UKH

There's no knowledge of whom out of the once only vaccinated are likely to have a reasonable (subjective term eh? ) immune response to that single vaccine. In addition, there is still half the population at least, who have not been vaccinated. So a good proportion who are at least somewhat vulnerable, and therefore may enable the viral load on the population to rise in greater quantae. So then we could possibly end up with another swathe of the population heading for the hospitals, especially if the European threat of virus variants of all types arrives on our doorstop, and we end up with a mutation which takes on younger people than previous variants have done so far.

So I wonder if it is going to be worthwhile to keep self-restricted for another 2-3 weeks to see how the statistics change, over and above the changes thought to be sequels to schools going back in.

I am tempted by the idea of being out on real rock again, but should I just temper my ideas?

I'm considering this not just in the light of my own skin, but with respect to friends, relatives and fellow staff, who are not vaccinataed, when we do not know how well the first dosage of vaccine works in reducing transmission of the Covid-19 virus.

Rob

There is very little evidence of outdoor transmission, so climb away.  You're more likely to get it in the supermarket.

Yes. Hearing from France that they are seeing an influx of basically healthy 40 year old in hospital, and patients needing ICU are being flown out of Paris as it is being overwhelmed.

The vaccine takes 2-3 weeks to provide a degree of protection even after dose 1.

I have to admit I'm not too sure where you stand on transmission or how "safe" you are despite the vaccine, but I agree there is a real danger that we get another surge and spike.  From a work point of view we seem to be going back to "normal" if not higher levels of demand already which may indicate that people are very prematurely starting to act like it's all over....

I agree with this concern, but I don't think it'll come from people going climbing or hillwalking, it'll come from reopening of indoor businesses, and people meeting in their mates' gardens, it getting a bit cold and them going inside.  Thus I'd probably say I am broadly supportive of tomorrow's relaxation, but I do think April 12 should not go ahead unless cases have started reducing again by then (due to more jabs in arms).  Though I think due to the risk of people going inside when visiting in gardens it should probably have been "public places only" for now.

One thing that would be very interesting indeed to know would be if a large walking organisation like the Ramblers had any cases at all reported that seemed likely to have resulted from transmission on one of their walks (I know it's hard to pin it on something precisely, but you might be able to work it out to some extent based on two people reporting symptoms back from the same walk, for example).  I bet it's 0 or very close to it.

As long as everyone agrees that their own little bit of virus transmitting activity doesn't really matter in the greater scheme, it'll all matter.

I suspect the Government agrees with me given the nature of the unlocking.  What do you propose?  Lockdown forever?  It does seem that way at times.  I trust, given your job, you are sticking to enforcing the law as written and not this opinion.

Didn't you get information with the vaccine? You are supposed to carry on as if you haven't had the vaccine was the walk away info we got.

And I'm saying that if I carry on as if I haven't had the vaccine, that I will be in relatively close proximity, like everyone else, who doesn't particularly think about circumstances, with up to 6 people, and that the proximity may get less, as people's mental guard starts to erode, with familiarity: Hence I may end up having the virus due to close proximity to others, or may act as a carrier.

So I was not disregarding the information doled out with the vaccine. I'm saying that relaxing things in the next couple of weeks, could be a bad idea, as we do not have all the information, and the viral load in Europe is continuing to increase. So we could find more of a viral threat very shortly, actually in the UK. It would not take much laxity on the part of the public.

If everyone does things that have minimal effect on transmission such as outside activities then there will be a negligible effect on overall case loads in the country. If people do things that have a high transmission risk such as socialising indoors the case load will increase. This has been explained to you many times before so I can only assume that you are being deliberately obtuse

Excellent point. I wish we had listened to your opinion earlier, we could have all continued climbing without impact and the pandemic would probably have finished by now.

(Love the patronising twist of "explaining it to me", thanks SO much x)

Doesn’t this make the question in your OP a waste of everyone’s time? I don’t mean that to sound as unpleasant as it reads! I just meant (again not to sound rude) that it seems that you’ve already made up your mind on what your position is. Whether you’ve had a first vaccine or not is immaterial, I don’t really think this affects your question which seems more like a more broad “as restrictions ease, should I hold up at least as much as I have been?”.

The answer to which, as I say, you’ve already decided on ...and the advice of strangers from the Internet is not going to change this, and that’s fair enough. Take care 

Personally I will be carrying on doing what I have done for the last year, go to work as normal and keep away from people outside of work and don't travel around. Probably do this for another month.

If numbers stay low then we (the Mrs and me) will start to relax things, if they start going up again then we won't. This may be an over cautious approach but then again it might not so for the sake of a few more weeks I would rather wait and see. 

Note the word "may", in the title. Not a definite.

I may be lured by the crags, but I'm not so sure about climbing being as risk free, in terms of virology/epidemiology, as many climbers assume. Last year, between lockdowns, I visited Stanage, and even back then, there were people who were less than one metre apart, possibly less than half a metre, and without masks. Then what about someone sneezing?  This was not our group of two, but a few friends, who possibly were in 2-3 pairs, but seemed to interact more than in pairs. 

Maybe walking the fells is safer than climbing, partly due to not being static in location, and with going higher, more air movement. Yet staying locally still may be more sensible for now, with just going running on my own, and possibly biking with one other, but mostly not.

Hopefully if I decide not to go climbing, the weather will be rubbish, then I won't be so frustrated, and not torn by the choice.

Maybe DaxH has a reasonable approach.

You have insinuated that the OP would be partly responsible for a 3rd/4th wave (depending on how you're counting) if he/she partook in an activity that is from today completely legal and has no higher a chance of transmission than exercising in their own town. To me, this is bordering on trolling, hence the patronising tone. Explain why I am wrong

The fun has already started in the Lakes:

https://www.facebook.com/100008394253374/posts/2902249180064862/

My view is that individuals lockdown adherence behaviour is likely to be a bell curve distribution... with very few (but noisy and media reported) people being complete lockdown denialists, and very few people locking themselves away completely in fear. The vast majority will be largely adhering, with the odd minor digressions.

If you do hole up for a few more weeks, itll offset someone who is a bit more lax, but I cant imagine it'll really change anything on the grand scale, as the rules say you can now go travel a bit further afield and mix socially outdoors, so that's what the vast majority will now do.

Thank you for the clarification, it is appreciated. 

I agreed with the OP's caution. I referred to the delay period before the vaccine became effective, as well as the uncertainty over its effect on transmission.

I also referred to the new wave that I believe is starting in France that appears to be concerning due to the impact it is having on otherwise healthy individuals.

I also mentioned the real impact I have noticed at work that suggests that possibly a more significant number of people have already reverted to "business as usual".

In response you suggested that lots of people doing things with small impacts would have negligible impact overall.

That's pretty much the reverse of a public health policy approach, that has been used all through this pandemic so far.  And I'm trolling...

You also insinuated that my opinion "I agree with caution" would mean I stopped enforcing the law "as written". Given my many, many, comments about law enforcement during this pandemic so far, that's just daft. 

I didn't suggest you were disregarding anything, I simply asked if you'd got any information. I wasn't judging or recommending anything, simply asking?

I don't understand the OP if this is what you've already decided, and then had a go when someone asks you a question.

I suppose you are right in saying your behaviour should not change as a result of getting the jab.  However behaviour *may* change as a result of the restrictions being loosened today, but actions from this should be independent of whether one has had the jab or not?

I think if you'd previously felt like you were particularly at risk, and hence your concern for your personal safety meant that you'd been going above and beyond the government guidelines in shielding yourself, then you might reasonably feel that having had the vaccine (and given it time to take effect) meant you were now okay to "just" follow the guidelines and take what the government consider to be reasonable steps to control the spread.

My understanding of the messaging is that what they don't want is for people to think they can just abandon all social distancing as soon as they've been jabbed, because that would obviously be bad.

In terms of the bigger picture, I think that's an issue for government policy, not individuals making their own decisions. If you still don't want to leave the house then that's on you, but calling out individuals for doing stuff which is within both the letter and the spirit of the current guidance is nasty and divisive IMO.

yes, this.

In that case I would agree.

I would also agree with that.  I don't completely agree with the Government's plan, there are some things I'd change about it.  However, people cannot reasonably be criticised for (genuinely) following it in letter and spirit (as distinct from looking for loopholes, which can definitely reasonably be criticised).

This is the issue I've had with what off-duty has been posting in this thread, and given his job I rather hope he is sticking to the official law and guidance only, and not his opinions, when dealing with his, er, "customers".

I'm not "calling out" anyone. I'm agreeing with the OP's caution. Which is a perfectly reasonable position to hold.

I agree with rambling Dave's post - particularly his paragraph highlighting messaging to those who have been vaccinated.

The similar snide suggestion that I would be overstretching my authority at work does you no favours.

This:

...in reply to me, is definitely a sarcastic "calling out", unless you perhaps wish to retract it?

Its the basis of public health policy. Everyone do their little bit to prevent transmission - we all benefit.

If you are saying keep to the guidelines and exercise caution then you basically agree with it.

This is the post that I also took exception to, the clearest reading of it being that if you go climbing you are part of the problem and will be contributing to a further wave when there is zero evidence for this and it is clearly allowed which leaves you with the feeling that the off-duty is here wind people up, i.e troll.

'That's pretty much the reverse of a public health policy approach, that has been used all through this pandemic so far.  And I'm trolling...'

I have not heard a single health expert worry about people engaging in outside activities or use their cars* on their own or in their household. Various cabinet ministers have but it is best to take their scientific thoughts with a pinch of salt. And anyway, as of this morning, it is not only allowed, but your public duty to get out on the crags:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/mar/29/get-your-trainers-on-public-u...

Will the police now start fining people for not leaving their house seeing as the guidelines are now explicitly to leave your house and exercise? Or will everyone finally realise why guidance and law are often kept distinct from one another?

 *obvs this has non coronavirus related public health issues

Yes, I am saying that - the guidelines of course don't now prevent you (say) going climbing, nor is the spirit of them infringed by that (unlike back in say February when it possibly was), provided you are sensible and in a group of up to 6/2 households.

Nothing wrong with playing it safe but I'd say that it's now fine to go climbing and hill walking (and to travell to do so). It's been well publicised, not least by Whitty, that transmission risk outside is fairly low. The government has now allowed (and is encouraging) outdoors sport, as well as generally meeting outdoors in groups of up to 6. In that context, meeting one other person to go climbing seems fine to me, as long as you take care to avoid accidents. If Stanage is too busy for your liking, perhaps just find a quieter corner of the crag or go to a different crag. Avoiding crowds is certainly a sensible thing to do but that doesn't mean you should avoid climbing altogether.

Of course you have to take care not to have an accident - this is always a consideration and most of us will be a bit rusty and not very fit at the moment. That's why I'll be starting with sport climbing. However the number of people in hospital with Covid now is at the level we had back in late June. The pressure on the NHS isn't anywhere as acute as it was in January, when arguably any risk was too much risk. So I feel it's fine to go and do a 'risky activity', while taking care not to have an accident.

Back in December I started a thread called something like 'Climbing - time to stop' and that was my view at the time as the Kent variant was out of control and all the numbers were rapidly going the wrong way. As much as anything else, I thought it was important to reduce my own travel so as not to create the general perception that travelling was an ok thing to do. It wasn't so much about the risk of me spreading the virus (which was and remains relatively low as I WFH) - it was more about setting a good example and doing 'the right thing' by sticking with the 'stay local' guidance.

However I always thought that a return to climbing around Easter would be on the cards and so it has come to pass. Today's circumstances are very different to back in Dec / Jan. Looking forward to doing some sport climbing on Wednesday! Also looking forward to having some weekends away in the campervan aftermid-April hopefully.

The wider picture is that cases will rise again, particularly after the mid-April relaxation. The May and June relaxations may well need to be postponed (I think the idea that life will go back to 'normal' on 21 June is for the birds). I don't think overseas holidays would be a good idea this summer. I certainly don't intend to return to the office until September (whatever Boris or my employer say) and I'm not sure it will be feasible even at that point (too early to tell though). We may yet see a significant third wave in terms of cases but it should entail far lower hospitalisations and deaths, as long as vaccine resistant variants don't rip loose. It will take the work at least until summer next year to get on top of Covid globally.

So I'm under no illusions regarding the current situation but at the moment cases are relatively low, while hospital and ICU occupancy are at manageable levels and heading down. Coupled with the fact that outdoor transmission isn't a big issue in the scheme of things, I think a cautious return to climbing is fine. I would think this anyway but the fact that I had the AZ just under two weeks ago gives me some additional reassurance.

It's an evolving situation which may well get worse again in autumn but I'm cautiously optimistic of a decent summer season, including a couple of UK road trips to hopefully go and do all those routes I've been wanting to do for years!

There is definitely a higher change of transmission that being on your own (anything is going to be higher than zero) but it's still a relatively low risk. It can be mitigated further by maintaining more SD than you normally would, if you're really concerned about it. You could also be quite selective about who you climb with (eg whether their job involved contact with lots of people and/or whether they've been vaccinated) and how many climbing partners you have. I would also avoid car sharing. So where you get to is pretty low risk. The government seems to agree (though we shouldn't perhaps always take our cue from this government given their shambolic response over the past year...).

I'm not worried about transmitting covid outside at the crag, but I am worried about the consequences of everyone driving to the crag in their own car. Which I don't think they're going to do because there'll be no parking. 

Agree with all, and I agreed with what you said in your post ‘time to stop’.  
The main (only?) real risk defo comes travel, specifically when people care share (which will happen and has been happening). It’s is still against the rules. And popping into petrol stations carries a risk. But given Covid rates and measures, risk is low enough (in my view) to crack on. 
The hospital/death rates aren’t far off those of a bad flu year, and still heading in the right direction, so it’s kinda now or never.

Re car parking: just been checking lakes national park rules and they state ‘most are open’ and also state they are opening more in key areas to stop local congestion. Looks like national trust parking also open. 

Your cunning plan to keep places quiet may have failed

Car sharing seems like a sure fire way to spread Covid, unless you keep the windows open I suppose. It’s more environmentally and parking friendly but less Covid friendly. Bit of a dilemma...

On a wider point, has the government done anything in the last 12 months to prepare the countryside for the ‘city hordes’ about to descend on it in unprecedented numbers for the second summer  in a row? Dream on...

Apparently it doesn't like fresh air and sunlight so makes sence to get outside ? Rather than jam up shopping precincts wandering around b&q with a mask on with hundreds of other people ?¿

Bracing myself for chaos here. I mean, the aftermath of Glastonbury has got a unique visual appeal and ambience, but all summer? Stepping in human faeces every day could get old after a while...