Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Melanius Mullarkey]

1 minute ago, Bert Raccoon said:

She seems to have taken over as the more friendly face of CoVid and Leitch seems to have been subbed. I for one am all for this.

This I can get on board with.

’mon the Covid.

[Billy Jean King]

Just catching up with the thread and came across this post which appears to try to show that infection rates are higher in bandings of 20 years (25-44 and 45-64) than they are in 10 year banding (5-14) and 5 year banding (15-19) of course the absolute numbers are higher.  However, based on your own figures, there are:
64.4 cases per age year in the 15-19 age group,
32.75 in the 25-44 and
25.85 in the 45-64
This doesn't even take into account the demographics of each age band which would make the relative number for the 15-19 age group even worse.  I am sure that the government can see this but they continue to ignore it as the "science" wouldn't back up the political and economic position that they are taking.  Interestingly we haven't heard any scientific evidence that backs up keeping schools open.

That's the way they present the year breakdown stats.

Problem with your version is that virtually no 18 & 19yo are at school and even at 17 it will be reduced. The vast majority of the 15-19 bracket over the last week or so will be college or university students rather than school pupils.

Schools are open so a case needs to be made for closing them more than keeping them open. So far no such evidence has been presented.

[David W]

17 minutes ago, Rob1885 said:

I've seldom been as angry as I was regarding the panic buying back in March, pathetic.

Is it panic buying, or good sense, to buy stuff in anticipation of others panic buying?

[Rob1885]

Is it panic buying, or good sense, to buy stuff in anticipation of others panic buying?

Had this conversation with many people at the time, which I get to an extent.The problem is that if everybody goes with the attitude of "I'm going to buy in bulk because f**k getting caught out when everybody else is doing it" you get the same result.

Its selfishness in its purest form.

[101]

24 minutes ago, Michael W said:

Covid indeed isn't going away and therefore we need to work out how we're going to live with it. Random changes in restrictions, periodic lockdowns and shutting down parts of the economy are stop gap measures and are not sustainable in the long term. That the government has made zero progress in trying to work this out is frankly unforgivable, and that many other European governments have made similarly zero progress in this regard is not an excuse. 

I've said it before, but we are absolutely not living with the virus, we are hiding from it and hoping it goes away. What if the vaccine fails? Are we just carry on locking down every 4 months when cases reach a level the government decides it will no longer willing to tolerate? 

Other than "hide" from it the only other option is to let it run its course through the population - being stubborn and keeping everything open would kill thousands every government in the world is waiting for a vaccine because the trials look positive if all the trials fail then perhaps a super strict N.Z style lockdown will be enforced around the world to drive prevalence of the virus down but other than that I have no idea what we could do.

Hyper shielding of the over 40s and those with underlying medical conditions? I can't see that being very popular.

If schools have to remain open which for most of the population seems to be a must and the economy has to have some kind of activity then I think we are stuck with what we have just now.

The frustration for me comes from actually having a good track and trace system but its still a bit slow people who are contacts should be contacted the same day as the positive result not the following day, I'm sure this will get better but until it does and folk stick with the self isolation advice then this is as good as it gets. Sadly.

[Thereisalight..]

Seemingly NS has contacted BJ to ask for even stricter lockdown measures to be brought in. She seems hell bent on achieving “zero covid”. With the new guise of furlough going to be announced I think we can be sure that pubs and maybe restaurants will be shut again. They should probably do the same with hairdressers/barbers if they’re going down that route 

[101]

Just now, Rob1885 said:

Had this conversation with many people at the time, which I get to an extent.The problem is that if everybody goes with the attitude of "I'm going to buy in bulk because f**k getting caught out when everybody else is doing it" you get the same result.

Its selfishness in its purest form.

I'm sure in the first lockdown it was shown that most folk were buying more than normal but very few were buying in bulk, so everyone was picking up an extra pack of tinned tomatoes or toilet roll and this was meaning the shops were empty.

Of course there are some folk who take the piss but there needs to be a bit more pragmatic approach we can't call people who are stocking up wankers and them call the people who don't stock up wankers for breaking their self isolation to do some shopping.

Is buying twice as much soup as normal hoarding, probably not, is buying two 24 packs of toilet roll instead of one, I would say that is panic buying and literally arsehole behaviour 

Spoiler

Buying twice as much soup? Stop stock pilling.

 

[101]

5 minutes ago, Thereisalight.. said:

Seemingly NS has contacted BJ to ask for even stricter lockdown measures to be brought in. She seems hell bent on achieving “zero covid”. With the new guise of furlough going to be announced I think we can be sure that pubs and maybe restaurants will be shut again. They should probably do the same with hairdressers/barbers if they’re going down that route 

Covid Zero hasn't been mentioned for weeks I think everyone agrees its too difficult even NZ struggled to get it, this is the article you refer to.

I think she is just putting pressure on England to join Scotland and Northern Ireland who has almost identical measures. However nearly 10 Million people in England are living under strict lockdown so about 17 Million Brits are under similar rules, Im not 100% what Wales are up to but they are probably somewhere between England and Scotland and N.I

[Rob1885]

Seemingly NS has contacted BJ to ask for even stricter lockdown measures to be brought in. She seems hell bent on achieving “zero covid”. With the new guise of furlough going to be announced I think we can be sure that pubs and maybe restaurants will be shut again. They should probably do the same with hairdressers/barbers if they’re going down that route 

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/nicola-sturgeon-writes-boris-johnson-22732500

link

[Mistermark 75]

Seem to recall hand sanitiser flying off shelves too about a trillion years ago when this all began. 

[Ralstonite]

2 minutes ago, MixuFruit said:

I'm away to buy all the lavvy paper and tomato soup in the shops f**k the rest of ye's

I've still got loads of both stocked up in my shed from last time...

[Thereisalight..]

In other news I went to Asda tonight and there was no toilet roll, pasta or flour. People are fcking morons 

[mizfit]

Seem to recall hand sanitiser flying off shelves too about a trillion years ago when this all began. 

The most surreal moment I had was back in February. Got asked to get my grandads messages. No soap on any shelves in Morrisons, Tesco or Asda for about 3 days.

[Michael W]

2 minutes ago, 101 said:

Other than "hide" from it the only other option is to let it run its course through the population - being stubborn and keeping everything open would kill thousands every government in the world is waiting for a vaccine because the trials look positive if all the trials fail then perhaps a super strict N.Z style lockdown will be enforced around the world to drive prevalence of the virus down but other than that I have no idea what we could do.

Hyper shielding of the over 40s and those with underlying medical conditions? I can't see that being very popular.

If schools have to remain open which for most of the population seems to be a must and the economy has to have some kind of activity then I think we are stuck with what we have just now.

The frustration for me comes from actually having a good track and trace system but its still a bit slow people who are contacts should be contacted the same day as the positive result not the following day, I'm sure this will get better but until it does and folk stick with the self isolation advice then this is as good as it gets. Sadly.

At the same time, people's lives are being ruined through these measures. These measures cannot continue forever as the harm they will do is only going to get worse. 

Johnson touched on shielding the vulnerable and elderly last night and just basically said it wasn't an option. What would've been good would be an elaboration of why this isn't an option. 

I don't think killing thousands of people by just letting it rip is the answer, but neither is destroying the livelihoods of the working age population, much of whom are low risk for the virus. The people most at risk have the least to lose from the restrictions, but those with the most to lose are at the least risk from the virus. The application of restrictions, IMO, is weighted too heavily towards the former. 

It's a fair point that enhanced shielding for the elderly/vulnerable is unfair. However another national lockdown if that's where we end up) would also be unfair, particularly concerning the risk levels off many of the people it captures.

Schools need rethought as well - the prevailing attitude that they must be open at seemingly all costs is harmful, especially in areas where there is a high rate of infection. If we're serious about trying to suppress it, there is no justification for schools being in class in the North West of England, for example. 

[vikingTON]

4 minutes ago, Thereisalight.. said:

In other news I went to Asda tonight and there was no toilet roll, pasta or flour. People are fcking morons 

^^^ couldn't get 400 vegetarian ready meals

[101]

1 minute ago, Michael W said:

At the same time, people's lives are being ruined through these measures. These measures cannot continue forever as the harm they will do is only going to get worse. 

Johnson touched on shielding the vulnerable and elderly last night and just basically said it wasn't an option. What would've been good would be an elaboration of why this isn't an option. 

I don't think killing thousands of people by just letting it rip is the answer, but neither is destroying the livelihoods of the working age population, much of whom are low risk for the virus. The people most at risk have the least to lose from the restrictions, but those with the most to lose are at the least risk from the virus. The application of restrictions, IMO, is weighted too heavily towards the former. 

It's a fair point that enhanced shielding for the elderly/vulnerable is unfair. However another national lockdown if that's where we end up) would also be unfair, particularly concerning the risk levels off many of the people it captures.

Schools need rethought as well - the prevailing attitude that they must be open at seemingly all costs is harmful, especially in areas where there is a high rate of infection. If we're serious about trying to suppress it, there is no justification for schools being in class in the North West of England, for example. 

I might not go so far as saying people's lives are being ruined but they are certainly being challenged, I know a few people who have lost their job and they are all glad of their health at a time like this, but then again all their partners work which helps.

The livelihoods are fucked anyway another massive recession for the second time in just over a decade, the damage has been done I genuinely don't think many businesses were taking on staff during the relaxation period, I think its likely more folk were laid off during the phased easing than were hired.

I don't think it's useful to separate groups into what restrictions they have unless you are basically going to say the group's can't mix meaning you would have to take people in their 20's who live at home out the house or take their parents out their houses.

Schools need rethought but I don't think they will shut again. I still think people who go to school and their families should be under strict restrictions as it's a whole group of people who live and work together basically and national education bubble.

[madwullie]

I think his argument re shielding the vulnerable is that they are still going to get tye virus and die from it eventually. They, to coin a phrase, can't have their lives ruined by being locked up forever. While it "rips through" (grimace) the population, it doesn't matter what kind of kwrazy percentage of people catch it and get through it, all those vulnerable people are still going to get infected as soon as they are let out, vaccine notwithstanding. 

They would be far better served explaining what their actual endgame is (of course its unlikely they have one (or unlikely they have one that would be palatable to the majority of people) and retraining people to understand that its going to be a long long time, if ever, that we reach march levels of normality, and preparing for that. Unfortunately that's too tough a message for Johnson who is the probation teacher who thinks that having all his class think he is a pushover is the best way to get liked, so he would have to dilute the message with some jingoistic populous empty wrapper banter that completely destroys any point he is trying to make in order to make him look good / interesting /funny /a bit of a ride. 

Something about our new normal being a superior Great British normality, the same way we found a new normal after the few helped liberate us from the evil Bosche or some shit etc etc etc LOOK. A SPITFIRE! 

[ICTChris]

Did I read it right that 124 students have actually tested positive in Glasgow Uni halls rather than are having to self isolate?

I’ve seen some people tweeting about their kids being stuck in single rooms in halls of residence, not allowed out and classes online. It must be fucking miserable.

[strichener]

34 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

Schools are open so a case needs to be made for closing them more than keeping them open. So far no such evidence has been presented.

Well let's see the science and models.  Up until today we were able to into another's home and now we aren't (unless you are looking after kids or a childminder).  Where is this so called evidence of home transmission?  The only thing we know for sure in this whole escapade is that it is being made up as we go.  Hell it was only last week that trials were being held for crowds at football, can we assume that this is now canned based on an arguable case or another panic decision.  We need to stop thinking we can save everyone from catching the virus and manage it rather than attempting to eradicate it.

[Honest_Man#1]

5 minutes ago, madwullie said:

I think his argument re shielding the vulnerable is that they are still going to get tye virus and die from it eventually. They, to coin a phrase, can't have their lives ruined by being locked up forever. While it "rips through" (grimace) the population, it doesn't matter what kind of kwrazy percentage of people catch it and get through it, all those vulnerable people are still going to get infected as soon as they are let out, vaccine notwithstanding. 

They would be far better served explaining what their actual endgame is (of course its unlikely they have one (or unlikely they have one that would be palatable to the majority of people) and retraining people to understand that its going to be a long long time, if ever, that we reach march levels of normality, and preparing for that. Unfortunately that's too tough a message for Johnson who is the probation teacher who thinks that having all his class think he is a pushover is the best way to get liked, so he would have to dilute the message with some jingoistic populous empty wrapper banter that completely destroys any point he is trying to make in order to make him look good / interesting /funny /a bit of a ride. 

Something about our new normal being a superior Great British normality, the same way we found a new normal after the few helped liberate us from the evil Bosche or some shit etc etc etc LOOK. A SPITFIRE! 

Can’t see this tbh. Yes it may never be the same as pre-Covid for things working from home more often and not shaking hands as the most common greeting etc, but if you genuinely think there’s a chance the world may never get back to a point where we can have full sporting stadiums, cinemas, theatres etc and where we can meet people in unrestricted settings then I completely disagree.

There will be a point people get to where we will need to decide to move back to relative normality and live with the risk posed the virus.