Coronavirus Thread

[BKLFox]

31 minutes ago, stix said:

The only ‘evidence’ I can offer is the fact that at my child’s school, the whole of Year 7, 6/8 classes in Year 8 & the whole of Year 9 are currently self isolating. 

it sounds dramatic but is that because there is a such a high + count or is it down to the fact there aren't now enough teachers to cover the year periods?
My daughters school for today only the whole of year 10 are off but its down to teacher availability not because the whole of year 10 have reported + or been in contact with + cases.

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, bmt said:

I don't think to criticise something you need to have a better alternative.

 

However, I think here there would be a myriad of different responses but the key differences with what the government has done with all of them would be:

- Clear messages to the population to avoid confusion, and no mixed messages 

- A spelled out end game for any new restrictions and rules (what the rules aim for and how it will achieve it) 

- Evidence that a proper cost-benefit analysis has been done and decisions aren't being made based on media hype 

- A unified approach which doesn't try to shift blame to groups of the public (eg. students)

- An equitable response which doesn't prioritise London ahead of other places

 

For me there have always been two preferable paths which the government could have taken but haven't:

1. Very strict initial lockdown to get domestic cases down to near-zero, strict track and trace, complete halt on most international activities/travel and very harsh testing/quarantining where travel is unavoidable. Similar to NZ, China, areas of Asia. End game: wait until a vaccine is produced whilst accepting economic contraction in areas such as airlines etc. Pros: low deaths, very protective of population. Cons: sharp shocks to the economy, life comes to complete standstill during the initial harsh lockdown.

2. Very strict protection of vulnerable groups whilst letting lower risk groups act similar to normal albeit with masks, capacity limits on things, and testing to control spread. Similar to what Sweden intended to do but they messed it up. Pros: economy is mostly protected. Cons: higher deaths, life would be hell for vulnerable groups, NHS may become overwhelmed if spread is quicker than intended.

 

We have done mixes of both with no clear evidence as to why, and no clear end game. Pros: you can say you've tried to protect health and the economy. Cons: does nothing to protect health or the economy. Too much importance is placed on trying to retain political power and not enough on what is good for the country in the long term.

 

 

No, you don't have to have a better alternative or even any alternative at all, but it does make ones argument much more credible. So your response is much further ahead of the usual discourse we've had on here about the topic and if this had been said a long time ago it would have made that particular point of view look much better.

 

For what it's worth I totally agree that the UK government had only a couple of choices, tried to combine them to be all things to all people, and messed it up horribly.

 

NB. I can't speak for other places, but over here, while there has been a lot of economic strife, the effects haven't been felt nearly as badly by people as a lot of other places who have taken a more hands off approach, as far as I can tell.

 

 

11 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

Out of interest, when will some of you say 'enough is enough'? Or will you do everything the government tells you to do even if it makes absolutely no sense? Yes, I'll be that guy. It lockdowns work, why would you put places in a higher tier than they were before? (I'll await some response about not undoing our hard work)

 

It's very important to ask questions when there is our freedom and livelihoods involved. 

...when someone has come up with reasonable alternative suggestions that don't cripple the NHS rather than just soundbite criticism, which the above poster did very eloquently.

 

Asking questions is fine. Not supplying an answer of one's own doesn't look as good, as per above.

[dsr-burnley]

16 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

Out of interest, when will some of you say 'enough is enough'? Or will you do everything the government tells you to do even if it makes absolutely no sense? Yes, I'll be that guy. It lockdowns work, why would you put places in a higher tier than they were before? (I'll await some response about not undoing our hard work)

 

It's very important to ask questions when there is our freedom and livelihoods involved. 

What surprises me is that there are still a significant number of people who say that the reason we're still in lockdown is because people have not been following the rules.

 

It's not that I disagree people have been ignoring the rules, but that there are people who genuinely believe that the government knows what it is doing and has set rules that would have stopped the epidemic if they had been followed.  Whatever anyone's political persuasion, I am surprised that anyone thinks the government has been competent and amazed that they think even a competent government would have made much difference.

 

As for lockdown, the government has a default position.  It is that lockdown works and is the best and only solution.  And if cases drop, it proves lockdown is working so we need more of it, and if cases rise, it proves we haven't got enough lockdown so we need more of it.  They are so certain of those "facts" that they do not see any need to test the figures or explore alternatives.

[stix]

3 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

it sounds dramatic but is that because there is a such a high + count or is it down to the fact there aren't now enough teachers to cover the year periods?
My daughters school for today only the whole of year 10 are off but its down to teacher availability not because the whole of year 10 have reported + or been in contact with + cases.

I think it’s mainly down to positive cases. Students and Staff members, more likely a mixture of cases and staff availability though. I am surprised they didn’t shutdown the school for 2 weeks when it spiked there. Deep clean, keep all of the kids at home, then go again. 

[BKLFox]

1 hour ago, bmt said:

I don't think to criticise something you need to have a better alternative.

 

However, I think here there would be a myriad of different responses but the key differences with what the government has done with all of them would be:

- Clear messages to the population to avoid confusion, and no mixed messages 

- A spelled out end game for any new restrictions and rules (what the rules aim for and how it will achieve it) 

- Evidence that a proper cost-benefit analysis has been done and decisions aren't being made based on media hype 

- A unified approach which doesn't try to shift blame to groups of the public (eg. students)

- An equitable response which doesn't prioritise London ahead of other places

 

For me there have always been two preferable paths which the government could have taken but haven't:

1. Very strict initial lockdown to get domestic cases down to near-zero, strict track and trace, complete halt on most international activities/travel and very harsh testing/quarantining where travel is unavoidable. Similar to NZ, China, areas of Asia. End game: wait until a vaccine is produced whilst accepting economic contraction in areas such as airlines etc. Pros: low deaths, very protective of population. Cons: sharp shocks to the economy, life comes to complete standstill during the initial harsh lockdown.

2. Very strict protection of vulnerable groups whilst letting lower risk groups act similar to normal albeit with masks, capacity limits on things, and testing to control spread. Similar to what Sweden intended to do but they messed it up. Pros: economy is mostly protected. Cons: higher deaths, life would be hell for vulnerable groups, NHS may become overwhelmed if spread is quicker than intended.

 

We have done mixes of both with no clear evidence as to why, and no clear end game. Pros: you can say you've tried to protect health and the economy. Cons: does nothing to protect health or the economy. Too much importance is placed on trying to retain political power and not enough on what is good for the country in the long term.

 

 

Look about 6 posts up from yours, @leicsmac lives in SK & they did much of what your preferable path would be but its still there & rising currently yes they have a little more freedom currently but its not a case of ying & yang on how much of this is panning out.

The up shot of all this is that there are 2 options lockdowns or no lockdowns both come with their own set of problems.

[Buce]

11 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

Out of interest, when will some of you say 'enough is enough'? Or will you do everything the government tells you to do even if it makes absolutely no sense? Yes, I'll be that guy. It lockdowns work, why would you put places in a higher tier than they were before? (I'll await some response about not undoing our hard work)

 

It's very important to ask questions when there is our freedom and livelihoods involved. 

 

I feel like I'm getting that way, tbh. There doesn't appear to be any kind of joined-up thinking to the measures the govt are adopting, and that's been the case from day 1. It's not a coincidence that we have had more deaths than anywhere in Europe while simultaneously seeing more economic damage than anywhere bar Spain.

 

Johnson is trying to be all things to all people. A country needs a strong, competent leader in a time of national crisis, but unfortunately we have a weak-willed, incompetent buffoon at the helm.

[BKLFox]

4 minutes ago, stix said:

I think it’s mainly down to positive cases. Students and Staff members, more likely a mixture of cases and staff availability though. I am surprised they didn’t shutdown the school for 2 weeks when it spiked there. Deep clean, keep all of the kids at home, then go again. 

agree especially that 3 of i guess 5 year groups + 6th form(?) are self isolating, unless they think this is best as now they have just the GCSE & A level students in the school which kinda makes sense?
Edit:- I see they also have year 10 in, maybe it would make sense to kick year 10 out also so they just have the GCSE & A level as my initial thought.

Edited 27 November 2020 by BKLFox

[MonmoreStef]

51 minutes ago, stix said:

The only ‘evidence’ I can offer is the fact that at my child’s school, the whole of Year 7, 6/8 classes in Year 8 & the whole of Year 9 are currently self isolating. 

I think the government said themselves back in the summer that there would be a trade off and the pubs/hospitality would be closed to reduce the upsurge in cases when the schools reopened. It’s going to be a long winter now.  Such a shame I couldn’t be in a pub for the last minute equaliser last night   

[Leicester_Loyal]

1 hour ago, bmt said:

I don't think to criticise something you need to have a better alternative.

 

However, I think here there would be a myriad of different responses but the key differences with what the government has done with all of them would be:

- Clear messages to the population to avoid confusion, and no mixed messages 

- A spelled out end game for any new restrictions and rules (what the rules aim for and how it will achieve it) 

- Evidence that a proper cost-benefit analysis has been done and decisions aren't being made based on media hype 

- A unified approach which doesn't try to shift blame to groups of the public (eg. students)

- An equitable response which doesn't prioritise London ahead of other places

 

For me there have always been two preferable paths which the government could have taken but haven't:

1. Very strict initial lockdown to get domestic cases down to near-zero, strict track and trace, complete halt on most international activities/travel and very harsh testing/quarantining where travel is unavoidable. Similar to NZ, China, areas of Asia. End game: wait until a vaccine is produced whilst accepting economic contraction in areas such as airlines etc. Pros: low deaths, very protective of population. Cons: sharp shocks to the economy, life comes to complete standstill during the initial harsh lockdown.

2. Very strict protection of vulnerable groups whilst letting lower risk groups act similar to normal albeit with masks, capacity limits on things, and testing to control spread. Similar to what Sweden intended to do but they messed it up. Pros: economy is mostly protected. Cons: higher deaths, life would be hell for vulnerable groups, NHS may become overwhelmed if spread is quicker than intended.

 

We have done mixes of both with no clear evidence as to why, and no clear end game. Pros: you can say you've tried to protect health and the economy. Cons: does nothing to protect health or the economy. Too much importance is placed on trying to retain political power and not enough on what is good for the country in the long term.

 

 

Great post.

 

The international travel was key for me, we were just allowing people to come back over here without testing them and then we weren't even making sure they were quarantining. It's absolutely batshit crazy that the Track & Trace system is still so poor, they've had 9 months to sort this out! Yes it won't ever be perfect, but it should be performing a lot better than it currently is.

[Alf Bentley]

9 hours ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

I'm in Notts and we're in tier 3. We're below national average and only went bananas with infections when the unis came back and were mass tested. It stinks if you ask me, more and more I'm starting to agree with Mr YouTube conspiricy theorist Bell end. It's hard not to see this as some sort of mental breakdown when that's what it is. 

 

16 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

Out of interest, when will some of you say 'enough is enough'? Or will you do everything the government tells you to do even if it makes absolutely no sense? Yes, I'll be that guy. It lockdowns work, why would you put places in a higher tier than they were before? (I'll await some response about not undoing our hard work)

 

It's very important to ask questions when there is our freedom and livelihoods involved. 

 

We're currently averaging about 400+ deaths per day, almost 3000 per week, not to mention an unknown number surviving with long-term damage.

Fortunately, those figures should dip again shortly, now that infection rates are falling and hospitalisation figures leveling off, due to lockdown. 

 

However, under the new tiering system, non-essential shops are opening again - in time for Christmas shopping crowds. The Govt has also announced a relaxation over Christmas. A lot of people will meet family/friends and use public transport.

There alone you have ways in which further infections are baked in - which argues for a stricter approach in other ways, particularly in winter when more people fall ill of other causes and need hospitalisation.

 

I don't do everything the Govt tells me to do. I didn't vote for this Govt. I think it's done a disastrous job of handling the pandemic in many ways. But adopting a strict approach in these circumstances is correct. In fact, I think they have adopted too lax an approach re. the 23rd-27th December relaxation and some of us will pay for that with our lives or the lives of those close to us in Jan/Feb.

 

As for why some places are in higher tiers than before:

- Some have infection rates that are still high (Manchester, Leicester) or that have risen recently (Kent, Bristol)

- Some have hospitals under pressure (Devon)

- There are other factors in the calculation that I know less about: e.g. consideration of infection rates among over-60s

- Plus the new tiering system relaxes some activities (shops, gyms, hairdressers) so, when Covid is still a massive danger, it makes sense to be strict with other activities

 

I appreciate that some people are in a more difficult situation than me (I work from home anyway) but that's an argument for better Govt support for people and businesses that are struggling, particularly as the vaccine is on the horizon.

I absolutely support criticism of the Govt strategy on that score.

 

When will I say "enough is enough"? Well, vaccination is expected to be rolled out by the spring for the most vulnerable, so showing patience until then seems entirely reasonable, to protect lives and health - who knows, it might even be the life or health of someone you care about.

[Mickyblueeyes]

Figures from yesterday.
 

The latest seven-day infection rates, area by area, are:

• Leicester: 400 cases per 100,000
• Blaby: 342.8 cases per 100,000
• Charnwood: 238.4 cases per 100,000
• Harborough: 284.6 cases per 100,000
• Hinckley and Bosworth: 242.2 cases per 100,000
• Melton: 269.5 cases per 100,000
• North West Leicestershire: 287.6 cases per 100,000
• Oadby and Wigston: 422.7 cases per 100,000

Of a total of 387 new infections added to overall tolls in the past 24 hours, 182 were in Leicester, while the remaining 205 cases were spread across the county. 

Oadby and Wigston added another 41 cases, while there 39 new cases in Blaby and 34 in Charnwood.

 

O&W, Leicester (city) and Blaby look like they remain “problem” areas. 

[Leicester_Loyal]

3 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

Figures from yesterday.
 

The latest seven-day infection rates, area by area, are:

• Leicester: 400 cases per 100,000
• Blaby: 342.8 cases per 100,000
• Charnwood: 238.4 cases per 100,000
• Harborough: 284.6 cases per 100,000
• Hinckley and Bosworth: 242.2 cases per 100,000
• Melton: 269.5 cases per 100,000
• North West Leicestershire: 287.6 cases per 100,000
• Oadby and Wigston: 422.7 cases per 100,000

Of a total of 387 new infections added to overall tolls in the past 24 hours, 182 were in Leicester, while the remaining 205 cases were spread across the county. 

Oadby and Wigston added another 41 cases, while there 39 new cases in Blaby and 34 in Charnwood.

 

O&W, Leicester (city) and Blaby look like they remain “problem” areas. 

Be interested to see the Charnwood numbers once Lough Uni students go home for 4 weeks for Christmas.

 

Someone earlier was asking me about the end game of all this, I can't see any other way out now until a vaccine is successfully dished out, hopefully that's by March/April, but I've got absolutely zero confidence in the Government managing to achieve that. It would be nice if we could have a normal summer after wasting nearly a year of our lives.

[ealingfox]

46 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

Out of interest, when will some of you say 'enough is enough'? Or will you do everything the government tells you to do even if it makes absolutely no sense? Yes, I'll be that guy. It lockdowns work, why would you put places in a higher tier than they were before? (I'll await some response about not undoing our hard work)

 

It's very important to ask questions when there is our freedom and livelihoods involved. 

 

When you say stuff like this, what are you actually going to do?

 

Break into a pub and pour yourself a drink? Take up arms and launch a rebellion against the Crown?

 

It's all bollocks, we know that. But aside from going to see your friends and family, which nobody else gives a toss about, what sort of responses are you expecting?

[Guest Harrydc]

1 minute ago, ealingfox said:

 

When you say stuff like this, what are you actually going to do?

 

Break into a pub and pour yourself a drink? Take up arms and launch a rebellion against the Crown?

 

It's all bollocks, we know that. But aside from going to see your friends and family, which nobody else gives a toss about, what sort of responses are you expecting?

It's amazing how people think this is all we want. I haven't been able to work properly since March. When I did get the opportunity to work again, my shifts were cut down massively and I hardly had any money coming in. Then, we shut down again when we went in to Tier 3 to then go in to another lockdown. After the lockdown, we are still in Tier 3 so yet again I cannot go to work - even if its for my own sanity of getting out the house. 

[ealingfox]

2 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

It's amazing how people think this is all we want. I haven't been able to work properly since March. When I did get the opportunity to work again, my shifts were cut down massively and I hardly had any money coming in. Then, we shut down again when we went in to Tier 3 to then go in to another lockdown. After the lockdown, we are still in Tier 3 so yet again I cannot go to work - even if its for my own sanity of getting out the house. 

 

I suppose it must look that way when you highlight one sentence and ignore the rest. What do you actually expect ordinary people to do to solve your problem?

[leicsmac]

25 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

Look about 6 posts up from yours, @leicsmac lives in SK & they did much of what your preferable path would be but its still there & rising currently yes they have a little more freedom currently but its not a case of ying & yang on how much of this is panning out.

The up shot of all this is that there are 2 options lockdowns or no lockdowns both come with their own set of problems.

To add further clarity to this and my own posts above, what Korea did well right at the start was hunting down the first outbreaks and jumping on them as soon as they first arrived, and having a Track and Trace system all ready to go to back it up. Through that, they've been able to get through all this without anything approaching what could be called a lockdown because the number of cases has never really got out of control. There has been a certain amount of economic damage, but not nearly to the degree of other placesand a lot of businesses have survived - some through timely government help.

 

Of course, we're currently hitting what would be called a third wave and things could yet spiral (especially as this particular one isn't quite so localised as the others have been) but the authorities over here have been doing the right thing so far in terms of being able to balance fighting this thing while keeping the economy at least viable.

 

3 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

It's amazing how people think this is all we want. I haven't been able to work properly since March. When I did get the opportunity to work again, my shifts were cut down massively and I hardly had any money coming in. Then, we shut down again when we went in to Tier 3 to then go in to another lockdown. After the lockdown, we are still in Tier 3 so yet again I cannot go to work - even if its for my own sanity of getting out the house. 

That is a problem with government aid to business, not an argument that restrictions aren't necessary to contain the virus itself.

 

What should be done?

[Samilktray]

Have they turned off the track & trace app now? I haven’t had a phantom notification in weeks disappointingly, always found it quite exciting when 1 came through. Have I or haven’t I been around the infected, what a bloody rush 

[Rain King]

2 hours ago, Samilktray said:

Have they turned off the track & trace app now? I haven’t had a phantom notification in weeks disappointingly, always found it quite exciting when 1 came through. Have I or haven’t I been around the infected, what a bloody rush 

Same. I had a stage where I got the 'nothing to worry about' notification about 10 times in a two week period. Had nothing since.

[StriderHiryu]

[Costock_Fox]

18 minutes ago, Rain King said:

Same. I had a stage where I got the 'nothing to worry about' notification about 10 times in a two week period. Had nothing since.

Means you have everything to worry about. COVID-19 ITS COMING FOR YOU

[Alf Bentley]

23 minutes ago, Costock_Fox said:

Means you have everything to worry about. COVID-19 ITS COMING FOR YOU

 

"Coming for you"?

 

If COVID-19 is basing its pursuit on the SPURS-16 virus, we have nothing to worry about....

[String fellow]

32 minutes ago, Costock_Fox said:

Means you have everything to worry about. COVID-19 ITS COMING FOR YOU

Does this message mean that I'm no longer scaremonger-in-chief? Btw, why do reporters bother reporting from borders between two areas in different tiers? The tiering system inherently involves having borders.

[Costock_Fox]

26 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

"Coming for you"?

 

If COVID-19 is basing its pursuit on the SPURS-16 virus, we have nothing to worry about....

Well if it finishes 3rd I’m not looking forward to the other 2 that beat it.

[Leicester_Loyal]

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-what-counts-as-a-substantial-meal-how-rules-on-pub-drinking-could-work-in-tier-2-12143814

 

'However, on Friday an official spokesperson for the prime minister said drinkers will have to leave the premises once they have finished their food.'

[Samilktray]

3 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-what-counts-as-a-substantial-meal-how-rules-on-pub-drinking-could-work-in-tier-2-12143814

 

'However, on Friday an official spokesperson for the prime minister said drinkers will have to leave the premises once they have finished their food.'

Gonna have to work your way through about 10 plates of cheesy chips just to have a substantial night out