Forum menu
If Australia had a population density >10x that which you do, even with you excellent response to the pandemic you would have had a bigger infection rate., which in turn spreads it wider still and so it begins….that’s how pandemics work.
No.
It’s literally the UKs strategy to allow the virus to spread to levels that would have sparked much stronger responses in other countries, much sooner.
The federal and state leaders in Australia were on-the-ball from day 1 (straight of the back of another national crisis).
What’s characterised the UKs response is waiting too late to take action, and then that action being woefully insufficient.
There was a day back in June when Melbourne had the same infection rate as the uk. The difference is that this sparked a super strict lockdown in Melbourne - and in the uk everybody started going on their holibobs and eating out to chuffing help out.
Sorry - this is obviously something that really pushes my buttons
What’s characterised the UKs response is waiting too late to take action, and then that action being woefully insufficient.
This.
Michael Rosen on Radio4 Today very touching this morning. Worth a listen. Both on the negative experience of having this disease, and the positive response of other people towards him while he struggled. Somehow still manages to be funny and warm while talking about learning to walk again, and mourning his pre-Covid self that he has lost. The man is a legend, and oh so human.
I'm not saying the UK response has been adequate, far from; nor that Aus has been excellent. And don't mean to push buttons, but:
There was a day back in June when Melbourne had the same infection rate as the uk. The difference is that this sparked a super strict lockdown in Melbourne
Define infection rate? Whether R number or cases per 100,000 people, if the people are confined to a small area the likelihood of spread is higher.
TLDR. UK response has been very poor. Aus has been excellent. But there are other factors that have enabled Aus's response to be EVEN MORE effective, and simply saying that Melbourne has 5 million inhabitants compared to (sic) 7M in London is over simplistic.
(flipside and I am genuinely very angry at the UK's response....)
Knowing what our city's population density is like, that's another reason why we should have had stronger restrictions.
Sorry to read your news PJM, try to make some time for you in between supporting those around you.
I'm just about managing as there's wife and 2 children to provide an absorbent shoulder for.
News from Ulster not so good yesterday as MIL sats show blood oxygen at 90% with oxygen and 70% if she takes the nasal tubes off. After Friday we thought that a corner had been turned but it looks like we're in for a series of short rallies and further subsidence as our lovely matriarch subsides in the West.
UK response has been very poor. Aus has been excellent. But there are other factors that have enabled Aus’s response to be EVEN MORE effective,
Which does not excuse or justify our failure to make the extra efforts required to step up our own response to a level that would have been more effective, in terms of closing borders, quarantine, lockdown and test and trace. Especially test and trace.
like I said in the next post
I’ll of course agree that there are really significant differences in demographics between the UK and Australia.
I’d agree that these differences should have shaped the UKs response.... so did they? What did the UK do over and above what Australia have done to reflect this difference?
I agree comparing two countries' responses isn't particularly helpful, which is why I mentioned the spread of the major cities and the crucial state borders. IMHO our Prime Minister (Scott Morrison - or 'Scotty from marketing') wasn't particularly good, he's tried to politicise things. I've never been a fan of the state system but it was very important. When everyone was saying borders had to be opened Queensland refused and managed to pretty much shut out the virus. No one from into Brisbane from Sydney - i can't see that you could do the equivalent in the UK.
But international borders should have been managed better by the UK. And the selfish greed of people who think they 'deserve' holidays more than the people they potentially effect when they return makes my blood boil.
I was impressed by the likes of Sam Hill and Conor Fearon deciding not to travel this year (ok, maybe they didn't see the point of a token 2020 season, and equally disappointed by Tracey Hanna on a Downtime podcast saying she thought Australia was 'a bit over the top' about the whole virus thing. Tell that to PJM1974 and the thousands of others who've lost loved ones as an indirect result of poor government decisions this year.
Going back a few steps, has anyone actually heard of fines being issued?
And I can tell you, as the husband of a social worker, there is not a snowballs chance in hell of kids being taken into care for not going to school at the moment
Well the threat is enough for most people, especially carers who may be in an uncertain position.
Why else do they keep reminding us of the absence policy?
Even the COVID flowchart they issued has "NO NOT TAKE UNAUTHORISED ABSENCE" in bold capitals.
Perhaps you don't realise but the ever present threat of being taken from a loving parent and put into care is terrifying.
When will people aged 49 and under with no under lying health issues get vaccinated?
Probably not (if ever) all the info I have stops at over 50 with no medical conditions. But those folk are “group 9” we’re only just getting going on groups 1&2
What’s characterised the UKs response is waiting too late to take action, and then that action being woefully insufficient.
There was a day back in June when Melbourne had the same infection rate as the uk. The difference is that this sparked a super strict lockdown in Melbourne – and in the uk everybody started going on their holibobs and eating out to chuffing help out.
Sorry – this is obviously something that really pushes my buttons
Back in March (Crankworx) NZ was quarantining....
Define infection rate? Whether R number or cases per 100,000 people, if the people are confined to a small area the likelihood of spread is higher.
It's a red herring IMHO. Measures have got to reflect population density.
What WE should be doing is MORE...rather than Hancock just looking for excuses why we aren't doing as well as the rural outback. (or wherever)
Perhaps you don’t realise but the ever present threat of being taken from a loving parent and put into care is terrifying.
Can I repeat - who is threatening to take kids from a loving parent for not attending school at the moment? Unless there is a likelihood of actual immediate harm, it takes months if not years for a SW to get a child removed, so whoever is peddling that level of twaddle needs to be told to do one!
I haven’t read all 500 pages of this thread but I’ve dipped in now and again and I’m always amazed how little diversity of opinion there is.
Have you bullied out all the cynics and conspiracy theorists, or is STW really that depressingly homogeneous?
It seems unlikely given what I see around me in the real world, on and off the bike.
Why is nobody here questioning the stats and the vaccines and the lockdowns? Why is nobody here advocating that the government should do less, not more?
It’s like entering some alternative reality...
Ask away with any specific question or concern you have... there are people (not me) with real scientific and/or medical knowledge and experience contributing to this thread, and also people (including myself) with real experience of what this virus can do to people who get it. So... question away... but you'll need to be specific about what you propose, rather than that we just "do less".
Why is nobody here questioning the stats and the vaccines and the lockdowns? Why is nobody here advocating that the government should do less, not more?
Because science. Hth.
Interesting large parts of the media are up in arms about London going into tier 3 and the damage it'll do, yet they seemed rather quiet about the rest of the UK.
Related, we really are going to pay for this Christmas relaxation aren't we? Goodbye January and February...
Why is nobody here questioning the stats and the vaccines and the lockdowns? Why is nobody here advocating that the government should do less, not more?
Because we have real experts in the field on here, from around the world in fact, who have answered those questions as we've gone along. Backing them up with real data. Lots of decisions have been questioned and argued over if you follow the thread in more detail. And we're still disagreeing on stuff, but doing it in a mostly civilised and rational way
Totally agree lunge. Also, given that, so I've heard, a lot of the current rise in cases is school age groups, will the inevitable January+February lockdown be lockdown hard, or lite?
Why is nobody here questioning the stats and the vaccines and the lockdowns? Why is nobody here advocating that the government should do less, not more?
We'll, here's your platform, we're all ears.
Interesting large parts of the media are up in arms about London going into tier 3 and the damage it’ll do, yet they seemed rather quiet about the rest of the UK.
I was amazed that football clubs in the south had fans in given the virus prevalence.
Haven't seen this article discussed here (but maybe it has)
Basically it's about Johnson meeting with herd immunity proponents and Rishi Sunak and deciding not to have an early firebreak, costing thousands of lives.
I was amazed that football clubs in the south had fans in given the virus prevalence.
Yeah, seems an odd decision, though it does seem that as long as you keep people outside the transmission rates are low. I don't think those events have made much difference to the rates, though you could argue about the message it sends out.
To be fair, London was always going to end up in tier 3, their rates were high and going up after lockdown 2.
I was amazed that football clubs in the south had fans in given the virus prevalence.
IIRC Jenny Harries' argument was that anyone not sitting in a football stadium would automatically go to the pub. Probably wearing a flat cap and with a whippet in tow.
Anyone who ventures a different opinion will get shut down on here. Apparently if you have concerns about this pandemic/plandemic then you’ll be compared to a Brexiteer.
Umm, no, but if you expect conspiracy theories advanced without evidence to be entertained in the same measure as the contributions of epidemiological experts probably you're going to be disappointed.
With that caveat - go for it.
The football club thing is because London is still in Tier 2 due to the lag in data leading to what would seem to be obvious decisions.
We are going to be screwed again in January/February, and this time I don't see how schools can be kept open, however much that may be a good thing to aim for. Eldest is in his A level year - any more disruption this year, or a lockdown, and I don't see how exams in England can go ahead.
C_G - I'm happy to read and comment on your considered view based on evidence, the same as I have for others on here. There certainly shouldn't be any insulting or slapping down of other opinions. However, the tone of your post suggests that you are not happy seeing information that doesn't fit with your own opinion, so you do potentially come across as wanting it both ways maybe?
Anyone who ventures a different opinion will get shut down on here. Apparently if you have concerns about this pandemic/plandemic then you’ll be compared to a Brexiteer.
Sorry, c_g, but no they won't. I have several times questioned the government responses wrt needing the economy to keep functioning, and the impact that will have in the long term on mental health / poverty and outcomes. Some have disagreed, others have also added the same concerns. But you need to come with evidence and argument, and be prepared to listen to it as well.
And the moment you call it a plandemic, you start to forfeit your views being debated as rationally.
Can I repeat – who is threatening to take kids from a loving parent for not attending school at the moment? Unless there is a likelihood of actual immediate harm, it takes months if not years for a SW to get a child removed, so whoever is peddling that level of twaddle needs to be told to do one!
I spent the entire time from 11-16 living in terror
for us it all started when my mum was ill and had to go into hospital, then they started saying we had to have our own place to live (as we were stopping with grandparents and uncles and aunts), next thing they are showing you dolls and trying to trick you into saying someone is touching you or they send the police around to accuse the kids of cashing a giro or something.
So sure it takes months or years but it is months/years of extreme unpleasantness and everyone knows what happens to the kids in care.
Haven’t seen this article discussed here (but maybe it has)
Basically it’s about Johnson meeting with herd immunity proponents and Rishi Sunak and deciding not to have an early firebreak, costing thousands of lives.
Well, you know they never changed the strategy when Gove goes on TV and barefaced say's they never had a herb immunity strategy and were following the science but Vallance was lying.
My kid has started calling it "Hunger Games" at school. He's in the last 10 in his class now.
I'm quite happy for anybody to challenge my view. Show me evidence and you might change my mind. Start quoting Facebook experts though, and you can expect some strong responses - backed up by evidence/expert opinion/science.
Im up for a discussion on CV/Lockdown/Brexit/Trump/Rigged elections - anything at all really. I tend to find the other side to me aren't interested in facts/evidence though.
plandemic
Get. In. The. Sea.
Chrispo - if you did read the 524 pages, you'd discover it isn't just one viewpoint at all. Most discussions have been had. What you will find is that rational scientific evidence generally points one way.
I think most of us acknowledge that, as Prof Chris Whitty has often said, "There is no Simple Solution"
Lockdown has its negative sides, and we can't save every life. The problem with "Just letting it Rip " is that hospitals will be overrun and that leads to far worse outcomes. So many Healthcare Professionals have already lost their lives fighting this horrible disease and I think we owe it to their colleagues to do our best for them.
I spent the entire time from 11-16 living in terror
for us it all started when my mum was ill and had to go into hospital, then they started saying we had to have our own place to live (as we were stopping with grandparents and uncles and aunts), next thing they are showing you dolls and trying to trick you into saying someone is touching you or they send the police around to accuse the kids of cashing a giro or something.
So sure it takes months or years but it is months/years of extreme unpleasantness and everyone knows what happens to the kids in care.
I'm really sorry for your experience, which must have been horrendous. However, my question was, who is saying kids will be taken into care if they don't go to school because of Covid worries? Who is actually threatening this from a position of authority, rather than your own understandable fears based on your own terrible experience 20 years ago?
London to Tier 3
Hancock to make a statement shortly.
(Tiers of a Clown playing in the background in my head)
I’m quite happy for anybody to challenge my view. Show me evidence and you might change my mind. Start quoting Facebook experts though, and you can expect some strong responses – backed up by evidence/expert opinion/science.
I think this sums up my view as well.
However, I think this place can be a little quick to critisise and demand evidence for someone's opinion. I've certainly felt on occasions that any comments about lighter restrictions or putting more emphasis on saving the economy and protecting the youngsters are quickly met with nastiness.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plandemic
The casual use of that word is not something that does you any favours if you wish to be taken seriously.
London to Tier 3
Hancock to make a statement shortly.
(Tiers of a Clown playing in the background in my head)
I get it, but it seems pointless, in a few days people will be going up and down the country when surly the whole country will be in lockdown from Jan. It is what it is, no more Surrey hills rides for me for a few weeks.
I get it, but it seems pointless, in a few days people will be going up and down the country when surly the whole country will be in lockdown from Jan. It is what it is, no more Surrey hills rides for me for a few weeks
There's a few rumours that Johnson is debating cancelling the Christmas exemptions despite cases falling in most places bar London. I'm not convinced he will as he so wanted to be the guy who saved Christmas, but I'd not rule it out. It's not like he has previous for making ill-informed, last minute decisions...
There’s a few rumours that Johnson is debating cancelling the Christmas exemptions
I think the genie is out of that particular festive bottle. People will have already made plans, ordered food and drink etc. Johnson doesn't seem happy enough being unpopular to be on the front of the Sun dressed up as the Grinch.
When will people aged 49 and under with no under lying health issues get vaccinated?
Don't plan on anything before 3Q21. Possibly with influenza dual roll-out. Supply won't get up to speed until then.
However, I think this place can be a little quick to critisise and demand evidence for someone’s opinion. I’ve certainly felt on occasions that any comments about lighter restrictions or putting more emphasis on saving the economy and protecting the youngsters are quickly met with nastiness.
Something we've all probably been guilty of on here, and not just on the Covid thread.
I can't see how Boris can't cancel Christmas. Quite a few scientific advisors have gone public on the risks, the NHS has gone public on the risks, he's got to weigh up whether he looks a bigger buffoon cancelling Christmas now, or having to drag out Tiers or impose a stricter lockdown in January/February.
However, I think this place can be a little quick to critisise and demand evidence for someone’s opinion.
I agree, but with caveats
1/ when the case for is supported by lots of evidence*, including from some very auspicious correspondents, opinion with no correlating evidence to back it up is not a particularly convincing counter. 'It's just what I think' or 'some bloke in the pub said' doesn't have the same veracity.
2/ It's OK (as I have done) to ask a question. You don't need to actually be on the other side to be able to ask what the other side might be. As long as you're prepared to listen to the evidence both for and against. Not knowing but wanting to find out is a fair place to be.
3/ Rebuttal of your opinion is not a personal attack (should not be). It's just pointing out the flaws in your argument. Sadly, the weaker / less well evidenced arguments get the stronger rebuttals, which seem to upset people more.
4/ Positing an opinion and then getting counters to it is how debate works. If you just want validation, you need to find a different chamber. Yes- I'm aware this site is a bit echoey at times but I'll say again, my queries have usually been met with fair and polite argument.
* unless you genuinely believe this is all a massive conspiracy. But no amount of evidence is then likely to convince otherwise.
I get it, but it seems pointless
Hmm. I know of several people who have been travelling out of a Tier 3 area into London for “drinkies”. Probably not that many people, but it doesn’t take many people to move the virus about and cause problems.
To quote someone on Twitter:
"Wow London get 1 day notice to lockdown hospitality because the retail shops have been full. "
Not an unfair point.