Coronavirus Thread

[Facecloth]

13 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

So if nothing has changed, why has the alert level moved to 5? I'm not disbelieving you when you say nothing has changed, but I thought the decision to close the schools was always going to be a last resort, and therefore pretty last minute? 

What change so drastically that it couldn't be seen the direction we were heading that he be a little proactive. As the post above says, last resort doesn't have to be last minute.

Edited 6 January 2021 by Facecloth

[Facecloth]

 

[Dahnsouff]

Why are people being so convinced that the plan to lock down again was known long ago, but only announced at the last minute?

Surely, recognising the impact of changes made mean this was always going to a last gasp/last minute/last tango announcement?

Maybe I missed some info, apologies if so. 

 

[Facecloth]

5 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Why are people being so convinced that the plan to lock down again was known long ago, but only announced at the last minute?

Surely, recognising the impact of changes made mean this was always going to a last gasp/last minute/last tango announcement?

Maybe I missed some info, apologies if so. 

 

Sage adviced them to shut schools back in the 22nd of December (and that wasn't just for Christmas).

We have had 50k plus cases and rising for weeks, the deaths, and hospital admissions have been rising rapidly too. 

 

Yes we were put in alert level 5 on Sunday, but waiting until you hit that point is surely like applying the breaks as you reach the cliff edge.

Edited 6 January 2021 by Facecloth

[Dahnsouff]

2 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Sage adviced them to shut schools back in the 22nd of December (and that wasn't just for Christmas).

We have had 50k plus cases and riding for weeks, the deaths, and hospital admissions have been rising rapidly too. 

 

Yes we were put in alert level 5 on Sunday, but waiting until you hit that point us surely like applying the breaks as you reach the cliff edge.

Complex problem I would suggest, a blunt close the schools relates to the reduction of transmission in school settings? Where do these kids go? The balancing act is tricky, seen plenty of teenagers, younger, milling about (No, I am not blaming them, it’s a society wide requirement).
 

Are children, certainly secondary school kids supposed to sit tight? Would be great if so, but it’s a real hard problem.

[StanSP]

52 minutes ago, nnfox said:

I thought that the new vaccine worked best with 12 weeks between jabs?  The Pfizer one was two weeks but is more difficult to store and transport.

 

Also, the new one gives greater protection after one jab so they are trying to jab as many as possible in the top 4 groups with their first dose.  I expect it will be into May before many of those get the second dose.

Can understand the 2nd bit in wanting as many people legible and possible getting the first vaccine. But with researchers and scientists who produced the vaccine say the best chance of efficacy is within 21 days (Pfizer) or 28 days (Oxford), surely it's best to try and stick to that? The government very hastily changed the approach to almost ignore those time-frames to make it 12 weeks probably in favour of getting as many people as possible vaccinated with first dose and worry about the 2nd dose later.

[bovril]

Just now, StanSP said:

Can understand the 2nd bit in wanting as many people legible and possible getting the first vaccine. But with researchers and scientists who produced the vaccine say the best chance of efficacy is within 21 days (Pfizer) or 28 days (Oxford), surely it's best to try and stick to that? The government very hastily changed the approach to almost ignore those time-frames to make it 12 weeks probably in favour of getting as many people as possible vaccinated with first dose and worry about the 2nd dose later.

It feels again like we're too hasty to get back to normality and end up ****ing up. 

[Facecloth]

4 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Complex problem I would suggest, a blunt close the schools relates to the reduction of transmission in school settings? Where do these kids go? The balancing act is tricky, seen plenty of teenagers, younger, milling about (No, I am not blaming them, it’s a society wide requirement).
 

Are children, certainly secondary school kids supposed to sit tight? Would be great if so, but it’s a real hard problem.

But what suddenly changed on Sunday apart from the alert level that meant that schools needed shutting immediately? He sat on the Marr show and said they were safe, and then suddenly they are not. The numbers were rising in all factors and suddenly schools became unsafe in 24 hours. 

 

I'm not criticising the shutting of schools, I'm not even criticising waiting until Monday, I'm criticising waiting until Monday to shut them on Tuesday. If they weren't safe, make the decision earlier and shut them before Monday as you can see the number going up. If you really don't want to do it then wait, but give a few days notice before shutting them. What they done is managed to produce the worst of both scenarios.

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, Facecloth said:

But what suddenly changed on Sunday apart from the alert level that meant that schools needed shutting immediately? He sat on the Marr show and said they were safe, and then suddenly they are not. The numbers were rising in all factors and suddenly schools became unsafe in 24 hours. 

 

I'm not criticising the shutting of schools, I'm not even criticising waiting until Monday, I'm criticising waiting until Monday to shut them on Tuesday. If they weren't safe, make the decision earlier and shut them before Monday as you can see the number going up. If you really don't want to do it then wait, but give a few days notice before shutting them. What they done is managed to produce the worst of both scenarios.

You may be right, and they could and should have acted earlier, but perhaps the required data to make the decision only became available over the weekend? I do not mean Sage’s guidance, they would always recommend a lockdown as it saves lives and transmission. However, the decision had to be paid with many factors I would assume, such as unpalatable fiscal damage, mental health. It is already reported the effect lockdown and school closures have on childrens mental health, eating disorders, etc (clearly I am biased being a parent)

[RowlattsFox]

Germany and other European countries are considering delaying the second dose so not like it's Boris's idea. 

[Stevosevic]

4 minutes ago, RowlattsFox said:

Germany and other European countries are considering delaying the second dose so not like it's Boris's idea. 

Yeh. There is no way Boris ever made that decision anyway. 

 

Seems like it will be the norm for more immediate impact 

[Parafox]

15 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

You may be right, and they could and should have acted earlier, but perhaps the required data to make the decision only became available over the weekend? I do not mean Sage’s guidance, they would always recommend a lockdown as it saves lives and transmission. However, the decision had to be paid with many factors I would assume, such as unpalatable fiscal damage, mental health. It is already reported the effect lockdown and school closures have on childrens mental health, eating disorders, etc (clearly I am biased being a parent)

I don't think you're biased. There must be thousands of parents worrying about their children right now. It's in a child's nature to mix and play and interact with other children, to have fun and learn how to build friendships. They can't do that very outside of the school setting. they might have a few friends that they might play with or socialise with away from school but school is where you make your first best friend and often a friend for life. To not have that interaction is damaging as it isolates kids and drives them to solitary pastimes like online games and such. They need to mix with their peers to gain confidence and understanding in how relationships work. 

[Facecloth]

2 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

You may be right, and they could and should have acted earlier, but perhaps the required data to make the decision only became available over the weekend? I do not mean Sage’s guidance, they would always recommend a lockdown as it saves lives and transmission. However, the decision had to be paid with many factors I would assume, such as unpalatable fiscal damage, mental health. It is already reported the effect lockdown and school closures have on childrens mental health, eating disorders, etc (clearly I am biased being a parent)

 

I appreciate that there has to be an official point we reach before schools shut, but what point during Christmas week where everyday we have 50k plus cases, with deaths and hospital cases rising did the Prime Minister decide it was a good idea to go on national TV and declare school safe and that they would be staying open 24 hours before they were due to. Surely they data was heading in a direction that said that was extremely close to no longer being the case, and would have been for days. So maybe just maybe, whilst they were off, and the teachers had time to react, and it wouldn't affect the education as much as complete closure like some have had for the last couple of days, it would have been a good idea to be a bit proactive and at least plant the seed we were heading towards it.

[Legend_in_blue]

23 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Can understand the 2nd bit in wanting as many people legible and possible getting the first vaccine. But with researchers and scientists who produced the vaccine say the best chance of efficacy is within 21 days (Pfizer) or 28 days (Oxford), surely it's best to try and stick to that? The government very hastily changed the approach to almost ignore those time-frames to make it 12 weeks probably in favour of getting as many people as possible vaccinated with first dose and worry about the 2nd dose later.

This is what annoyed me when Whitty attempted to defend this position yesterday.  He said the decision was made on scientific grounds but clearly the science behind the vaccine states the 21 days, not 90 days.  What he is defending is a hunch which he thinks is worth the risk and nothing more.  

 

The problem is govt or SAGE or whichever misinformed group make these decisions, it's irrelevant who it is, they're so far down the rabbit hole of the lockdown mantra and restrictions easing "cases" based on dodgy PCR testing, they won't back out of this now.  It's unfortunate, but when Whitty states there will be restrictions of some sort until next winter, I believe him, because this train of thought is a product of the route they've decided to take.  

 

Meanwhile, until Ferguson is kicked out (imo he's caused more damage than ever Cummings has) this will roll on and on and on.  

[Steve_Walsh5]

Are we in lockdown until mid February or end of March? 

[Dahnsouff]

1 minute ago, Facecloth said:

I appreciate that there has to be an official point we reach before schools shut, but what point during Christmas week where everyday we have 50k plus cases, with deaths and hospital cases rising did the Prime Minister decide it was a good idea to go on national TV and declare school safe and that they would be staying open 24 hours before they were due to. Surely they data was heading in a direction that said that was extremely close to no longer being the case, and would have been for days. So maybe just maybe, whilst they were off, and the teachers had time to react, and it wouldn't affect the education as much as complete closure like some have had for the last couple of days, it would have been a good idea to be a bit proactive and at least plant the seed we were heading towards it.

I get it, I really do. Parental issues are of great concern to some, but mental health is relevant to everyone. Cannot answer the points you raise (obviously) and they are good points.  These quandaries have no foresight answers, only hindsight, anger and recriminations. It is basically crap.  

[st albans fox]

7 minutes ago, Steve_Walsh5 said:

Are we in lockdown until mid February or end of March? 

Boris says the former, everyone believes the latter .....

[Strokes]

6 hours ago, StanSP said:

From someone who's been WFH for best part of 3-4 years, I can't stress how important it is to get up from your desk/working area every hour or so, if possible. Especially living alone, moving about and keeping active is something I've made sure I make a habit out of. And getting out and about for fresh air even if just for 20-30 minutes. 

 

Yeah echo this, Quick wànk every hour and one in the shed for some outdoor activity. Kept me mentally in shape through last lockdown.

[Facecloth]

Just now, Dahnsouff said:

I get it, I really do. Parental issues are of great concern to some, but mental health is relevant to everyone. Cannot answer the points you raise (obviously) and they are good points.  These quandaries have no foresight answers, only hindsight, anger and recriminations. It is basically crap.  

I get the mental health thing. My nephew loves school, I know he's gutted its shut. Parents have also had issues about what to do with their kids the last couple of days whilst they were meant to be working in key jobs, but their kids schools were shut. People have lost jobs, houses, families and even their lives due to these lockdowns, so no lockdown should be taken lightly.

 

I'm afraid there is foresight. I've just mentioned it to you. I've said what the numbers were, I've questioned what made him think it was a good idea to declare schools safe 24 hours before they open, but 36 hours before he shut them. Lots of people questioned the logic of opening schools. My sister is a teacher, wants to keep going in, wants her son to keep going in because he loves it, but she couldn't believe up until Monday they were going back, she thought it was madness. Plenty of people saw it, plenty of people questioned why we weren't doing it, only one person didn't and sadly he's the PM.

[Legend_in_blue]

2 minutes ago, Steve_Walsh5 said:

Are we in lockdown until mid February or end of March? 

Currently, neither.

 

Until you see PCR testing in cases decrease, pretty much as dramatically as they have increased, nothing will change quickly.

 

As for the cycle thresholds of PCR, it would be interesting to find out what the labs are setting this to when analysing samples.  I suspect this information is hard to come by.  According to released govt information I could find, a Ct>36 has indicated infectious virus but then alternative information I found quite easily states a Ct>35 leads to 70-90% false positives in PCR testing.

 

Wherever you look, there's always an alternative point of view.  Who is more believable?  It's irrelevant though because govt clearly will not listen,

 

 

[Leicester_Loyal]

22 minutes ago, Steve_Walsh5 said:

Are we in lockdown until mid February or end of March? 

The regulation passed allows us to lockdown until March 31st, but Boris will review the lockdown at half term in February.

 

If there are any easing of restrictions in February it'll be the kids going back school.

[Free Falling Foxes]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55561108

Please no.

The twats on your street (every street has them) that ignore the Covid restrictions anyway, bringing out their wooden spoons and saucepans to make more racket than anyone else.

The Dutch women who thought of this should take her clogs and feck off back to the Netherlands

Edited 6 January 2021 by Free Falling Foxes

[Dahnsouff]

16 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

I get the mental health thing. My nephew loves school, I know he's gutted its shut. Parents have also had issues about what to do with their kids the last couple of days whilst they were meant to be working in key jobs, but their kids schools were shut. People have lost jobs, houses, families and even their lives due to these lockdowns, so no lockdown should be taken lightly.

 

I'm afraid there is foresight. I've just mentioned it to you. I've said what the numbers were, I've questioned what made him think it was a good idea to declare schools safe 24 hours before they open, but 36 hours before he shut them. Lots of people questioned the logic of opening schools. My sister is a teacher, wants to keep going in, wants her son to keep going in because he loves it, but she couldn't believe up until Monday they were going back, she thought it was madness. Plenty of people saw it, plenty of people questioned why we weren't doing it, only one person didn't and sadly he's the PM.

Don’t believe there is an agreement to be had, which is fair enough

Maybe I am a secret Tory, or  I am too forgiving or something.
We all do our best as we see it, and hope there is a good end to this rubbish.

[Facecloth]

1 minute ago, Dahnsouff said:

Don’t believe there is an agreement to be had, which is fair enough

Maybe I am a secret Tory, or  I am too forgiving or something.
We all do our best as we see it, and hope there is a good end to this rubbish.

I don't see how anyone can claim he's doing even a half decent job tbh. I'm all for opinions, but in this case, there's facts and just plain wrong. Sorry, no disrespect meant.

 

Boris isn't doing his best. He wants everyone to like him, he doesn't want to declare bad news, so he tries to keep it jolly and tell everyone it'll be OK. That might be OK for a leader in some scenarios, but in a pandemic you need forward thinking, tough decision making leaders, not someone trying to be everyone's mate. Hopefully there will be an end to this rubbish, but its much further off than it could have been had he not been in charge.

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, Facecloth said:

I don't see how anyone can claim he's doing even a half decent job tbh. I'm all for opinions, but in this case, there's facts and just plain wrong. Sorry, no disrespect meant.

 

Boris isn't doing his best. He wants everyone to like him, he doesn't want to declare bad news, so he tries to keep it jolly and tell everyone it'll be OK. That might be OK for a leader in some scenarios, but in a pandemic you need forward thinking, tough decision making leaders, not someone trying to be everyone's mate. Hopefully there will be an end to this rubbish, but its much further off than it could have been had he not been in charge.

I am convinced that he has done bad job, I am convinced anyone who would have been PM would have done a bad job. Don’t confuse my resignation with this government as support, I just think it’s totally terrible whatever, whoever.