Getting recreation and leisure up and running again.

I think that's under-selling the vaccines. Most people who have two doses and waited the extra couple of weeks will be 'immune' from the current strains of the virus. A portion won't be fully immune, but it does seem as if the minority who aren't immune will still get decent protection. New strains may reduce the proportion who are immune, and the level of protection, which is why it's important we reduce the overall incidence of disease, because new strains only appear in infected people.

And of course no one person can be sure whether they are part of the 10% of people who don't get full immunity from the vaccine, so everyone needs to stay careful until there is herd immunity. That's before we mention whether or not an 'immune' person can still transmit the disease. It's likely transmission will be substantially reduced, but we need to see a lot more real world data before they can make meaningful predictions.

That's not actually that different from other vaccines, but this is the first time that we've had this level of national debate on the efficacy and effectiveness of vaccines, and the first time in a long time that we've been trying to create herd immunity from scratch while a virus is prevalent in the community. 

A one in ten chance of not being immune is worth considering when 1 in 100 people have a virus, but practically irrelevant when it's 1 in 10,000,000.

I had my rubella vaccine as a teenager, and no-one bothered to explain that it's just 95% effective, presumably because enough people have the vaccine to mean that there is hardly any German Measles in the population these days. It's still a notifiable disease, which means if you get it your GP is required by law to tell public health officials so they can take action if there is an outbreak. 

Point being, most socially distanced shows were run at a break even or loss, it's been proven not to be financially sustainable, so to get theatres running back at full capacity there needs to be something more effective than just social distancing in place.

100 people in a pub (generous) vs 1500 in a theatre - the chances of being in an enclosed space for a greater incubation period with someone cov+ is inherently much higher in a theatre. 

Pubs can limit their capacity much more effectively in a far greater financially viable way than theatres, so they are bound to be open first.

I always wonder how effective stuff like this is, especially as my local council repaved a couple of the shopping streets claiming it would bring more visitors to the town. 

When I used to be able to visit London, the only times I ever used to go to Oxford Street was to visit HMV. Is it particularly cluttered? I don’t remember it being one of those streets with loads of flowerbeds or benches.

Widening the pavements would help the congestion, but would they not be better off just pedestrianising a section of it?

Very intrigued by the “giant” hill at Marble Arch idea.

Multiple folk have tried with Oxford St over the years. I favour pedestrianisation, terminating buses at both end of the street.

I also favour pedestrianisation of Old Compton St but Mizhog Westminster Council says it would lead to a rise in crime *coughs* homophobia!

Great article from What's On Stage:

A new musical with Wendi Peters is being staged at Southwark Playhouse either inn person or streamed.

www.whatsonstage.com/london-theatre/news/you-are-here-wendi-peters-musical-southwark_53400.html

I found this article interesting. Shows currently being sold without social distanced seating for the not too distant future may want to give it some thought. www.thestage.co.uk/news/audience-confidence-knocked-by-lockdown-and-new-variants-survey-suggests

Good in theory but this line
“ But for nightclubs and theatres, a five minute test conducted on entrance could now be viable with the new technology.”
This doesn’t work.....

Let’s say you’re queuing for a nightclub/theatre in central london having travelled in by train/tube - and test positive at the door - how do you get home without using public transport and potentially putting people at risk?

What I’m saying is, how would you travel back home without getting on public transport and without getting in a cab if you tested positive? I thought lateral flow tests for employers were getting done at home.

Horrible visions of covid-positive people screaming at the FOH house staff when denied entry, thus spreading covid even more.

Oh look, we’re in fantasy land again for the magical COVID test.

For example, let's say on Day 1, you were exposed to COVID-19 but didn't realize it. You happen to get tested the next day, but you don't have enough viral load in your system for it to register.

Then, anytime between Day 3 and Day 5, you enter the incubation phase. Although you're not showing any symptoms, you're still contagious, you can transmit the virus 24 to 72 hours before you experience any symptoms.

A negative test at the door is not a 100% your safe badge to be around 500 people, inside for over 2 hours.