the QR codes etc. 

 

I'm surprised the UK government has taken that approach as never before has the UK felt so separate to me, Scotland is being treated like any other foreign country in regards to the vaccine passport.

Edited July 30, 2021 by Taffin

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

What a chilling prospect and a truly dangerous response from a beleaguered Govt.

Exactly . Desperation stakes now for them . Cant they just admit the Probably got it wrong and change strategy . ? 

[Beni]

2 hours ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

i was talking about the general point not anything to do with aus or nz so we can have different opinions on the validity of  the point without actually disagreeing

 

After quite a bit back and forth I have to admit I'm not entirely sure what general point you're making, any chance could you spell it out?

 

[redjambo]

Scottish numbers: 30 July 2021

Summary

• 1,456 new cases of COVID-19 reported [+58; down from 1,505 a week ago]
• 25,990 new tests for COVID-19 that reported results [-7,689]
  • 6.2% of these were positive [+1.6%]
• 6 new reported death(s) of people who have tested positive [-7]
• 60 people were in intensive care yesterday with recently confirmed COVID-19 [=]
• 474 people were in hospital yesterday with recently confirmed COVID-19 [-16]
• 4,007,577 people have received the first dose of the Covid vaccination and 3,162,662 have received their second dose [+2,156; +17,645]