Second National Lockdown...

[Dustydazzler]

Would you support it , would it have any affect and is it necessary...?

Coronavirus: Two-week national lockdown in October proposed by top scientists - report

Chris Whitty is advising PM for a two-week national lockdown."

uk.yahoo.com

 

[littlespark]

I don’t think it is required. A national lockdown before Xmas will cause panic buying again... you won’t be able to get a big tub of Quality Street for love or money..

The problem being people don’t adhere to the current level of restrictions, so going back a step won’t be listened to.

Schools are not the problem, if they can get the kids to wear masks when needed. Scotland govt failed in that respect after saying masks should be worn 2 weeks after they went back.

The biggest problem is opening the pubs. If they couldn’t get customers to behave properly before, how can they get them to now?

North Northumberland is now in a local lockdown, which means my local supermarket is back to marshalling queuing customers outside, counting them in and out....
But the pubs now have a curfew! They must close 1 hour sooner than they have been. What a lot of difference that’s going to make!

 

[Dustydazzler]

I don’t think it is required. A national lockdown before Xmas will cause panic buying again... you won’t be able to get a big tub of Quality Street for love or money..

The problem being people don’t adhere to the current level of restrictions, so going back a step won’t be listened to.

Schools are not the problem, if they can get the kids to wear masks when needed. Scotland govt failed in that respect after saying masks should be worn 2 weeks after they went back.

The biggest problem is opening the pubs. If they couldn’t get customers to behave properly before, how can they get them to now?

North Northumberland is now in a local lockdown, which means my local supermarket is back to marshalling queuing customers outside, counting them in and out....
But the pubs now have a curfew! They must close 1 hour sooner than they have been. What a lot of difference that’s going to make!

just means get To the pub 1hr earlier

just close all pubs after lunchtime , simples...

 

[telectrix]

just means get To the pub 1hr earlier

just close all pubs after lunchtime , simples...

i will have my lunch at 11.00 p.m. from tomorrow.

 

[Zerax]

Not needed in my view.

We now know far more about this virus and how to treat it than we did 6 months ago... at that time it was generally perceived by the media as an 'instant-killer'. We just need to make sure that the NHS/PHE is better organised to deal with any patients that need help.

I have a suspicion that long term (a few more years yet) the approach that Sweden took might have been the right one.

 

[Wilko]

There’s no doubt this heartless virus is readily transmitted and can be fatal.

However the purpose of lockdown was to “protect the NHS and save lives” (sorry can’t quite remember the nightly broadcast statement now). My understanding is it was achieved, one way or another, in that the NHS didn’t collapse and the poor folks that needed hospital care were able to get it, thankfully. Today the UK death rate has dropped significantly (thankfully a fact) and I understand that hospital intensive care beds are no longer anywhere near full of CV19 (I’m happy to see data on this aspect, as I’ve only anecdotal info from Mr. I-Can’t-Say-Who). And this is while the number of cases is going up again.

I don’t think additional lockdown will help anything just now.

 

[snowhead]

This possible Lockdown is not proposed as a full lockdown like the first one.
Work and schools would continue, it's seems to be aimed at restricting leisure.

 

[Risteard]

Would you support it , would it have any affect and is it necessary...?

Coronavirus: Two-week national lockdown in October proposed by top scientists - report

Chris Whitty is advising PM for a two-week national lockdown."

uk.yahoo.com

No. I didn't support the first either.

In fact I believe all of the restrictions are an unlawful interference in our lives.

The fact that the virus has an infinitesmally small mortality rate makes it all the more criminal.

Countless more lives will have been lost to the lockdowns/restrictions than the virus ever killed.

 

[UNG]

Not needed in my view.

We now know far more about this virus and how to treat it than we did 6 months ago... at that time it was generally perceived by the media as an 'instant-killer'. We just need to make sure that the NHS/PHE is better organised to deal with any patients that need help.

I have a suspicion that long term (a few more years yet) the approach that Sweden took might have been the right one.

I don't think we know much if anything more about this virus than we did at the start of the year, a lot of the science seems to be very assumptive and unpredictable

This possible Lockdown is not proposed as a full lockdown like the first one.
Work and schools would continue, it's seems to be aimed at restricting leisure.

We haven't had a full lockdown yet. The first one was a feeble attempt at a lockdown as we didn't close our borders, the police and the military were not on the streets enforcing it

No. I didn't support the first either.

In fact I believe all of the restrictions are an unlawful interference in our lives.

The fact that the virus has an infinitesmally small mortality rate makes it all the more criminal.

Countless more lives will have been lost to the lockdowns/restrictions than the virus ever killed.

Spoken like someone who hasn't felt the effects of the corona virus yet and I really hope you don't, I have and it is something I would not wish on anyone, it took me about 3½ months to recover to something close to normal.
A mate of mine spent 3 weeks in hospital with it, his wife, M-I-L and 2 other family members also caught it
Would you think it criminal if you caught it and it ultimately killed you? or you unknowingly were a carrier any one of your family caught from you and didn't recover
While the mortality rate might be considered low the stats don't tell you how many will never fully recover and have lasting effects or how long it will take those who are lucky enough to make a full recovery to get back their full health

 

[Zerax]

Spoken like someone who hasn't felt the effects of the corona virus yet and I really hope you don't, I have and it is something I would not wish on anyone, it took me about 3½ months to recover to something close to normal.
A mate of mine spent 3 weeks in hospital with it, his wife, M-I-L and 2 other family members also caught it
Would you think it criminal if you caught it and it ultimately killed you? or you unknowingly were a carrier any one of your family caught from you and didn't recover
While the mortality rate might be considered low the stats don't tell you how many will never fully recover and have lasting effects or how long it will take those who are lucky enough to make a full recovery to get back their full health

You've highlighted an important point... when you're managing a country you need to look at the macro level, not the micro level. You have to do what is good for the country as a whole and not what is good for Mrs Jones at No. 32 or your M-I-L.

Whenever the government or indeed commentators on this forum, talk about the general situation, someone will always bring up a specific case of someone they know who has died or might die. That seems to instantly trump the situation of the whole country... so we never get anywhere.

The simple fact is that the vast majority of people that catch the virus have either no symptoms or very mild symptoms. The number of people that have symptoms that require medical attention is incredibly small... and yes yes yes I know that 'small' does mean that 'some' will suffer, but it's a very very small proportion.

An example of the nonsensicalness of all this is the school teachers saying they didn't want schools to reopen until it was 'safe'. Kids are far far more likely to get run-over on the way to school than from the virus when they get there !!

 

[GBDamo]

There’s no doubt this heartless virus is readily transmitted and can be fatal.

However the purpose of lockdown was to “protect the NHS and save lives” (sorry can’t quite remember the nightly broadcast statement now). My understanding is it was achieved, one way or another, in that the NHS didn’t collapse and the poor folks that needed hospital care were able to get it, thankfully. Today the UK death rate has dropped significantly (thankfully a fact) and I understand that hospital intensive care beds are no longer anywhere near full of CV19 (I’m happy to see data on this aspect, as I’ve only anecdotal info from Mr. I-Can’t-Say-Who). And this is while the number of cases is going up again.

I don’t think additional lockdown will help anything just now.
View attachment 60898

I think all we are seeing is testing picking up the true prevalence of the virus, and indirectly confirming it is in the majority benign.

More tests = more positives.

If the test is 99% accurate, which by all accounts is about right, there will be 1% erroneous results.

For simplicity say these split evenly between false positives and false negatives.

In a population of 65million thats 325,000 false positives and 325,000false negatives.

So if by some miracle we tested the whole population overnight, with the current test, we would see 325,000 cases reported in errors alone.

Now, it has long been suspected the virus is a lot more prevalent and the majority of people have either had it or are carrying it asymptomatically.

We are entering sniffle season so every mallingering halfwit with a cold is getting tested in the hope of getting a two week holiday, maybe harsh, or the hysteria whipped up has people genuinely petrified.

The death rate.

The death rate is not increasing now as it did previously.

There are three possibilities,

1, The vulnerable have already been taken and those left are much more resilient.

2, The original deaths were wrongly attributed to Covid.

3, The virus has mutated to something much less virulent.

Unfortunately the government has reacted in a manner that has forced their hand as to future action.

If they say "It wasn't as bad as we thought" they are blamed for trashing the economy and possible avoidable deaths as a result of limiting access to health care.

So it looks like they are doubling down but I can't see an exit strategy, when and how do we return to normal?
[automerge]1600590419[/automerge]

You've highlighted an important point... when you're managing a country you need to look at the macro level, not the micro level. You have to do what is good for the country as a whole and not what is good for Mrs Jones at No. 32 or your M-I-L.

Whenever the government or indeed commentators on this forum, talk about the general situation, someone will always bring up a specific case of someone they know who has died or might die. That seems to instantly trump the situation of the whole country... so we never get anywhere.

The simple fact is that the vast majority of people that catch the virus have either no symptoms or very mild symptoms. The number of people that have symptoms that require medical attention is incredibly small... and yes yes yes I know that 'small' does mean that 'some' will suffer, but it's a very very small proportion.

An example of the nonsensicalness of all this is the school teachers saying they didn't want schools to reopen until it was 'safe'. Kids are far far more likely to get run-over on the way to school than from the virus when they get there !!

If a similar argument was used for road traffic we would have to ground all vehicles until driving can be made safe.

What is safe, no deaths, no injuries, no crashes?

 

[Baddegg]

BREAKING NEWS...

 

[GBDamo]

I don't think we know much if anything more about this virus than we did at the start of the year, a lot of the science seems to be very assumptive and unpredictable


We haven't had a full lockdown yet. The first one was a feeble attempt at a lockdown as we didn't close our borders, the police and the military were not on the streets enforcing it


Spoken like someone who hasn't felt the effects of the corona virus yet and I really hope you don't, I have and it is something I would not wish on anyone, it took me about 3½ months to recover to something close to normal.
A mate of mine spent 3 weeks in hospital with it, his wife, M-I-L and 2 other family members also caught it
Would you think it criminal if you caught it and it ultimately killed you? or you unknowingly were a carrier any one of your family caught from you and didn't recover
While the mortality rate might be considered low the stats don't tell you how many will never fully recover and have lasting effects or how long it will take those who are lucky enough to make a full recovery to get back their full health

It became very apparent very early that there were groups who were significantly more susceptible.

They should have been locked down and protected.

The vast, vast majority had almost negligible symptoms, if any.

It is as if the government had a prepackaged response, formulated in COBRA meetings, that they put into action, but the virus didn't materialise as expected.

Now they seem to be blindly following that plan as they have no exit strategy, or an exit strategy that maintains face.

 

[telectrix]

it's all a big con. harmless bug transmitted by 5G network to make people feel ill. then they go into hospital where all the old are euthanised to save the NHS and Dept. of Pensions budgets.

 

[GBDamo]

it's all a big con. harmless bug transmitted by 5G network to make people feel ill. then they go into hospital where all the old are euthanised to save the NHS and Dept. of Pensions budgets.

Or,

The Chinese staged thousands of Internet videos of people dying in the streets, incineration camps, overflowing hospitals and locked down a few minor cities.

They then released a fairly benign virus hils claiming there is nothing going on in China and the more they deny the more we believe it is huge.

We get a few cases in the west and all the Western economies panic and shut down.

The Chinese laugh, with pinky in the corner of the mouth, at the silly westerners.

 

[Ian1981]

Dam I need me a ginger cat then

 

[Moley]

Dam I need me a ginger cat then

My daughters boyfriend is ginger. What should I do? Do I lock him in the attic and pretend he doesn't exist or should I just send him to Switzerland and have him euthoniszed?

 

[Midwest]

I think a lot more people have become indifferent to all the restrictions now. Early on we had people visiting places they shouldn’t, the raves, people like Cummings etc. But now, it’s as if there was no lockdown.

Went into town for my appointment with my barbers, had to wait outside as others had just walked in. Barber wore a visor, which was sat on the back of his head, so he’s breathing all over me. No other customers, apart from me, wore a mask. Town was packed, it was like a normal Saturday with people stood around chatting, no masks. Went into a shop, no social distancing and nobody wearing a mask, including the shop assistants.

It will go through the roof again, and you guys won’t have any work again.

 

[mattg4321]

Even if it does go through the roof we can’t afford as a country to shut workplaces down as happened before.

Most sparks I know are stacked out with work so a slight reduction in demand won’t hurt this winter imo. Long term is more the problem when the job losses/cuts the idiotic restrictions caused start to bite.

Should always have been a case of protect the vulnerable, while everyone else goes about their business with a low level of restrictions until we have vaccine/herd immunity.

 

[GBDamo]

My daughters.....

Is just me who wondered where that was heading?