No new community acquired cases in NSW today - 3 in quarantine (returned travellers).
Feeling Optimistic, as this is our fourth consecutive day of no new cases. We’ve certainly not eliminated it, but we seem to be bumping along the bottom
@ElShalimo:
that’s good if you’re local to your store but what did they do in the previous months of the pandemic?
I can only speak for my area (Cardiff) but the initiative was launched 2 weeks into the lockdown together with a massive increase in Home Delivery capacity. It's how me and a few of my fellow furloughed colleagues got in these jobs, they're were taking any drivers they could find. I started doing it at the end of May as I was later onto furlough but two of my colleagues started there mid-April. I believe the same thing happened nationwide.
In your dad's case he could have phoned up the priority line and would have been given a slot, even cancelling a 'normal' customer's slot if needs be. Saw it happen every few days.
I may have other issues that mean I'm currently working my notice there but the way they quickly responded to the situation and got the priority system running quickly and continue to do so is spot-on IMO.
Which it isn’t. It never has been, and as various people who know have pointed out very early on, it’s pretty much impossible without some sort of super vaccine or cure, which may never happen. Even New Zealand have outbreaks when their strict systems blink and miss something.
The realistic goal, as I understand it, is to keep transmission at an acceptably low level in order to keep the economy ticking over enough that we don’t die of debt and starvation in 1-2 years time, while protecting the vulnerable.
You may not realise that this is the plan, given the way the government have handled it, obviously.
Sad to say, but you're right. Even New Zealand has an estimated 350 or so people with Covid amongst it's population who are unknowingly carrying it. Even though most of their restrictions have been lifted, and they're going into their summer now, you only need 1 person to spark an outbreak, after all, it started with a single person less than a year ago (probably) and we have 1m dead globally.
I think if you rewind this thread to when we first knew it had properly arrived in the UK. No one thought there were any easy solutions, and lock down showed us that even at the peak of Covid fears human nature doesn't allow us to isolate long enough to snuff it out.
However we might differ on the goal. My personal belief in regards to the 'end game' is, and I think what it was.
The original plan was a sort of herd immunity. "Flatten the curve" via lockdowns, ramp up NHS capacity via the big Field hospitals etc and then allow the virus to travel through the population at as controlled a pace as we can, to keep the NHS at near capacity until it ran it's course.
A few things stopped that happening (which is probably for the best). Firstly the information sent out from Gov to get the best response from the public (I wouldn't call it fear-mongering so not to fall inline with anti-mask right wing brigade) did a very good job of getting public opinion to fearing the virus more than the restrictions and less people were willing to be viral cannon fodder for Queen and Country.
The virus didn't "do a SARS" and evolve to be less fatal.
The Vaccine that experts said could take years to develop, let alone test, took months thanks to brilliant people doing brilliant things - it's just a shame we couldn't work together on it, rather than developing dozens of them.
I think the new plan is:
We know to a sort of certainty who will be badly effected or killed by Covid. It's the elderly, those with certain underlying heath issues etc. With the Oxford Vaccine being probably the first to finish 3rd Trail very soon and be ready for licensing, the .Gov will ask for a quick review of the data and use emergency powers to allow it's use without a license in the short term.
We will mass vaccine high risk people ASAFP - Medics first, anyone who has previously been asked to shield, elderly, Teacher, Police officers etc. That should drastically reduce the numbers of hospital admissions and deaths - with the obvious caveats, the Vaccine isn't 100% effective, and is less effective in older people, the exact type of people we're trying to protect, however, that's all the protection they're going to get. There will be sadly a number of people who aren't old and don't have a known underlying health issue who will get sick and even with the new treatments for Covid, a few will die, but it will be low enough for the Public to live with and the press to get bored with. The sensible thing to do then would be to repeat the process globally, but Boris may decide to forget our earlier agreements and aim to vaccinate as much of the population as he can, allowing the virus to mutate abroad and come back and bite us in the arse down the road, anyway. that's another story.
I've also heard rumour that Boris may resign post-covid, citing the huge personal toll handling the virus and of course suffering through it himself, leaving office with his legacy 'intact' and without having to fight another GE during the tough economic recovery.
@reluctantjumper - at a local level there's a lot of very good stuff going on like the examples you gave.
I think the lessons learnt in the last 6months should mean the supermarkets are very well prepared for the next national lockdown.
The realistic goal, as I understand it
Is it realistic to expect people to carry on working, producing and consuming whilst giving up socialising with their friends and family?
it’s just a shame we couldn’t work together on it, rather than developing dozens of them.
This is a good thing, more avenues explored means more chances of finding the right one
As with all these things, you only need to ask one question:
What kind of person has both the time and the inclination to phone up a radio phone in at 9.30 in the morning?
It is indeed a complete gammon-o-thon. You’re highly unlikely to hear anyone sane
If you believe that they're all genuine people then you need to have a real serious think.
Have a look at how Cummings and co like to manipulate and use social media to air there views indirectly. Why would they not be using traditional media in the same way?
There was one bloke a few weeks ago, it was the day after the "Moonshot" announcement, who came on and basically attempted to give credibility to the Johnsons claims. He had an obviously scripted speech, claimed to be expert in the testing field, and declared that there's no reason why we can't and won't be doing millions of tests a day. I was just waiting for the five live voice over to announce " you are currently listening to the voice of an actor".
@P-Jay I agree almost completely with you but
The Vaccine that experts said could take years to develop, let alone test, took months thanks to brilliant people doing brilliant things – it’s just a shame we couldn’t work together on it, rather than developing dozens of them
No-one knows which vaccines will work, so having many different teams developing different vaccines based on different mechanisms gives the world it's best chance of a working vaccine.
The UK has signed up to the Covax plan to ensure that forntline workers worldwide get the vaccine.
There’s no logical reason why socialising should be banned/discouraged whilst going to work is encouraged/required
I can think of a few. As a starter:
1. The economy is linked to socialising. The economy isn't just bankers in the city, it's bars and restaurants, it's sports centres, clubs and gyms, it's retailers, it's stately homes, it's hotels and guest houses. These paces all employ people, keep them closed or restrict their custom and you suddenly have more unemployment and so the economy suffers.
2. We're social animals, for our mental health and wellbeing we need to socialise. You can cut this out for a short period, but any longer period will have an impact on people. Socialising is the pleasant part of life that many of us work for. Take that away and people will question if there's any point in working and/or start socialising anyway.
Is it realistic to expect people to carry on working, producing and consuming whilst giving up socialising with their friends and family?
This. It's not, certainly not long term.
Take that away and people will question if there’s any point in working and/or start socialising anyway
Plus once unemployment rises, what else are people expected to do?
My question to everyone is how do you get back to the life you want, and over what timescale?
Medics first, anyone who has previously been asked to shield, elderly, Teacher, Police officers etc
Wrong approach, get the front line workers, health professional, police, teachers and school staff done first. Then get as many mobile, probably younger people vaccinated as possible, they are the ones spreading the virus and have least to gain by isolating. It's all about reducing transmission as quickly as possible. Is someone who is currently shielding more of a risk to the population at large than a healthy 25 year old who goes out to work and socialises.
It's the same with any vaccination program, the vulnerable are protected by the many being vaccinated to reduce to pool of virus in the population.
Wrong approach, get the front line workers, health professional, police, teachers and school staff done first. Then get as many mobile, probably younger people vaccinated as possible, they are the ones spreading the virus and have least to gain by isolating. It’s all about reducing transmission as quickly as possible. Is someone who is currently shielding more of a risk to the population at large than a healthy 25 year old who goes out to work and socialises.
It’s the same with any vaccination program, the vulnerable are protected by the many being vaccinated to reduce to pool of virus in the population.
All vaccination programmes are voluntary.
Good luck at trying to persuade those who are at low risk to have a vaccine, which has been rushed through the approval process.
I don't want to appear contrary, but I think you'll find a considerable proportion of healthcare workers are not going to be particularly enamoured with the idea that we get to be beta testers for a vaccine which has been developed so quickly. Especially when the driving factors seem to be economic and political.
Clapping only gets you so far.
Wrong approach, get the front line workers, health professional, police, teachers and school staff done first. Then get as many mobile, probably younger people vaccinated as possible, they are the ones spreading the virus and have least to gain by isolating. It’s all about reducing transmission as quickly as possible.
This is exactly the right approach...and so it won't be done.
Can you imagine the headlines in The Daily Mail? They would be purple with rage, prioritising young people against our brave pensioners?
No chance.
Is it realistic to expect people to carry on working, producing and consuming whilst giving up socialising with their friends and family?
Good question. It's realistic to ask. Lockdown was pretty effective. If your reasons are wooly and the example you set shit though... People are capable of all sorts of mental gymnastics when what they want to do and what they should do don't align. Unfortunately any faith I have in the great British public doing the right thing for the greater good has evaporated over the past 4 years.
I’m suggesting that if eliminating the virus transmission is the goal, then it makes no logical sense to continue sending kids to school and people to work whilst reducing social contact.
Oh dear... I can't believe I have to point out the logic in a government policy that I consider flawed and poorly communicated... but here goes... if you think that prioritising people being able to go to work and school over people being able to socialise (for a limited time) has no logic to it, you should spend more than 6 months without a job and without there being any new posts in the sector you work in. It's not a great feeling. Get on Zoom with some mates tonight... ask them if prioritising their job over the group of you meeting up for a natter in person (for a limited time) is sound logic.
More restrictions as regards (on site) work and (on site) school will have to come soon (I think they were needed early this month as it happens) but there *is* logic in having a half way house between open and locked down, were schools and workplaces are in use more, but we don't mingle otherwise. The timing for going further is being missed again... but the logic about shutting down socialising before education and many workplaces has a very real logic to it, even if you/I/we disagree with how/when/why they are following it.
Hospitality of all forms straddle this social/economic divide in a way that means they're hit both ways though... and that's where the real (and perhaps unavoidable) contradictions in the rules/laws are apparent.
Boris Johnson has just been asked to explain his governments ‘Rule of Six’ and how it presently applies to the North East
He couldn’t
They don’t even understand the rules that they put in place and are telling us we must all adhere to
https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1310900627917205507?s=21
Jeez.
Matt Lucas sketch of him at start of GBBO was frighteningly accurate.
Will the rules be "reinterpreted" to make the PM correct? I'll put my money on the new laws being adjusted in the next 10 hours to make what he has said "legal", but against "guidelines"... so you won't be allowed by pubs to do it... to prevent them breaking guidelines... but the rules will be changed, so that as a customer you can't be fined if the pub didn't stop you, to keep the PM's words "correct, in a way".
We shouldn't have the situation where the laws are briefed in advance, but then published at the very last moment (or even after they are supposed to come into effect) without any scrutiny, and without any time for people and businesses to understand and prepare for the new laws that they have are supposed to be complying with. People in the NE literally don't know what the law will be tomorrow morning.
There we go... not illegal to meet in a beer garden (outside)... but the guidelines are they you should "avoid" it. Bingo.
So, official policy is now entirely dependent on how much Boris 'misspoke' on any given day?
Righty ho then...
It gets worse. None of the council leaders or local MP's in the North East were consulted about the increased restrictions that were to apply to their areas, they received no advanced warning and were issued with no official guidelines as to what is and isn't allowed. Just what they've seen on the news, the same as everyone else.
The government are literally making it up as they go along. Sketched out, on the hoof, on the back of a fag packet. As Boris just demonstrated.
Its criminally negligent
if you think that prioritising people being able to go to work and school over people being able to socialise
You're completely missing the point again. I'm arguing that work/school shouldn't take priority over socialising. A lockdown only works if people accept it, and people are not going to accept removing the one thing in life that gives them pleisure, whilst being told they still have to work. If a lockdown is required to suppress the virus, then fine, but it will only work if it applies everywhere, including work, and that's going to require the govt to support jobs and industries. Expecting people to lockdown without providing the support to enable them to do it, and without providing a level playing field will fail. The end result will be huge disruption to everyone's lives for very little actual or perceived benefit.
People are capable of all sorts of mental gymnastics when what they want to do and what they should do don’t align. Unfortunately any faith I have in the great British public doing the right thing for the greater good has evaporated over the past 4 years.
My holiday still bugging you? 🙂 Honestly though, the british public gave up doing the right thing about 30 odd years ago when they sold themselves out to Thatchers individualist utopia. Our inability to take collective action in the face of threats like coronavirus goes much further back than brexit.
Apologies, I misspoke today.
I’m arguing that work/school shouldn’t take priority over socialising.
So... you're not arguing that there is no logic to that decision, just that you don't agree with the decision? Say that then.
Also, I'm surprised you'd take such a bourgeois position. I suggest you get on that zoom with some mates who appreciate how important their job is to them. [ tongue in cheek ]
Expecting people to lockdown without providing the support to enable them to do it, and without providing a level playing field will fail.
I keep posting this myself... so agree 100%.
1. The economy is linked to socialising. The economy isn’t just bankers in the city, it’s bars and restaurants, it’s sports centres, clubs and gyms, it’s retailers, it’s stately homes, it’s hotels and guest houses. These paces all employ people, keep them closed or restrict their custom and you suddenly have more unemployment and so the economy suffers.
2. We’re social animals, for our mental health and wellbeing we need to socialise. You can cut this out for a short period, but any longer period will have an impact on people. Socialising is the pleasant part of life that many of us work for. Take that away and people will question if there’s any point in working and/or start socialising anyway
Obviously this is learning how we deal with the second wave. Given that we didn't deal with the first wave very effectively. I'd want us to be a bit more cautious this time around. We haven't been IMO, not really seen ANY tough decisions made by govt, just some flapping round the edges and an attempt to blame various demographics. We'll see where that gets us in a few weeks time.
As they've already nudged it, my money is on a 2 week lockdown over half term. So less effective than now in controlling spread, but easier logistics.
I do hear you on the socialising thing, I don't think it is long term sustainable. But if we go through 2-3 months of restrictions and open up after with a sensible no. of cases, that has to give confidence that the "boom and bust" model can be workable in the medium term. We haven't seen the alternative at all, have we? No one has seen "boom and boom" yet and what that means in terms of impact, both for public health and economically.
Seriously, wtf is the point of this 2 week lockdown in October? unless this vaccine and/or new treatments is closer than we think (which seems feasible), then we just end up suppressing and back to rising numbers a few weeks later?.
Also, I’m surprised you’d take such a bourgeois position. I suggest you get on that zoom with some mates who appreciate how important their job is to them. [ tongue in cheek ]
I'll admit that most of my mates are indeed bourgeois but I can guarantee you that the working class oiks from whence I came will almost certainly take the view that Boris can f*** right off if he thinks they're gonna carry on working without having the opportunity to go down the pub on a Friday night and get wasted with their mates. IME it's the bourgeois who are wedded to their careers, not the working class.
then we just end up suppressing and back to rising numbers a few weeks later?
Saving thousands of lives. Someone more able would be able to draw you some graphs to explain it for you.
We won't be going into some form of eternal lock down... but we have to keep dampening down the spread of the infection... and without a vaccine social distancing measures are the best tool we have.
Is it realistic to expect people to carry on working, producing and consuming whilst giving up socialising with their friends and family?
The problem is, it would appear - though I'd like to see the data - that people socialising irresponsibly has been a driver of the increase in transmission. As yet - and it may change - work and school have not been, to the same extent.
If everyone stayed outside, met a few limited number of friends, stayed 2 metres apart and wore masks, socialising would be lower risk.
And no one here is saying that restricting socialising means throwing the leisure industry under a bus. I'd expect any sector facing government restrictions to get proper support.
if he thinks they’re gonna carry on working without having the opportunity to go down the pub on a Friday night and get wasted with their mates.
Even if it kills granny? Nice people, great sense of social responsibility.
I’d expect any sector facing government restrictions to get proper support.
The opposite is happening. If government restrictions make jobs in a sector "unviable", then the workers in them are being thrown under the bus... that's the official government line now.
Saving thousands of lives. Someone more able would be able to draw you some graphs to explain it for you.
I understand the boom and bust of it, it just seems so unsustainable. Hence why I'm hoping it's a sign that traetment is relatively near.
Unsustainable? Compared to another doubling + another doubling + another doubling...? We need to keep the virus in check. A short "lock down" every now and again, before the spread becomes too great, can prevent a longer lock down being needed this winter. The cost of inaction or late action can be much greater than the cost of timely action. Hopefully we learned that lesson already this year.
The opposite is happening. If government restrictions make jobs in a sector “unviable”, then the workers in them are being thrown under the bus… that’s the official government line now.
Entire sections of the economy, or certainly the people who work(ed) in them, have already been deemed as acceptable collateral damage and won't survive the winter.
As you'd expect from people who know the price of everything and the value of nothing
I actually don't have a particular issue with another short and well defined lockdown if, and it's a big if:
The guidance is clear on what we can and can't do.
It's for a set period of time and won't get extended on a whim.
There is science behind why it will work.
People who's jobs are affected by it (yes, we're back to hospitality workers again) are suitably looked after.
**** it, I'm no arguing, lifes too short. 🙂
I agree with all that Lunge except ...
It’s for a set period of time and won’t get extended on a whim.
The aim should be to get the rise in infections flat (or better still falling) (or at worst less steep)... not to hit an arbitrary deadline. Ideally, only release restrictions once the figures start to suggest they have done their job.
I don’t want to appear contrary, but I think you’ll find a considerable proportion of healthcare workers are not going to be particularly enamoured with the idea that we get to be beta testers for a vaccine which has been developed so quickly. Especially when the driving factors seem to be economic and political.
I know a lot of healthcare workers, most want it double-quick, knowing both how high risk they are from their work, and how low risk vaccines generally are. That said, I do know of one Nurse who is a good friend of my wife who is, let's say Vaccine cautious, she certainly paused for thought before she vaccinated her kids for the usual stuff.
As for the testing, as I understand it the Oxford Covid vaccine has been through the same 3 phase trial as any other drug, no short cuts, just given pretty much unlimited resources and money to get it done quickly and Phase 3 which is going on at the moment is generally a measure of it's performance, not safety, which is done in the earlier phases.
The only potential short-cut being considered now, is to either pass emergency rules to allow it to be used unlicensed, or to ask the licensing body to pass it very quickly, rather than taking months to go over the data to be sure for themselves.
It puts a huge amount of trust in Oxford Uni and AstraZeneca that they haven't hidden anything, or otherwise gotten up to any sort of skulduggery, but if they did I don't think the governing body would know any better.
That's not to say it's not without risk, and they may only decide to offer it unlicensed to high risk people, which would make some sense as by the time it's ready to be given to general population.
There is a Phase 4 too, they will continue to monitor is as it's used in the population.
As with everything when it comes to Covid, it's the small numbers that **** you. Even if 0.0001% of people who get the Covid vaccine have an unexpected side effect and get ill, that's still 800k people globally, or 6700 in the UK, assuming vaccinating the whole globe is the plan.
Even if it kills granny? Nice people, great sense of social responsibility.
No one believes it's going to kill *their* granny though. And yes, there is very little social responsibility because that hasn't existed for quite some time in this country for reasons that are beyond the topic of this thread. It's all very well labelling people as irresponsible or selfish, but the reality is that we live in a transactional society. People aren't going to give up their 'freedoms' without being supported and compensated, even if that means the deaths of elderly strangers in some far flung care home. We either do this properly, or not at all, this halfway house only ensures we get the worst of both worlds.
People aren’t going to give up their ‘freedoms’
They have. People all over the country have done exactly that this year. You can argue that they will continue to do so in ever dwindling numbers... but that's not exactly the blitz spirit, is it. [ tongue firmly in cheek again ]
You're right though... people need "compensation" and support if they can't work because of restrictions... not because they are selfish, but because they can't afford to do their bit for very long (if at all) without it.
They don't need bribing not to go the pub though. Just clear instructions. We haven't really moved fully away from "it's your duty to go to the pub, we'll pay half your food bill"... to whatever is expected of people now... and we're back to the daily briefings... people have no idea if it's "go the pub", or "don't go to the pub", or something in-between that needs explaining to them (and if it can't be explained, it needs to be changed).
They have. People all over the country have done exactly that this year.
There is much less willingness to do another lockdown now than there was in March, due largely to the fact that the govt have made it clear they are not willing to support workers like they did first time round, and the realisation from those who were thrown under the bus back then that no one is going to help them. You can't do collective action without collective support.
We haven’t really moved fully away from “it’s your duty to go to the pub, we’ll pay half your food bill”
Agreed. On the one hand the govt says 'we need to stop socialising to stop the spread', on the other they tell us we should continue to go to the pub because they're not willing, or rather they can't afford, to support the hospitality industry. It doesn't take a genius to work out this is contradictory, and when that conclusion is reached, everything else the govt tells us is ignored.
The aim should be to get the rise in infections flat (or better still falling) (or at worst less steep)… not to hit an arbitrary deadline. Ideally, only release restrictions once the figures start to suggest they have done their job.
You won't get support for another indefinite lockdown, people are fed up already so it'll be broken and broken quickly.
I've said this before, but if you do your science behind the scenes and then come out and say "right, we need these restrictions for this long to get this result" people are vastly more likely to buy into it.
Give people an end goal to aim at and more will do as their told. Give them vague statements, no end goal and no timeline and people who are already fed up with it will push it.
Ahh... to have so little faith in your fellow Brits. I understand where that comes from... but I'm not there yet. All this was said before we did the "lock down" in the spring... it sounds like exactly the same kind of negative thinking to me. It's true that any kind of "lock down" will require extra support from the government beyond what is currently publicly announced... and I also agree that support is likely to be far less, and even less universal, than the support offered in the spring... but things will change fast once the government is forced into action by events (which is the only time they do anything it seems).
Is the two-week lockdown thing still on the Horizon?
If anyone is looking for a silver lining, Caerphilly was the first county to go into local lockdown here in Wales, far from "draconian" as the anti-mask lot like to call it, the rules were fairly simple. No going to each other houses, no leaving the county (unless it's for work / education) / shut the pubs earlier - although this was 11pm at the time.
They've been in force for 3 weeks now and new cases have been falling steadily. Week 1 119 cases per 100k, week 2 67 per 100k week 3 45 cases per 100k. I'm not sure if WAG has said at what level they will consider lifting lockdown, but 54 cases per 100k was seen as when they would enforce it.
