 Poster: A snowHead
|
The vaccines are mainly approved as a 2 dose schedule, can't understand why the government are going against the approval. The MHRA approval regulation which was updated on 17th September says
You will receive 2 injections, given at least 21 days apart.
If you receive one dose of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2, you should receive a second dose of the same vaccine at least 21 days later to complete the vaccination series. Protection against COVID-19 disease may not be maximally effective until at least 7 days after the second dose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| orange wrote: |
| Why does having unvaccinated people differ from vaccinated ? Being vaccinated doesn’t inhibit or change the spread of Covid beyond a very slight reduction in transmission, it does clearly massively reduce the symptoms should you get it. So the risk is more to the unvaccinated than the vaccinated ? I’ve been at several large events which have required proof of vax and a negative lft after which colleagues have tested positive. So the spread still happens, it’s just better to be vaccinated. So I’m confused as to why people are concerned about it - genuinely ? |
I agree. Another factor:
Everyone has now been offered a vaccination. Those who have declined it are therefore either a very small minority who can’t have it for medical reasons, or, much more likely, they are anti-vaxxers or Covid-deniers. These people don't just decline the vaccine, they ignore the rest of the rules too, so no mask, or an incorrectly worn one, poor hygiene, generally don’t give a toss. I don’t really want to share a gondola or a cable car with folk who have no regard for their own safety or that of others. We all have a role to play in this pandemic, and the strength of the PS scheme is that it highlights who is onboard and who isn’t.
I hope the issue with U.K. teenagers gets sorted out - we have guests with a 15 year old coming in February. We're in CH though, and the rules will be different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| telford_mike wrote: |
| orange wrote: |
| Why does having unvaccinated people differ from vaccinated ? Being vaccinated doesn’t inhibit or change the spread of Covid beyond a very slight reduction in transmission, it does clearly massively reduce the symptoms should you get it. So the risk is more to the unvaccinated than the vaccinated ? I’ve been at several large events which have required proof of vax and a negative lft after which colleagues have tested positive. So the spread still happens, it’s just better to be vaccinated. So I’m confused as to why people are concerned about it - genuinely ? |
I agree. Another factor:
Everyone has now been offered a vaccination. Those who have declined it are therefore either a very small minority who can’t have it for medical reasons, or, much more likely, they are anti-vaxxers or Covid-deniers. These people don't just decline the vaccine, they ignore the rest of the rules too, so no mask, or an incorrectly worn one, poor hygiene, generally don’t give a toss. I don’t really want to share a gondola or a cable car with folk who have no regard for their own safety or that of others. We all have a role to play in this pandemic, and the strength of the PS scheme is that it highlights who is onboard and who isn’t.
I hope the issue with U.K. teenagers gets sorted out - we have guests with a 15 year old coming in February. We're in CH though, and the rules will be different. |
The level of stupidity and lack of basic respect ….. Mankind appears to be going backwards in evolution! Jesus  Christ what an idiotic and disrespectul post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Actually the health pass was considered to be unnecessary for lift access as long as the figures kept dropping, at the moment the figures have started rising slightly (11% in the past week) and according to the French Health Minister, it's still under consideration........
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@KenX, realistically I can't see how anyone can function on a ski trip without the PS now anyway, for points made on this and other threads.
Train from Paris to Alps? Pass sanitaire
Coach to resort? Pass sanitaire
Food? Either shops or restaurant? Pass sanitaire
Toilet in a cafe? Pass sanitaire
Need ski/boot hire? Pass sanitaire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
@Timmycb5, Exactly........
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We were planning to fly (Geneva), self drive, self cater. Our apartment block have already told us that they will accept a single jab for access to the swimming pool...that said, it will be worth checking nearer the time! As adults we can shop and if weather allows, all sit outside. My understanding is it is just inside where the PS is needed?
The only sticking point seems to be ski hire where much depends on how strict owners are going to be....
Other than that, I can't see a trip not working. We are more dawn til dusk skiers as a family so the 'extras' aren't that important, although they would be nice to do occasionally. If only we could give our custom.
For us, the biggie is the lifts....we're not going through the faff of testing the kids every 48 hours. We're going 11th December and can cancel everything with 48 hours notice (apart from flights which can be moved).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Timmycb5 wrote: |
| @johnE, those aged 16 to 3 months short of their 18th birthday have been offered one dose, and the timing of their second dose is yet to be decided. I read from that that they will be offered a second dose at some point. 12-15 have been (or are due to be) offered one dose only. At the moment there is no plan to give them a second dose. |
My sons been offered his 2nd jab for next week, nine weeks after his first one - he’s seventeen (18 at end of Nov).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DanishRider wrote: |
| telford_mike wrote: |
| orange wrote: |
| Why does having unvaccinated people differ from vaccinated ? Being vaccinated doesn’t inhibit or change the spread of Covid beyond a very slight reduction in transmission, it does clearly massively reduce the symptoms should you get it. So the risk is more to the unvaccinated than the vaccinated ? I’ve been at several large events which have required proof of vax and a negative lft after which colleagues have tested positive. So the spread still happens, it’s just better to be vaccinated. So I’m confused as to why people are concerned about it - genuinely ? |
I agree. Another factor:
Everyone has now been offered a vaccination. Those who have declined it are therefore either a very small minority who can’t have it for medical reasons, or, much more likely, they are anti-vaxxers or Covid-deniers. These people don't just decline the vaccine, they ignore the rest of the rules too, so no mask, or an incorrectly worn one, poor hygiene, generally don’t give a toss. I don’t really want to share a gondola or a cable car with folk who have no regard for their own safety or that of others. We all have a role to play in this pandemic, and the strength of the PS scheme is that it highlights who is onboard and who isn’t.
I hope the issue with U.K. teenagers gets sorted out - we have guests with a 15 year old coming in February. We're in CH though, and the rules will be different. |
The level of stupidity and lack of basic respect ….. Mankind appears to be going backwards in evolution! Jesus Christ what an idiotic and disrespectul post. |
Wow. I don’t see too many genuinely ad hominem posts on here, so well done for bucking the trend 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
@telford_mike, follow the science, there is no need for such segregation. I don't remember being accused of poor hygiene  for never taking a flu vaccine, especially as I am fresh out of the shower just now and smelling of roses.
@Timmycb5, @KenX, shops (food, ski hire etc) do not require a PS. And if it's anything like the last 3 months then there will be restaurants and bars that won't check. Certainly not at the door.
Didn't see much coverage of the recent french senate vote to block mandatory vax, 262 votes to 64. That's the second time it has been proposed and roundly rejected. Iceland went one step further than it's nordic neighbours and has banned moderna for every age group. So the vax safety science is stlll mixed from country to country.
Personally I'm not bothered about all the drama, lifts would be nice but am planning to mostly ski tour either way like last year. My only concern (as usual) is snow. Nothing else should cause worry.
Last edited by snowHeads are a friendly bunch. on Tue 19-10-21 20:46; edited 3 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
[quote="Pejoli"]
| Timmycb5 wrote: |
My sons been offered his 2nd jab for next week, nine weeks after his first one - he’s seventeen (18 at end of Nov). |
Yeah they seem to do it if you’re 3 months from turning 18 for some reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| telford_mike wrote: |
| DanishRider wrote: |
| telford_mike wrote: |
| orange wrote: |
| Why does having unvaccinated people differ from vaccinated ? Being vaccinated doesn’t inhibit or change the spread of Covid beyond a very slight reduction in transmission, it does clearly massively reduce the symptoms should you get it. So the risk is more to the unvaccinated than the vaccinated ? I’ve been at several large events which have required proof of vax and a negative lft after which colleagues have tested positive. So the spread still happens, it’s just better to be vaccinated. So I’m confused as to why people are concerned about it - genuinely ? |
I agree. Another factor:
Everyone has now been offered a vaccination. Those who have declined it are therefore either a very small minority who can’t have it for medical reasons, or, much more likely, they are anti-vaxxers or Covid-deniers. These people don't just decline the vaccine, they ignore the rest of the rules too, so no mask, or an incorrectly worn one, poor hygiene, generally don’t give a toss. I don’t really want to share a gondola or a cable car with folk who have no regard for their own safety or that of others. We all have a role to play in this pandemic, and the strength of the PS scheme is that it highlights who is onboard and who isn’t.
I hope the issue with U.K. teenagers gets sorted out - we have guests with a 15 year old coming in February. We're in CH though, and the rules will be different. |
The level of stupidity and lack of basic respect ….. Mankind appears to be going backwards in evolution! Jesus Christ what an idiotic and disrespectul post. |
Wow. I don’t see too many genuinely ad hominem posts on here, so well done for bucking the trend |
You can obviously argue that, and whatever you see fit - I have absolutely no intention to comment this any further, because my experience tells me, that people with that sort of views, rarely respond to sensibility. Consider this my last comment on this subject.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Timmycb5 wrote: |
| Yeah they seem to do it if you’re 3 months from turning 18 for some reason. |
I think this hangs over from the summer when they were moving down the age bands for vaccination. In the 18-25 cohort they allowed 17y9mo on the basis (I read somewhere) that the youngest in the second year sixth group could then be fully vaccinated before starting university. Those would have been born 31 August. The earliest courses start mid-September, and the gap between doses could be up to 12 weeks/3 months.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| johnE wrote: |
| Quote: |
Why does having unvaccinated people differ from vaccinated ? Being vaccinated doesn’t inhibit or change the spread of Covid beyond a very slight reduction in transmission, it does clearly massively reduce the symptoms should you get it. So the risk is more to the unvaccinated than the vaccinated ? I’ve been at several large events which have required proof of vax and a negative lft after which colleagues have tested positive. So the spread still happens, it’s just better to be vaccinated. So I’m confused as to why people are concerned about it - genuinely ?
|
Even preventing 50% of infections (and the vaccines do reduce the chance of infection by over 50%) would have a massive effect on transmission rates. Spread still happens - it is just less likely. Basically the fewer people who have the disease the less likely you are to catch it. Papers like this one explain it https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468042720300129
Like you I am confused why people don't want to be vaccinated. Is their role model Typhoid Mary? |
That's incorrect. The latest evidence shows that vaccination make no difference to the chance of infection:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00808-7
Also it seems that its protective properties wane to near zero after 6 months:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.25.21262584v1.full.pdf
Hence the sudden urge to give booster shots.
I presume people don't want the vaccine for multiple reasons, the most obvious ones being that prior infection gives much stronger immunity than the vaccine, and the obvious absence of any long term safety data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@greengriff, The additional risks of infection in the unvaccinated are much greater, which imv, offsets any stronger immunity gained.
I would prefer to gain the additional immunity by (a reduced) natural infection after vaccination.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
The risk profile is very stratified by age, but that wasn't the point I was trying to make. What I was trying to say is that recovery from prior infection is a reason not to be vaccinated (and is taken as equal to double vax in France at least, maybe other places too), as per JohnE's question speculating about why people might not want to get the vaccine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Interesting papers. The second differentiates between the likelihood of infection, and the likelihood of hospitalisation and death:
| Paper wrote: |
Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization and death
Estimated BNT162b2 effectiveness against any severe, critical, or fatal disease due to any SARS-CoV-2 infection, was negligible for the first two weeks after the first dose. It increased rapidly to 67.7% (95% CI: 59.1-74.7) in the third week after the first dose, and reached a peak of 95.4% (95% CI: 93.4-96.9) in the first five weeks after the second dose (Table 2 and Figure 2). Unlike effectiveness against infection, there was no evident decline in this effectiveness over time. However, at ≥25 weeks after the second dose, there was a hint of a decline in effectiveness, but the case numbers were small.
|
That sounds like a pretty good reason to vaccinate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Indeed, but that wasn't the question was raised, which was why people might *not* want the vaccine!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
It also seems that the real word effectiveness of the vaccine is only about a third of what was claimed in the trials. Unfortunately I don't have the relevant paper to hand, and am too busy right now to go looking for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@greengriff, Is that because the most prevalent variant now is delta? Whereas the vaccines were much more effective against the original strain?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, that seems to be the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Can I just throw in there that I now know 2 people in their 40’s who have caught Covid after their boosters!
Neither have had covid before.
Also, majority of people I know who have caught Covid this year never had covid before, regardless of if they were vaccinated or not.
I still think natural immunity + vaccination is strongest, followed by natural immunity, followed by vaccination. And obviously at the bottom are those who have never caught Covid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting papers, but not quite showing what you say.
The first does not look at whether someone vaccinated has a different chance of infection. It simply compares public figures for number of cases with the proportion of the population vaccinated for a series of whole countries in one graph, or a series of US counties in another. It does not in any way control for all the other factors that might be involved. At the extreme, there are data points which appear to show that some countries with the lowest levels of vaccinations have very few cases recorded - but those are likely to be poor countries with underdeveloped health systems which are have as little coverage by testing as they do for vaccination. There will be a host of other uncontrolled variables: degree of rurality (likelihood of infectious contacts), climate (likelihood of contacts being indoors in poorly ventilated rooms) as well as degree of compliance with other control measures like masks. It is fascinating that the relationship is as poor as they find, but that doesn't mean vaccination has no effect on the likelihood of infection.
The second paper is a well planned study that really does look to see if vaccinated individuals have reduced probability of infection. They conclude that may no longer be the case after six months for asymptomatic or mild infection - though curiously they also say that even at the end of the study only 36.7% of infections were in the vaccinated, which given that Qatar has a very high level of vaccination compliance does seem to imply that the unvaccinated were more vulnerable. But more importantly, as @telford_mike points out the data looked very different against severe, critical or fatal disease and rather than waning to zero protection continued to be very good. Vaccination was of enormous benefit to those individuals!
As you say, people who decline vaccination do so for multiple reasons. However I am not sure about your rationalisation of that. While prior infection does give immunity it is not clear that is significantly better than vaccination (though vaccination plus infection is apparently strongest). And the safety issue is a red herring, the probability of serious side effects from infection (about 1 in 20, with around a tenth of those dying) is hugely higher than from vaccination and that is based on billions of doses; clearly there can be no long term data but in that case there isn't with natural Covid infections either, and we at least have the reassurance that there is massive experience of the human response to other vaccines over many decades and delayed side effects don't happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| j b wrote: |
Interesting papers, but not quite showing what you say.
The first does not look at whether someone vaccinated has a different chance of infection. It simply compares public figures for number of cases with the proportion of the population vaccinated for a series of whole countries in one graph, or a series of US counties in another. |
That is the best proxy we have. Unless someone is bold enough to run an experiment where they deliberately try to infect both vaxxed and unvaxxed cohorts of similar vulnerability, then this is the best we have to go on.
| j b wrote: |
It does not in any way control for all the other factors that might be involved. At the extreme, there are data points which appear to show that some countries with the lowest levels of vaccinations have very few cases recorded - but those are likely to be poor countries with underdeveloped health systems which are have as little coverage by testing as they do for vaccination. There will be a host of other uncontrolled variables: degree of rurality (likelihood of infectious contacts), climate (likelihood of contacts being indoors in poorly ventilated rooms) as well as degree of compliance with other control measures like masks. It is fascinating that the relationship is as poor as they find, but that doesn't mean vaccination has no effect on the likelihood of infection.
|
My takeaway is it does mean that. If anything, it showed the vaxxed are slightly MORE likely to catch it. No doubt just noise, but interesting nevertheless. Unless you can think of a more reasonable conclusion to draw, given the variables?
| j b wrote: |
The second paper is a well planned study that really does look to see if vaccinated individuals have reduced probability of infection. They conclude that may no longer be the case after six months for asymptomatic or mild infection - though curiously they also say that even at the end of the study only 36.7% of infections were in the vaccinated, which given that Qatar has a very high level of vaccination compliance does seem to imply that the unvaccinated were more vulnerable.
|
Without more detailed demographic info it's hard to be sure that it's an apples to apples comparison.
| j b wrote: |
But more importantly, as @telford_mike points out the data looked very different against severe, critical or fatal disease and rather than waning to zero protection continued to be very good. Vaccination was of enormous benefit to those individuals!
|
That wasn't what was in discussion IIRC - it was about meeting unvaccinated passengers in gondolas.
| j b wrote: |
As you say, people who decline vaccination do so for multiple reasons. However I am not sure about your rationalisation of that. While prior infection does give immunity it is not clear that is significantly better than vaccination ...
|
That's entirely incorrect. Recovery from infection gives protection between 6 and 13 times higher than vaccination. I will look for the paper later if you are curious.
| j b wrote: |
...(though vaccination plus infection is apparently strongest). And the safety issue is a red herring, the probability of serious side effects from infection (about 1 in 20, with around a tenth of those dying) is hugely higher than from vaccination and that is based on billions of doses; clearly there can be no long term data but in that case there isn't with natural Covid infections either, and we at least have the reassurance that there is massive experience of the human response to other vaccines over many decades and delayed side effects don't happen. |
I never said it wasn't safe. I said there is no long-term data. Experience with previous vaccines is irrelevant, as covid vaccines are new tech. Of possible interest is that these types of vaccines have been given to animals for a while and, as well as being fairly limited in effectiveness, they also caused serious auto immune issues. Certain versions of the new (human) covid vaccines have already been banned either entirely or for certain demographics in several European countries because of the serious side effects.
These vaccines are not a panacea, covid is not going anywhere, and not all 'anti-vaxxers' are tin foil hat wearers worried about being turned into mobile 5g aerials.
BTW if it's relevant I have been double-vaxxed. Not because I needed it (I had covid and recovered), but because I assumed it would make going skiing easier!
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
@greengriff, fair enough, as you say this discussion is about travel in gondolas. There is every expectation vaccination contributes to reducing the likelihood of infection, but what its importance is compared with ventilation, adjusting capacity and mask-wearing is not something that has been systematically measured.
On the Qatar paper, you are right that my observation that the 36.7% infections in the small number of unvaccinated seemed large might be due to that being a different (and more vulnerable) population from the vaccinated. In the actual study they were very careful only to compare apples with apples.
But the country study was comparing the contents of a whole greengrocer's shop. Every single point differed in multiple ways, most of which they didn't even assess. The only conclusion was that vaccination was not the only factor that mattered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
@Timmycb5, ah, yes, you can do that, but first you have to find a shop that will let you shop (several round here are now mandating PS, although it's not a legal requirement).
@Sweedish, how enclosed are most chairlifts? Enclosed spaces, sure. On chairlifts? Ridiculous.
. |
I couldn't agree more about the chairlifts. What a fiasco!
Minus 10C, gloves off, goggles off, helmet off, mask on... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Checking passes digitally at every lift would be impractical. For h&s reasons, it would require at least 1 extra dedicated member of staff at every lift, probably 2 or 3 for Gondolas, and more for cable cars.
It's also asking for people to run out of battery at some point during the day. Will they stop you getting the last lift/bus home?
It would make more sense to check vaccine status when the pass is purchased/issued. That way, it would only be needed once.
Might create an headache for @Admin on the bashes, meaning we might have to collect them individually, or as a pre arranged large group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
@telford_mike, it's certainly decided per the Tignes website. Mind you, sis in law was saying (probs per friends who work there ) that CdMB wasn't going to have to mandate masks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| Quote: |
Lunch/drinks are doable so long as the weather isn’t rubbish
|
@Timmycb5, not in CdMB stations they're not. PS required to use any facilities, indoors or outdoors. "les restaurants (intérieur et extérieur), cafétérias présents sur nos sites et domaines" https://www.montblancnaturalresort.com/fr/
@orange,
| Quote: |
| Being vaccinated doesn’t inhibit or change the spread of Covid beyond a very slight reduction in transmission |
- I was under the impression that reduction of transmission was thought to be around 85% - but don't hold me to that as understanding of these things evolves soooo quickly - but also that at a population level, if vaccination makes me (hugely) less susceptible and I'm in your R-transmissibility bubble, that probabilistically reduces spread. I think there are 2 things going on - PS encourages vaccination in the reluctant, a definite good, and as you rightly suggest, vaxx doesn't eliminate disease or infection, so protecting the un-vaxxed - at least at the margin - reduces spread.
@twoodwar,
| Quote: |
| wearing masks in crowded, poorly ventilated volumes, is the thing that helps |
FIFY 
@Sweedish, There's a detailed and nuanced thread from the FT's John Burn-Murdoch which goes into some detail about why the uk's infection rate might be relatively higher to many comparable countries' and while masks indoors are a super low cost (in any currency) and, at least marginally, effective intervention, there are likely other reasons, it's worth a read, https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1449801652207239176 |
Very interesting link - Who is this guy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@DanishRider, john b-w is the FT’s stats bloke. I’d recommend him, @jamesward73 and (if you can get past his slightly brusque manner) @andrew_lillico as three interesting modellers.
James Ward especially has been far more accurate than any of the “official” sources (UCL, Warwick etc) and explains his models really well.
FWIW james doesn’t think we’ll get anywhere near 100k cases a day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Agreed. James Ward is very good. Not a fan on Lillico though.
Bristol Oliver was also very good, but he appears to have deleted his account unfortunately 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@greengriff, the first paper seems a little counter intuitive and at first quick read looks to suffer from the same fault that the Israeli MoH analysis a few weeks ago did, by not stratifying by age and falling into Simpson's paradox?
The Qatar paper was referenced and discussed on the Vaccines thread just after it was released but I've forgotten what was suggested about it!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| andy from embsay wrote: |
| FWIW james doesn’t think we’ll get anywhere near 100k cases a day. |
If PCR only finds half the cases (which has certainly been likely on a number of occasions historically) we could already be at 100k.
Or does he mean that we won’t get to 100k PCR +ve results per day?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
