That's fantastic - was it pre or post vaccination? Could be a great advert for getting jabbed.

It's the easily measurable benchmark but haven't we had the discussion on here that we don't have measurable antibodies in our blood forever for things we're vaccinated against though we do continue to be protected?

I know people who have been asked to send in blood for antibody testing but they aren't given specific results, only that they do or don't have antibodies. We know that antibodies aren't the whole picture and I have yet to see anything definitive which says boosters are needed at all. Would make more sense to me if we get to a stage where boosters are tailored to specific strains (like the flu vaccine) but is more of the same proven to be necessary or effective?

As far as I can see the majority still are - and I'm just back in from a supermarket trip. Where I've got incredibly frustrated is the kneejerk reaction to the announcement it would no longer be compulsory as if we would go from hero to zero in one quick jump. The situation whenever I was out and about was that around 15% never did, another 30% or so had them pulled down so didn't cover both nose and mouth. Those are the people who will give them up completely. You may say it was better than nothing and maybe so but in reality the change is not as great as it seems. There never was 100% compliance. Things are also different now in that many of us are vaccinated and even the not so good vaccines do seem to offer worthwhile protection.

TJ, the reason I used the term 'very vulnerable' is because I have huge empathy for those who are having lived with someone going through chemo and little patience with the vast majority who declared themselves exempt from mask wearing. They are the very people who could wear a mask but chose not to because they liked the idea of being special and above the rules. There is a large crossover of those who would label themselves vulnerable when it suits them and do nothing to protect others while expecting others to protect them.

The very vulnerable, the immuno-compromised have always been at risk. Pre Covid they and their families had to adjust lifestyle to protect them rather than restrict everyone else so yes, that was their 'normal' before this pandemic hit and it will continue to be the norm for some unless we eradicate all infectious disease. The vulnerable won't stop being vulnerable post pandemic.

But nobody is stopping you wearing a mask. Nor are they forcing you into crowded situations which you (and I mean a general 'you') find uncomfortable or deem dangerous. These are personal choices which people have made from the start, it's just felt as though everyone has complied. I have my own personal risk/reward criteria which is different from everyone else. I am confident that whenever I do have prolonged, close contact with others I pose little if any threat. For example, I have two gym sessions per week with two different PTs which require very close contact as I weight train and need them to spot me. We don't wear masks. I flow test before each one because I wouldn't endanger their livelihoods. Are my workouts essential? You wouldn't think so but they matter very much to me. Should I be stopped because others are too nervous to venture out still?

You've sort of made my point TJ that you want others to be made to act as you deem appropriate for as long as you need to feel 100% safe. I see it differently because I know they never have. Those who didn't want to wear a mask never have - they just claimed they were exempt and lord help anyone who dared to ask why. I regard my safety as my responsibility and judge every situation on its merits. Others will make their own choices. They are not responsible for me.

They say they've made it less 'sensitive'. You have to wonder how it was set to start with that you could get pinged from passing someone in the street or from one house to another. It was yet another con job - they knew or they would have made isolation mandatory if it was working properly.

I have a sensible set of rules and mechanisms. There is nothing to stop me taking whatever precautions I choose.

Wasn't deliberately ignoring it to start with. Put the app on it to check in to a pub way back in April as we first started opening up. Brought it home and left it on the windowsill. Would have taken notice of being pinged at that point. Had no reason to charge it for a while, then did, then realised what was happening and decided to let it run out of charge again.

I have a burner phone which I leave on a windowsill where people walk by quite close. Gets pinged regularly even though it hasn't been out of the house.

A frighteningly high proportion of the population have shown they're happy to have every aspect of their lives controlled and want the same for others. Plenty wanted even more draconian measures with military enforcement.

I saw the news of the price hike for vaccines. Is there any claim they'll use the revenue to make more available cheaper to poorer countries?

True TJ. It's more the effect such figures have on those who decry vaccination which bothers me. That 40% of those in hospital 'with' Covid are vaccinated is one argument given against getting vaccinated for those looking for an excuse. If it's only 15% of those admitted because of/needing treatment for Covid that's a very different picture. The claim for the vaccine is that it will prevent severe disease or death and it seems to be living up to that claim.

These are the people being included on the figures for hospitalised 'with' Covid. That isn't the reason they're in hospital though and as you say, they aren't ill with Covid, just +ve.

Apparently around 23% of those in hospital 'with' Covid are not there 'for' Covid but for other reasons. I'd like to think this is one reason why the numbers of hospitalised cases among the vaccinated can seem high. Does strike me as a ridiculous way of reporting the figures when they're trying to overcome vaccine hesitancy. Feeds anti vaxxers arguments.

Likely accurate but now historic in that more recent deaths don't appear to be mainly among the elderly and people are still reacting to whatever the BBC says they should day by day. Yesterday's outrage is easy forgotten it seems when replaced by today's headline.

Correct. If you are contacted by text or phone you must self-isolate. Not the case if you are pinged by the app, that's advisory.

It always has been advice rather than law and it hasn't been a secret.

All you need is NHS login details for somebody who is vaccinated. I'm sure there will be plenty happy to rent that out - everything has a price.

It does appear that the policy now is to shift blame. How on earth they think mandatory vaccination for entry into certain venues/events is workable I really can't work out. Best guess is that it's a ploy to 'encourage' greater take up and he can then announce later it won't be necessary. If it goes ahead I will be interested to see the going rate for forged documents.

Anything I'm reading suggests the Beta variant is more likely than the Delta to get around vaccines. I've seen reports that even the AZ is reasonably effective against severe disease with the Delta.

To be fair it could be weeks since I saw either Whitty or one of the spokesmen saying they had to be very careful with vaccine safety in children and the risks from Covid in youngsters weren't great enough to vaccinate.

The benefit of reduction in transmission is undeniable TJ. One catastrophic vaccine reaction would though be a PR nightmare.