No, Derriford deaths in hospitals don't count as "Plymouth" deaths. That would bugger up Exeter if it did, given that the Nightingale here also supports the other Devon and Cornwall hospitals (and Dorset and Zummerzet if required) and takes patients from those locations.

Quinny maybe u will know the answer. As Derriford take a large proportion of the cornish population and they are stage one whereas plymouth is stage 2 could this be keeping cornwalls levels artificially low because the rates of infection are registered against derriford in Devon.

Quinny maybe u will know the answer. As Derriford take a large proportion of the cornish population and they are stage one whereas plymouth is stage 2 could this be keeping cornwalls levels artificially low because the rates of infection are registered against derriford in Devon.

No, the reason why Plymouth is in tier 2 is because of confirmed test results of individuals, and that's based on where you live, rather than where the test was done. So if a patient from East Cornwall was admitted to Derriford and was proved to be Covid positive on admission, that Covid case would count against where they lived.

Teignbridge sent an email to all taxpayers yesterday that said we had the lowest level of infection in England (56 in 100,000).

If the government decode to split the county could we end up in a weird scenario where Teignbridge (and other more rural areas) end up in Tier 1 with Exeter, Torbay and Plymouth in Tier 3?

I can't see how that can be enforced. The second the pubs open here people will be leaving T3 areas

Quinny maybe u will know the answer. As Derriford take a large proportion of the cornish population and they are stage one whereas plymouth is stage 2 could this be keeping cornwalls levels artificially low because the rates of infection are registered against derriford in Devon.

No, the reason why Plymouth is in tier 2 is because of confirmed test results of individuals, and that's based on where you live, rather than where the test was done. So if a patient from East Cornwall was admitted to Derriford and was proved to be Covid positive on admission, that Covid case would count against where they lived.

Thanks

Teignbridge sent an email to all taxpayers yesterday that said we had the lowest level of infection in England (56 in 100,000).

If the government decode to split the county could we end up in a weird scenario where Teignbridge (and other more rural areas) end up in Tier 1 with Exeter, Torbay and Plymouth in Tier 3?

I can't see how that can be enforced. The second the pubs open here people will be leaving T3 areas

It isn't often I defend the Govt, but this is proving to be a case "damned if they do, damned if they don't" regarding lockdown. They regionalised lockdowns initially to almost postcode zones, and people complained it was too complex, and open to abuse. So they simplify it to county level, and everyone complains.

It is a pain on the arse for those who live in low infection rate areas (I'm also Teignbridge), but I think the current county level enforcement is as fair as they can make it. What I dispute is how they conclude an area is T1/T2/T3, because that seems inconsistent.

Teignbridge sent an email to all taxpayers yesterday that said we had the lowest level of infection in England (56 in 100,000).

If the government decode to split the county could we end up in a weird scenario where Teignbridge (and other more rural areas) end up in Tier 1 with Exeter, Torbay and Plymouth in Tier 3?

I can't see how that can be enforced. The second the pubs open here people will be leaving T3 areas

It isn't often I defend the Govt, but this is proving to be a case "damned if they do, damned if they don't" regarding lockdown. They regionalised lockdowns initially to almost postcode zones, and people complained it was too complex, and open to abuse. So they simplify it to county level, and everyone complains.

It is a pain on the arse for those who live in low infection rate areas (I'm also Teignbridge), but I think the current county level enforcement is as fair as they can make it. What I dispute is how they conclude an area is T1/T2/T3, because that seems inconsistent.

Wasn't personally complaining, just remarking on how complicated it can be.

Countywide is probably the fairest and easiest to enforce. If they go postcode it'll be a massive headache for the police to enforce and almost impossible.

Still, numbers are looking better and better down here, so hopefully the review in a couple of weeks will see Devon in T1...

I’ve been pondering a question perhaps suitable for The Moral Maze. At some point next year everyone who wants a vaccine will have received it. After that, the only infections will be those who deliberately declined the jab. Whilst I would never consider that their stupidity should result in no treatment, they should surely receive very little sympathy.

I’ve been pondering a question perhaps suitable for The Moral Maze. At some point next year everyone who wants a vaccine will have received it. After that, the only infections will be those who deliberately declined the jab. Whilst I would never consider that their stupidity should result in no treatment, they should surely receive very little sympathy.

I wonder how many of them that protest etc etc will have it done when the country they wish to visit makes it a condition of entry. Or the theatre, sports venue, music festival or whatever place they wish to go the same answer you need proof of vacination

I’ve been pondering a question perhaps suitable for The Moral Maze. At some point next year everyone who wants a vaccine will have received it. After that, the only infections will be those who deliberately declined the jab. Whilst I would never consider that their stupidity should result in no treatment, they should surely receive very little sympathy.

Not that I agree with some of the positions you can apply the same argument to any motorcyclist who gets in a crash, and athlete who gets injured during their sport.

It's completely unethical to refuse to treat anyone no matter how stupid you or the doctors think their position is.

As much as I disagree with their stance everyone has a right to an opinion and an action.

Their medical decisions are theirs and theirs alone and they run the risk of a deadly infection as a result. But that's a risk they're willing to take.

Those who are spreading BS online about the virus etc are the real ones where the ethics should be revisited.

I’ve been pondering a question perhaps suitable for The Moral Maze. At some point next year everyone who wants a vaccine will have received it. After that, the only infections will be those who deliberately declined the jab. Whilst I would never consider that their stupidity should result in no treatment, they should surely receive very little sympathy.

You are assuming its impossible to get the virus if you had the vaccine. Incorrect.

I’ve been pondering a question perhaps suitable for The Moral Maze. At some point next year everyone who wants a vaccine will have received it. After that, the only infections will be those who deliberately declined the jab. Whilst I would never consider that their stupidity should result in no treatment, they should surely receive very little sympathy.

You are assuming its impossible to get the virus if you had the vaccine. Incorrect.

Agreed, my wording is incorrect. I should have said ‘the only serious infections...’ But I do understand that the vaccine lessens the symptoms and helps prevent long COVID. I’ve also changed my view somewhat since hearing this evening on Newsnight how many in the BAME community are nervous about the vaccine because they have so little trust in authority/government, which is understandable when you consider the government’s handling so far.

We got notification that we should be receiving the first batch of vaccines here at the RDE on the 7th, although we still have to wait for permission from the MHRA and the Govt to start using them, but I get the hunch that'll be, if not next week, then w/c 14th.

That's fine, because we haven't got a system here for booking in all the staff for a mass vaccination roll-out yet: things like 'flu jabs are done at the staff's convenience. Our Occ Health dept has a system, but it isn't designed for 5 minute slots over multiple locations, and then followed up with a second jab a couple of weeks later

Oh, side effect stats are interesting: somewhere between 77%-84% of those who have had the vaccine have had some kind of reaction within 48 hours, lethargy, feeling run down, etc along with the obligatory sore arm. And apparently those in the trials felt worse on the second injection.

We got notification that we should be receiving the first batch of vaccines here at the RDE on the 7th, although we still have to wait for permission from the MHRA and the Govt to start using them, but I get the hunch that'll be, if not next week, then w/c 14th.

That's fine, because we haven't got a system here for booking in all the staff for a mass vaccination roll-out yet: things like 'flu jabs are done at the staff's convenience. Our Occ Health dept has a system, but it isn't designed for 5 minute slots over multiple locations, and then followed up with a second jab a couple of weeks later

Oh, side effect stats are interesting: somewhere between 77%-84% of those who have had the vaccine have had some kind of reaction within 48 hours, lethargy, feeling run down, etc along with the obligatory sore arm. And apparently those in the trials felt worse on the second injection.

Side effects to which vaccine? Looks like Argyle players have already been vaccinated.