Coronavirus Thread

[Rain King]

18 minutes ago, Md9 said:

They are doing a news conference today on this do they normally do this on Saturday or they doing it to plan on locking down ASAP 

Wonder if it's anything to do with schools?

Most of the country except Leicester are due back on Monday after half-term aren't they?

[Guest Fktf]

1 hour ago, dsr-burnley said:

"similar public health tactics" - similar to what?  I have no idea of any similar coronavirus issue that we are being compared to.

 

I'm not drawing conclusions, apart from the obvious conclusion that they don't really know what they are doing.  I don't think there is sound scientific evidence that lockdown in the style proposed now will make any practical difference.  There is every possibility that the net effect, lives saved versus lives lost, will be negative.  And I reckon that before we go back to a policy which will certainly cost a load of jobs and which will reduce the NHS and other public spending budget for many years to come, we need to be reasonably certain that it will solve the specific problem it's trying to solve.

 

Social distancing, OK.  Masks and 2 metre spacing, OK.  But banning people from seeing their families while allowing working people to go out to work and children to go to school?  Have they any evidence that that makes a significant difference compared with social distancing, masks, allowing work, and allowing people to see their grandchildren?

Look up the flu pandemic plan. It mentions social distancing, and that if those measures don't work, it might become a necessity to close schools, reduce household contacts. It's all evidence based.

 

You can see also see patterns of various restrictions (or lack of) altering the course of Spanish flu. In the USA, some states closed theatres and other indoor venues, and did remarkably well. Others kept indoor things open and did very bad. Some closed indoor venues, decided they'd beat the virus, and had a massive wave of infection when everything reopened. All that evidence points to restrictions slowing the virus down.

 

If you want to say, politically, I think we should try a different approach because lockdown has negative knocking on effects that outweigh controlling the virus - fine, that's a value judgement that people will argue about all day. But you've been questioning whether lockdowns actually work to control spread of a virus, and all the evidence posted to yes, of course is they do.

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

09.40 EDT

Prof Sir Simon Wessely, the director of King’s College London’s health protection research unit in emergency preparedness and response, says there is no right time for a lockdown.

He said:

Great harm results from not locking down, and great harm results from locking down. Either option is a dreadful one, and we should refrain from saying ‘I told you so’, and accept that lockdown is a political, and not solely a medical, decision.

The costs of a full lockdown are by now predictable – a further deterioration in mental health, greater and more long-lasting damage to people’s livelihoods and future prospects, especially if they are young, and further damage for those with other illnesses, both mental and physical.

Nor does it seem that our close neighbours have a magic formula that has somehow eluded us. All we can do now is support each other, which might include those who find it harder to comply with new restrictions at all times, and trust that, come the spring, there is more hope from either vaccines, an effective track-and-trace system, or sufficient (even if temporary) immunity, because otherwise this whole ghastly saga will repeat itself once more.
 

Sums the whole sorry situation up.

[Md9]

4 minutes ago, Rain King said:

Wonder if it's anything to do with schools?

Most of the country except Leicester are due back on Monday after half-term aren't they?

Yeah could be wouldn’t have thought they would close them though. Don’t mind if they do for a few weeks, I know the Mrs will disagree 🙈

[martyn]

13 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

09.40 EDT

Prof Sir Simon Wessely, the director of King’s College London’s health protection research unit in emergency preparedness and response, says there is no right time for a lockdown.

He said:

Great harm results from not locking down, and great harm results from locking down. Either option is a dreadful one, and we should refrain from saying ‘I told you so’, and accept that lockdown is a political, and not solely a medical, decision.

The costs of a full lockdown are by now predictable – a further deterioration in mental health, greater and more long-lasting damage to people’s livelihoods and future prospects, especially if they are young, and further damage for those with other illnesses, both mental and physical.

Nor does it seem that our close neighbours have a magic formula that has somehow eluded us. All we can do now is support each other, which might include those who find it harder to comply with new restrictions at all times, and trust that, come the spring, there is more hope from either vaccines, an effective track-and-trace system, or sufficient (even if temporary) immunity, because otherwise this whole ghastly saga will repeat itself once more.
 

Sums the whole sorry situation up.

This is true as a basic "lockdowns are good and bad" observation, however there is quite a lot you can do to affect the eventual outcome.

 

Working test and trace, locking down earlier for shorter periods so you dont have to end up doing it for longer to get rates down etc etc. 

 

Ultimately, we will look at number of deaths per capita, and economic damage sustained as a measure of "success" and we will be pretty low in both lists, i suspect. Brexit will make for a convenient excuse for the economic fallout though. 

 

 

[martyn]

2 minutes ago, martyn said:

This is true as a basic "lockdowns are good and bad" observation, however there is quite a lot you can do to affect the eventual outcome. 

 

Working test and trace, locking down earlier for shorter periods so you dont have to end up doing it for longer to get rates down etc etc. 

 

Ultimately, we will look at number of deaths per capita, and economic damage sustained as a measure of "success" and we will be pretty low in both lists, i suspect. Brexit will make for a convenient excuse for the economic fallout though. 

 

 

 

[yorkie1999]

1 hour ago, FLAN said:

People being unwilling to do their bit is a major issue. My daughters school asked all parents to wear a mask on site weeks ago. I went there yesterday and maybe 30% had one on. Risk may well be low but the fact so many think **** it I’m not doing it is one of the big issues. 
seems a lot don’t care until it affects them personally 

this is why modern attitudes of i'm alright jack  and the snowflake society we live in stinks. How about the headmaster standing outside and telling them, if you're not wearing a mask, your child's not coming in and if you don't like it, tough titties, go and cry to your Councillor.

[Zear0]

PM brief is now 5pm. Not doing well on the organisational front are they. 

Edited 31 October 2020 by Zear0
Rogue full stop

[leicsmac]

The US through the six-figure barrier for the first time.

 

104,405 cases in one day.

[Pliskin]

The thing I want to know is what is the end game? We know there is no vaccine available and won’t be universally for some time, so do we just carry on locking down when the infections inevitably rise again? 
 

Protecting the NHS is important, but so is the economy, there’s a fine balancing act that’s needed to be done, do we continue as we are accepting that the virus won’t be going anywhere until there is a large scale vaccine available, or do we just keep locking down every time the cases rise?

 

I don’t think you can have both can you? Can we keep the NHS protected and protect the economy? 

[st albans fox]

2 hours ago, Nod.E said:

The irony is lost on you that the conservatives have been underfunding and privatising the NHS for years.

not lost on me - I know where you’re coming from but your post was a large generalisation 
 

2 hours ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

Theyre literallt always full this time.of year, its what happens when you severely underfund the NHS

Yes I’m afraid we have been working the NHS close to capacity for years  - it’s the model we have and as long as we dont have a pandemic it jus Bakst works 

 

2 hours ago, Corky said:

It'll be here from Monday, a load of waving of arms, probably a new slogan, not answering questions and little detail.

not sure it can be Monday - parliament has to vote on a lockdown 
 

45 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

A national lockdown won't make much of a dent if schools and universities are still in play. They are sites of huge transmission. 

if lectures can mainly be online then keeping thousands of 18-22 year olds living together isn’t such a bad idea 
 

19 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

this is why modern attitudes of i'm alright jack  and the snowflake society we live in stinks. How about the headmaster standing outside and telling them, if you're not wearing a mask, your child's not coming in and if you don't like it, tough titties, go and cry to your Councillor.

100% - too many don’t care for the rules but are the first to moan when things go awry and more restrictions are brought in .....

 

[Md9]

1 hour ago, FLAN said:

People being unwilling to do their bit is a major issue. My daughters school asked all parents to wear a mask on site weeks ago. I went there yesterday and maybe 30% had one on. Risk may well be low but the fact so many think **** it I’m not doing it is one of the big issues. 
seems a lot don’t care until it affects them personally 

I took the kids to school on Friday as I had booked it off and it is ridiculous the amount of people not wearing masks after being told everyone should wear them. Same people that moan about everything and would moan if their kids caught something from school 

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

Robert Preston has “announced” the whole of England to move into a new tier 4. 

[Leicester_Loyal]

 

[The Syrup]

All hospitality and non essential shops to close for a month as pet breaking news on the BBC

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

Sky’s Beth Rigby has also been given a briefing on what to expect.

She said:

I’ve been told that all of England is into tier four. It will mean that all pubs and restaurants have to close. All shops will close apart from non-essential retail, but as I understand it supermarkets will still be able to sell nonessential goods. There will be no mixing inside homes. In terms of what can continue: schools and universities and colleges all will remain open. Courts will remain open and parliament will remain open.

The idea would be that while we all go into tier 4 for a period of a few weeks. Then we come out of it back into other [existing] tiering system. So different parts of the country will be released from this tier 4 at different periods depending on where they are with the virus.

[Leicester_Loyal]

1 minute ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

Sky’s Beth Rigby has also been given a briefing on what to expect.

She said:

I’ve been told that all of England is into tier four. It will mean that all pubs and restaurants have to close. All shops will close apart from non-essential retail, but as I understand it supermarkets will still be able to sell nonessential goods. There will be no mixing inside homes. In terms of what can continue: schools and universities and colleges all will remain open. Courts will remain open and parliament will remain open.

The idea would be that while we all go into tier 4 for a period of a few weeks. Then we come out of it back into other [existing] tiering system. So different parts of the country will be released from this tier 4 at different periods depending on where they are with the virus.

Basically loads of places will be like this right up until Christmas, probably longer. They might just allow mixing households on Christmas day etc.

 

Remember when the first lockdown was only for 3 weeks?

[Stevosevic]

What's the end game?

 

Is there any evidence that shopping and hospitality are driving the increase in numbers?

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

I hope support bubbles still remain 

[rachhere]

2 hours ago, Line-X said:

Universities can and have for many courses transferred teaching online, although for some, there will always be a higher practical component to teaching than others. How do you train a nurse, physiotherapist, paramedic, biomedical scientist, automotive engineer solely online and via distance learning? Most institutions have done a very commendable job introducing measures on campus, but thousands of students from both national and international origins concentrating on one city center is inviting disaster. This is a political decision, since universities are economic dynamos and generate such significant income for local commerce. The institutions themselves are eager to maintain physical presence and proximity of students - (although remember in the case of some Modern Universities - in particular, DMU, Coventry and Trent, a high proportion of students are locally domiciled). This is because they want to charge full tuition fees and fear discounts. They also have contractual obligations to ancillary services and businesses such as catering and accommodation. This at a time that Brexit threatens to decimate the European applications revenue and with increasing emphasis upon degree apprenticeships and FE. This is a competitive marketplace. Remove students from campuses and it will decimate Higher Education along with many other sectors that are currently being ravaged. 

 

I think that where possible though - Semester 2 and 3 should be entirely online and campuses closed to students unless their course demands otherwise. Particularly since the return after Christmas will be an explosion and judging by the rhetoric coming out of Westminster, we are on the cusp of another full National lockdown which I think is imminent in the New Year. 

I am still doing teaching in person which can 100% be done online - I can say that with certainty as we are running a dual offer, so overseas students attend online sessions and home students attend campus based. Apparently what we are offering is in line with what the government has asked universities to do. 

[Leicester_Loyal]

These are the measures to be announced by the PM at 5, as I understand it. They will begin at 0001 Thursday 5 November and last until 2 December. And they are, In effect, a new “Tier 4” that will be imposed for a month initially to the whole of England.

1) All pubs and restaurants to close, though takeaways and deliveries will be permitted.
2) All non-essential retail to close, though supermarkets won't have to follow the Welsh example of fencing off non-essential goods.
3) There will be no mixing of people inside homes, except for childcare and other forms of support
4) Manufacturing and construction will be encouraged to keep going.
5) Outbound international travel will be banned, except for work.
6) Travel within the UK will be discouraged, except for work.
7) Overnight stays away from home will be allowed only for work purposes
8) Courts, schools, and universities will remain open
9) Outdoor exercise and recreation will be encouraged.
10) Private prayer will continue in places of worship, but not services.

After 2 December, the exit strategy is that different parts of the country will then have their local economies and behaviour governed by the existing Tiers, namely Tiers 1 to 3, depending on how serious the virus is in these respective places.

[reynard]

7 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

What's the end game?

 

Is there any evidence that shopping and hospitality are driving the increase in numbers?

Not really in the form of shops or museums. Absolute disaster for these sectors.

[RowlattsFox]

I predict it will be extended until Christmas where they will allow one household to mix. Probably close schools from 2nd December in an extended Christmas holiday. 

 

Don't see how enough can change in 4 weeks to mean we can open up again. I'd be delighted if we have a bit more freedom in December but I can't see it.

[rachhere]

9 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

I hope support bubbles still remain 

They best do. I will be seeing my best local buddy who lives on his own, whatever they say. We always stay outdoors anyway (going for local walks) and the evidence shows the risks of transmission outdoors is really low. 

 

[Corky]

A real shame for those businesses who've put in so much effort to put in one-way systems, distancing and to make a tough situation bearable.

 

I hope they are properly compensated.