318 posts
|
Post by MrBraithwaite on Aug 3, 2020 6:16:57 GMT
That`s why I had a good laugh when Michael Gove said, they'd trust people's common sense.  |
|
4,995 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Aug 3, 2020 6:34:45 GMT
That`s why I had a good laugh when Michael Gove said, they'd trust people's common sense.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 7:38:01 GMT
That's nothing. I bet most people could easily beat that record, provided they're allowed to approach the situation from the more traditional end.
|
|
|
|
Post by frappuccino on Aug 3, 2020 11:28:32 GMT
|
|
1,972 posts
|
Post by sf on Aug 3, 2020 11:55:18 GMT
These are ideas under discussion, rather than something that is definitely going to happen.
I think people should pay attention - and frankly, that a lot of people should pay a lot MORE attention, based on what I see when I go out - but there's no point in being unnecessarily alarmist.
And in any case I wouldn't believe anything printed in the Daily Mail, including the date, until I had it corroborated by a more reliable source.
|
|
19,803 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 3, 2020 12:19:09 GMT
Rather gruesome item just now on bbc news, they’ve discovered that people with CV19 “shed” (I think that’s the word she used 😐) the virus when they have a 💩 and elements of it can be found in sewerage. You can’t catch it from waste water, it’s not the complete virus just bit of it. If they can find an accurate way to measure it then that could be used as an indicator of a forthcoming geographical spike a valuable week earlier other indications would show it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 13:01:46 GMT
I would have thought it would make more sense to cut back on families mixing.
Although some people seem to think that if we open everything up slowly enough the virus won't notice, it was always the case that we had to find a balance that would permit opening up as much of the economy as possible without tipping over into expansion again. The government is certainly aware of that — the policy all along has been to open up bit by bit to see what we can get away with — so it seems odd that they'd permit a relaxation of restrictions in an area that offers no benefit to the economy. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's that particular relaxation that's behind the growth in cases, because people will naturally tend to drop all precautions when in the group of people they trust and feel safe with even though the extended periods of time you spend with the people you know best mean that's actually the group where transmission is most likely.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 13:13:45 GMT
I would have thought it would make more sense to cut back on families mixing. Although some people seem to think that if we open everything up slowly enough the virus won't notice, it was always the case that we had to find a balance that would permit opening up as much of the economy as possible without tipping over into expansion again. The government is certainly aware of that — the policy all along has been to open up bit by bit to see what we can get away with — so it seems odd that they'd permit a relaxation of restrictions in an area that offers no benefit to the economy. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's that particular relaxation that's behind the growth in cases, because people will naturally tend to drop all precautions when in the group of people they trust and feel safe with even though the extended periods of time you spend with the people you know best mean that's actually the group where transmission is most likely. There appears to be three options here. 1) Keep things as they are with R rate slightly over 1 and use local lockdowns to try and stop it getting higher (the whack a mole approach). This means no return for offices or schools, though. 2) Trade off what we have now for opening something else. The problem here is that so little has changed that even closing everything back down again is likely not enough to enable schools and/or offices and the associated activity, to reopen. You get an ‘all work, no play lockdown’ and have to hope it works. Meanwhile either Sunak props ebery business up or they go to the wall. 3) Let it rip and shield anyone vulnerable (the over fifties/at risk option). This is basically herd immunity 2.0 and we saw what happened in reaction to version 1.0. The truth is that we are on the edge of the possible. Whatever Johnson desires he can’t have cake and eat cake. EDIT: Actually, there’s a fourth but they’ve pretty much nixed this one. Lockdown everything for a month then release. Then keep doing the same if necessary. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 13:25:49 GMT
That's nothing. I bet most people could easily beat that record, provided they're allowed to approach the situation from the more traditional end. I bet there are a few well sized buckets who could take a fair few? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 13:28:09 GMT
These are ideas under discussion, rather than something that is definitely going to happen.
I think people should pay attention - and frankly, that a lot of people should pay a lot MORE attention, based on what I see when I go out - but there's no point in being unnecessarily alarmist.
And in any case I wouldn't believe anything printed in the Daily Mail, including the date, until I had it corroborated by a more reliable source.
I noticed that DM were blaiming the youngsters in the pubs for the Northern Lockdown which is an improvement on the falsely held that it is driven by the actions of Asian people. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 13:34:17 GMT
I would have thought it would make more sense to cut back on families mixing. Although some people seem to think that if we open everything up slowly enough the virus won't notice, it was always the case that we had to find a balance that would permit opening up as much of the economy as possible without tipping over into expansion again. The government is certainly aware of that — the policy all along has been to open up bit by bit to see what we can get away with — so it seems odd that they'd permit a relaxation of restrictions in an area that offers no benefit to the economy. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's that particular relaxation that's behind the growth in cases, because people will naturally tend to drop all precautions when in the group of people they trust and feel safe with even though the extended periods of time you spend with the people you know best mean that's actually the group where transmission is most likely. There appears to be three options here. 1) Keep things as they are with R rate slightly over 1 and use local lockdowns to try and stop it getting higher (the whack a mole approach). This means no return for offices or schools, though. 2) Trade off what we have now for opening something else. The problem here is that so little has changed that even closing everything back down again is likely not enough to enable schools and/or offices and the associated activity, to reopen. You get an ‘all work, no play lockdown’ and have to hope it works. Meanwhile either Sunak props ebery business up or they go to the wall. 3) Let it rip and shield anyone vulnerable (the over fifties/at risk option). This is basically herd immunity 2.0 and we saw what happened in reaction to version 1.0. The truth is that we are on the edge of the possible. Whatever Johnson desires he can’t have cake and eat cake. EDIT: Actually, there’s a fourth but they’ve pretty much nixed this one. Lockdown everything for a month then release. Then keep doing the same if necessary. I don't see how third option could work, it could weaken a lot of healthy people and to shield the vulnerable would be hard and they could be left without care and still at risk. What is Scotland doing as their schools open within 2 weeks. Nicola Sturgeon isn't going into this blindly. Local lockdowns are likely way forward but if you do age restricted lockdowns wouldn't you be open to challenges in court for age discrimination/ civil liberties not just from the deniers but from age related charities. Imagine you had age timed lockdowns or different ages allowed out at different times. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 13:35:41 GMT
In other matters, I've experimented with using draught excluder tape on a mask to see if that stops my glasses fogging up. Initial trials look promising.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 13:46:50 GMT
3) Let it rip and shield anyone vulnerable (the over fifties/at risk option). This is basically herd immunity 2.0 and we saw what happened in reaction to version 1.0. I don't see how third option could work, it could weaken a lot of healthy people and to shield the vulnerable would be hard and they could be left without care and still at risk. I think opting for the idea of herd immunity was the one absolutely unforgivable mistake the government made at the start. It depended on two speculative ideas that both turned out to be false: that if you were healthy your chances of dying were infinitesimal and that once you'd had the disease you couldn't get it again. The reality turned out to be that if you let the disease take hold throughout the population it will just keep killing people and until a vaccine has been developed and deployed it would never be safe for the most vulnerable to return to society. |
|
2,342 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 3, 2020 13:55:33 GMT
I don't see how third option could work, it could weaken a lot of healthy people and to shield the vulnerable would be hard and they could be left without care and still at risk. I think opting for the idea of herd immunity was the one absolutely unforgivable mistake the government made at the start. It depended on two speculative ideas that both turned out to be false: that if you were healthy your chances of dying were infinitesimal and that once you'd had the disease you couldn't get it again. The reality turned out to be that if you let the disease take hold throughout the population it will just keep killing people and until a vaccine has been developed and deployed it would never be safe for the most vulnerable to return to society. Come on fella, that was one of the the worst but the government has made more than one absolutely unforgiveable mistake |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 14:32:53 GMT
I think opting for the idea of herd immunity was the one absolutely unforgivable mistake the government made at the start. It depended on two speculative ideas that both turned out to be false: that if you were healthy your chances of dying were infinitesimal and that once you'd had the disease you couldn't get it again. The reality turned out to be that if you let the disease take hold throughout the population it will just keep killing people and until a vaccine has been developed and deployed it would never be safe for the most vulnerable to return to society. Come on fella, that was one of the the worst but the government has made more than one absolutely unforgiveable mistake Hindsight is always great. We don't know how Labour would have handled it, JC, Abbott and McDonnell leading the briefings might have been something to watch. Sir Kier I'd have confident of leading a measured response. I think that the Chancellor has had his standing go up and Rishi is now a legit future Party Leader. Rabb has been authoritive and solid. No other minister has covered themselves in glory. Prof Whitty and Sir Patrick have done their job solidly, Jenny Harries again safe pair of hands, Prof JVT was excellent and the best explainer of the lot going into points but breaking it down and justifying his views with solid facts. Yvonne Doyle - way out of her depth like Dido Harding. Stephen Powis solid but unspectacular. Dr Nikki Kanani clearly a rising star not 40 yet, very articulate and media friendly. Will be likely Medical Director of PHE or go into CMO or DCMO level job in a few years time. |
|
410 posts
|
Post by maggiem on Aug 3, 2020 15:04:02 GMT
These are ideas under discussion, rather than something that is definitely going to happen.
I think people should pay attention - and frankly, that a lot of people should pay a lot MORE attention, based on what I see when I go out - but there's no point in being unnecessarily alarmist.
And in any case I wouldn't believe anything printed in the Daily Mail, including the date, until I had it corroborated by a more reliable source.
I'm sure I read 2 stories in the Mail about the Yeomen Warders being at risk of losing their jobs. No, they're not! The Tower is opening again and I'm going when I'm in London later this month. I maybe over 50, and suffer with asthma, but I'm not going without my much needed and anticipated break (1st. since Feb). Call me bloody-minded, but I will be taking plenty of precautions when on my travels. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 15:06:13 GMT
I would have thought it would make more sense to cut back on families mixing. So back to all of us who are alone being forced into effectively solitary confinement? Or do you mean people can mix with their own family but not others? Either way you condemn many, many people to a level of loneliness that some will find more unbearable than the risk of catching Covid. I feel like a broken record now, but this is so much more than a binary choice between taking measures to stop Covid and everything else. The "everything else" that has been lumped together (mental health, cancer, conditions causing severe chronic pain etc) is now quite possibly more dangerous than the virus risk. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 15:09:26 GMT
Come on fella, that was one of the the worst but the government has made more than one absolutely unforgiveable mistake Hindsight is always great. We don't know how Labour would have handled it, JC, Abbott and McDonnell leading the briefings might have been something to watch. Sir Kier I'd have confident of leading a measured response. I think that the Chancellor has had his standing go up and Rishi is now a legit future Party Leader. Rabb has been authoritive and solid. No other minister has covered themselves in glory. Prof Whitty and Sir Patrick have done their job solidly, Jenny Harries again safe pair of hands, Prof JVT was excellent and the best explainer of the lot going into points but breaking it down and justifying his views with solid facts. Yvonne Doyle - way out of her depth like Dido Harding. Stephen Powis solid but unspectacular. Dr Nikki Kanani clearly a rising star not 40 yet, very articulate and media friendly. Will be likely Medical Director of PHE or go into CMO or DCMO level job in a few years time. Hmm, not all of those I would agree with. Sunak, yes, Raab, yes (surprisingly, to me). Pretty much the rest of government all terrible. Johnson, appalling, Gove, invisible, Patel, vindictive, Williamson, a walking 'humilating climbdown' machine. On the health side most have been poor. Whitty and Vallance have been too weak and made the mistake of not being seen as separate to government. Harries is just useless, from her awful start with the fawning Johnson Q&A that seeded so many untruths that it has taken months to undo she just went downhill and lacks any sort of credibility and trust. Van Tam very good, though. and had that separation that Whitty and Vallance lacked. Beyond these public faces there have been many more effective specialists who have cut though better. |
|
3,355 posts
|
Post by Dr Tom on Aug 3, 2020 15:13:55 GMT
In other matters, I've experimented with using draught excluder tape on a mask to see if that stops my glasses fogging up. Initial trials look promising. I've found if I balance them slightly forward on my nose, they don't fog and I still see, so long as I also tilt my head a bit. That's my supermarket survival tactic anyway, which improves on the previous one (which was taking them off when I breathed out). |
|
2,342 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 3, 2020 15:19:04 GMT
Come on fella, that was one of the the worst but the government has made more than one absolutely unforgiveable mistake Hindsight is always great. We don't know how Labour would have handled it, JC, Abbott and McDonnell leading the briefings might have been something to watch. Sir Kier I'd have confident of leading a measured response. I think that the Chancellor has had his standing go up and Rishi is now a legit future Party Leader. Rabb has been authoritive and solid. No other minister has covered themselves in glory. Prof Whitty and Sir Patrick have done their job solidly, Jenny Harries again safe pair of hands, Prof JVT was excellent and the best explainer of the lot going into points but breaking it down and justifying his views with solid facts. Yvonne Doyle - way out of her depth like Dido Harding. Stephen Powis solid but unspectacular. Dr Nikki Kanani clearly a rising star not 40 yet, very articulate and media friendly. Will be likely Medical Director of PHE or go into CMO or DCMO level job in a few years time. This is a party political broadcast on behalf of the nasty party. Not much to like there. Good question, how bad did the government need to handle this before you say, these aren't really very good at government are they? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 15:20:25 GMT
There appears to be three options here. 1) Keep things as they are with R rate slightly over 1 and use local lockdowns to try and stop it getting higher (the whack a mole approach). This means no return for offices or schools, though. 2) Trade off what we have now for opening something else. The problem here is that so little has changed that even closing everything back down again is likely not enough to enable schools and/or offices and the associated activity, to reopen. You get an ‘all work, no play lockdown’ and have to hope it works. Meanwhile either Sunak props ebery business up or they go to the wall. 3) Let it rip and shield anyone vulnerable (the over fifties/at risk option). This is basically herd immunity 2.0 and we saw what happened in reaction to version 1.0. The truth is that we are on the edge of the possible. Whatever Johnson desires he can’t have cake and eat cake. EDIT: Actually, there’s a fourth but they’ve pretty much nixed this one. Lockdown everything for a month then release. Then keep doing the same if necessary. I don't see how third option could work, it could weaken a lot of healthy people and to shield the vulnerable would be hard and they could be left without care and still at risk. What is Scotland doing as their schools open within 2 weeks. Nicola Sturgeon isn't going into this blindly. Local lockdowns are likely way forward but if you do age restricted lockdowns wouldn't you be open to challenges in court for age discrimination/ civil liberties not just from the deniers but from age related charities. Imagine you had age timed lockdowns or different ages allowed out at different times. I'd mentioned elsewhere but other press have been much clearer than ranting headlines suggesting a blanket shielding. In essence, age (the biggest factor) but that may be ameliorated by low personal health risk and/or low workplace risk. The problem with those saying 'I'm sixty and I've never been fitter' is that they are mistaking external for internal. No matter who you are, your organs, your cardiovascular system are getting more worn out as you age. Some more than others, yes, but that is where health assessments need to come in. I've also been depressed by the large numbers my age and older saying that shielding is 'punishment' and 'why can't under 40s be locked down seeing as they are flouting the regulations?'. It is protection not 'punishment' and shielding those less at risk is just ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 15:21:24 GMT
In other matters, I've experimented with using draught excluder tape on a mask to see if that stops my glasses fogging up. Initial trials look promising. Apologies if this has been suggested before but I have found that this mask ‘hack’ has really reduced my glasses fogging up (even though the original video does not say it will do that.) www.womenshealthmag.com/health/a33247294/face-mask-hack-tiktok-video/The other thing that I see people swearing by is washing the glasses in fairy liquid water and leaving them to dry naturally, as offering anti-fog protection. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 15:36:55 GMT
Hindsight is always great. We don't know how Labour would have handled it, JC, Abbott and McDonnell leading the briefings might have been something to watch. Sir Kier I'd have confident of leading a measured response. I think that the Chancellor has had his standing go up and Rishi is now a legit future Party Leader. Rabb has been authoritive and solid. No other minister has covered themselves in glory. Prof Whitty and Sir Patrick have done their job solidly, Jenny Harries again safe pair of hands, Prof JVT was excellent and the best explainer of the lot going into points but breaking it down and justifying his views with solid facts. Yvonne Doyle - way out of her depth like Dido Harding. Stephen Powis solid but unspectacular. Dr Nikki Kanani clearly a rising star not 40 yet, very articulate and media friendly. Will be likely Medical Director of PHE or go into CMO or DCMO level job in a few years time. This is a party political broadcast on behalf of the nasty party. Not much to like there. Good question, how bad did the government need to handle this before you say, these aren't really very good at government are they? We were too late going into lockdown and we need to find why we have had so many deaths compared to other countries those are the two questions I'd want answering? Do Governments totally rely on the medics and scientists or try and take the lead themselves instead? If JC had been PM, I'm sure funding luvvies would have been even further down the list. |
|
2,342 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 3, 2020 15:49:25 GMT
This is a party political broadcast on behalf of the nasty party. Not much to like there. Good question, how bad did the government need to handle this before you say, these aren't really very good at government are they? We were too late going into lockdown and we need to find why we have had so many deaths compared to other countries those are the two questions I'd want answering? Do Governments totally rely on the medics and scientists or try and take the lead themselves instead? If JC had been PM, I'm sure funding luvvies would have been even further down the list. Talking sensibly now. I'd add continuous PPE failures and the worst of the lot, the care home debacle into the big questions for the independent enquiry. I might be taking this personally but they should be strung up for the treatment of the elderly and most at risk in our society shouldn't they? Bit early I think to say the medical executives advising government have done a good job. I want to see what advice they gave and the evidence why and what advice the government ignored before declaring that. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 15:59:29 GMT
We were too late going into lockdown and we need to find why we have had so many deaths compared to other countries those are the two questions I'd want answering? Do Governments totally rely on the medics and scientists or try and take the lead themselves instead? If JC had been PM, I'm sure funding luvvies would have been even further down the list. Talking sensibly now. I'd add continuous PPE failures and the worst of the lot, the care home debacle into the big questions for the independent enquiry. I might be taking this personally but they should be strung up for the treatment of the elderly and most at risk in our society shouldn't they? Bit early I think to say the medical executives advising government have done a good job. I want to see what advice they gave and the evidence why and what advice the government ignored before declaring that. The high mortality rate is likely linked to the care home issue you've highlighted. Were other countries ahead of us with PPE provisions? The logistics of getting the PPE out didn't seem great either. They basically had to get the Army boys to sort it out I recall. I'd really like to see how the Scottish Government's response stacks up against the England centric UK Government. Not is devolved but more there than in Wales or NI. Medical Advice from Sage and their peers would tend to be uniform. Some may be a bit more bullish. But most are in effectively the same field and comtempories of each other so they would likey respect each others views and act as a pack if their collective wisdom was ignored or they were made scapegoats for a ploitical decision. |
|
