It’s the middle period where it’s dragged on and things have slipped for a lot of people. With a bit of effort and nudging in the right direction I’m sure we could do a lot to get it under control without wrecking the country and unleashing the Stasi to crush folk straying too far on a bike ride.

I think this is pretty key. Lockdown fatigue is a real thing people can’t be expect to follow such extreme rules all the time without it having serious implications on mental health. Slips are always going to happen and people will take risks they feel are acceptable, for example even at the height of lockdown I was still doing 40/50 mile rides from my house roads were dead, interacted with no one touched nothing I didn’t own myself apart from the odd gate on a fire road/bridal way.

The only real way to get the R number down and get this thing gone is all stay inside until we have a vaccine but that isn’t practical unless the gov’ want to invest some seriously socialist measures. We need to learn to live with this thing its gonna be around for a long time.

Just what job are the police doing taking people home, arresting them… giving then a kicking. I mean lets just give the police guns after all we need to enforce a “proper lockdown.”

You took a bit of a leap there fella.

I agree lockdown compliance was good last time and it did its job. But this next time? How do we get it to the same levels? I’m not suggesting we have armed squaddies on the streets in tanks.

I’m well aware of the risks and flaws in my suggestion, I’m waiting for an alternative suggestion for enforcing a future lockdown given the lack of leadership/example at the top and the lockdown fatigue – yes, and mental health issues, which I have some experience of myself, when we need to make it happen again

We need to learn to live with this thing its gonna be around for a long time.

Close to what my wife, a nurse, said this week. Except she said it’s here for good and reckons almost everyone will get it eventually.

I’m well aware of the risks and flaws in my suggestion, I’m waiting for an alternative suggestion

well dude, i don’t have one i just know putting army on the street isnt a good idea. Historically when have that ever ended well. If we had decent social services and the gov’ could provide for people who have to isolate and not work maybe more people would be willing to stay at home.

Close to what my wife, a nurse, said this week. Except she said it’s here for good and reckons almost everyone will get it eventually.

Gotta be honest its not totally an original thought my sister in law said it too and shes a GP. All we can hope is getting better treatment to ensure less people die of it.

At the moment it feels like the government have lost perspective on why the message exists and gone solely for producing messages as the end it itself. Hardly surprising given Cummings love of the glib catchphrase.

Joepud … or a vaccine.

Has everyone given up on that idea?

The whole point of restrictions is to protect people until there is a vaccine and keep the wheels on the NHS.

I saw some behaviour expert a while back who said compliance started extremely high but dropped markedly at 2 points, the big drop being Cummings event. What has been done since to rebuild any trust? I fear compliance will be low from the start of any new lockdown

I agree lockdown compliance was good last time and it did its job. But this next time? How do we get it to the same levels? I’m not suggesting we have armed squaddies on the streets in tanks.

I think you’re on to something with the lack of leadership on this. I’m not clear what exactly we’re trying to achieve any more. Putting the conspiracy theorist loons to one side, there is a genuine debate about what gives us the “best” outcome as individuals and a society and it’s definitely not black and white. I’ve been pretty well on board with the whole thing but over the last couple of weeks I’m wondering whether the harm being stored up is worth it.

Struck me particularly today at the park with the kids. There was another girl there (age 6ish) who you could see desperately needing and wanting to connect with other kids. Every time she ventured near anyone she got a reaction off her mum like she was about to tread on a land mine. Our daughter’s class at schools is running at 1/2 full – only a few kids officially sick / isolating so Christ knows what the rest are up to. I’m worried we’re not getting the balance right – keeping in mind most kids and their parents are at minimal risk from this.

I think the underlying thing is that as a society we have a huge thing about death. So the avoidance of death is everything. Which sort of shifts the priority away from securing the best life for our kids and society.

Joepud … or a vaccine.

<span style=”font-size: 0.8rem;”>Has everyone given up on that idea?</span>

<span style=”font-size: 0.8rem;”>The whole point of restrictions is to protect people until there is a vaccine and keep the wheels on the NHS.</span>

I have. It took God knows how long to get rid of polio whats the likelihood of them solving covid in less than a year. Very slim I bet. Even if there is a vaccine they still need the logistics to get it to everyone which will take a long time….  But we always got the moonshot.

I’m totally onboard with protecting the NHS it’s why I never vote Tory, but we need to be realistic we can’t just expect people to stay inside lock themselves away it’s too draining for people.

Vaccine? It’s all gone quiet on that front; I would be (pleasantly) surprised if we had a fully tested and properly approved one in less than two years.
I wouldn’t be surprised if a fully tested and proven was never developed.

Neil – as for your comment, I couldn’t agree more that cummings behaviour – including his refusal to apologise – damaged compliance irreparably and will do the same to any new lockdown.

Six months since johnson decided to take this seriously and what tangible achievements since then?
Protect the NHS – yes but the collateral damage was thousands of care home deaths.
Generally a high level of compliance with regulations initially but cummings stuffed that.
Furlough support but that’s ending soon.
Opening employers eyes to the possibilities of WFH – but that’s an unintended consequence.

Downsides…
There has been too little international co-operation.
No clear communication about where we are today and what strategy we are following.
What is the objective of the gov’s scattergun approach.
Public health professionals have been marginalised – until recently.
Widespread abuse of public sector procurement.
Absence of accountability across gov.

If a further lockdown, significantly increase the fines for any breach.
A start point of £1,000 would demonstrate serious intent; incremental increases are pointless – double the fine for each subsequent breach or failure to pay.
Three strikes and you get three months.
Too many people are taking the piss and will continue to do so under any new lockdown.
Make it explicitly clear that this is serious; make it hurt where it counts – in the pocket.
Name and shame in local media; why not?

Close to what my wife, a nurse, said this week. Except she said it’s here for good and reckons almost everyone will get it eventually.

Gotta be honest its not totally an original thought my sister in law said it too and shes a GP. All we can hope is getting better treatment to ensure less people die of it.

Maybe not original, but not a widespread view either, at least until recently. Underlying assumption for many has been we’ll get the ‘end’ of this soon by a vaccine or whatever. As per a couple of other posts, if that’s not the case it does make you wonder whether the current strategy is the right one

Most people breaking lockdown don’t have £1000, they’re looking for their next fags, weed & booze whilst wandering the streets

Most people breaking lockdown don’t have £1000, they’re looking for their next fags, weed & booze whilst wandering the streets

That’s bollocks; most who breach the regs do so knowingly in the belief the chance of getting done is small and the penalty is laughable.
For the minority who fit your description, that’s their problem.

Global cases now close to 31 million; global deaths close to 1 million.
There appears to be a major disconnect between the high number of cases in India and the relatively low number of deaths; I don’t believe that’s the only country with such a disconnect so it’s probable the death count is understated.

I’m not sure why everyone is so pessimistic about the vacine. Science has come along way since we tried to crack polio..I reckon they’ll have one that works by early next year.

Getting enough of it to everyone is another matter altogether however. Rules mean that no country gets more than enough for 20% of the population until all the other countries have had their 20%. So basically nhs first, old and vulnerable next. Everyone else will be waiting.

Which is fine to a point, but given it seems to be a virus that may not kill healthy folks, but can do lasting permanent damage, it’s unlikely the danger of this will go away any time soon

I’m not sure why everyone is so pessimistic about the vacine. Science has come along way since we tried to crack polio..I reckon they’ll have one that works by early next year.

I agree that science continues to develop but there is no reason to believe that a CV19 vaccine will be developed anytime soon.
Even if a (possible) vaccine was developed, look at the timescales for stringent testing and approval protocols.
Two years, at best. Then factor in the logistical considerations you refer to; on top of that, how do we scale up production to provide national/international/global coverage?
What about patents on the first proven and safe vaccine?
Global health before profit? Only one winner there – and it isn’t global health.
I would suggest it’s best to assume there won’t be a vaccine and modify your life/behaviour accordingly.
That is being nothing other than realistic.

Everyone will either get it, or a proxy for infection in the form of vaccination or passive protection. Treatments are coming. Lilly proved last week that antibodies can do something, albeit at some heroic doses. But early days. Vaccine efficacy studies are due to report in October/November. I hope they work.

Mid 2021 is the delivery date for some of the biggest players. Perhaps earlier.

Vaccine efficacy studies are due to report in October/November. I hope they work.

So do I.

joepud
Full Member

I think this is pretty key. Lockdown fatigue is a real thing people can’t be expect to follow such extreme rules all the time without it having serious implications on mental health.

OK but, we have never faced “extreme rules” in the UK. We’ve never had a lockdown at all, really. We’ve had moderate restrictions, which some people have treated like the end of the world- but then, some people think being asked to wear a mask is the end of the world.

Lockdown fatigure is definitely a real thing but don’t confuse it with Government Fatigue, the number one factor in compliance and noncompliance by a long way is the government that’s running it. And ours has been incredibly awful. Arguably the worst, in those nations that have actually decided to handle it- not as bad as Brazil or the US but that’s a whole different issue. If you wanted to deter people from following the rules, westminster’s approach has been flawless.

ElShalimo
Free Member

Most people breaking lockdown don’t have £1000, they’re looking for their next fags, weed & booze whilst wandering the streets

Your explanation of why people break lockdown is bollocks imo but your point is sound. Fines don’t deter people who have money, and people who don’t have money might have no choice- what happens when you get pinged by the track and trace app but furlough is over and the eviction ban is over and you’ve got bills to pay? You go to work, and risk a fine, which you can’t afford. It’s near-perfect feudal capitalism.

I agree that science continues to develop but there is no reason to believe that a CV19 vaccine will be developed anytime soon.
Even if a (possible) vaccine was developed, look at the timescales for stringent testing and approval protocols.
Two years, at best. Then factor in the logistical considerations you refer to; on top of that, how do we scale up production to provide national/international/global coverage?
What about patents on the first proven and safe vaccine?

I understand your pessimism Frank

Two to three years for a phase 3 vaccine is about right – under normal circumstances. Almost a year of that is start-up, a 6 months to a year to find the patients (recruitment), and then a year for the last of those patients to run through the trial, and then process the results. Very roughly speaking of course. My day job is running large commercial clinical trials, typically oncology – but I’ve done a few flu vaccine studies in my time too. Delays in clinical trials are largely due to competing priorities, workload, unnecessary bureaucracy (genuinely unnecessary – you wouldn’t believe the delays I’ve seen for absolutely no reason) etc. Every so often you get a “unicorn” trial where you have none of those, and things happen very quickly.

The study has already started, there will be absolutely no problem recruiting patients, and usually the “topline” results are available within days of the last patient completing the last study examination. From there its a case of submitting the data to the regulators to approval.

There will be no delay in approval – this is such a huge global priority that review for the data will be done as soon as its available – which I am reading will be Q1 2020. Production will ramp-up in parallel – people will start receiving the vaccine the day it’s approved. Erm……as long as Boris actually puts somebody competent in charge.

Here in Australia, the government have already bought the rights to manufacture 85 million doses of 2 vaccines domestically (including the Oxford vaccine). And are projecting that it will start distribution in Q1.

The availability of a vaccine in Q1 2020 is entirely possible. Yes, it will be a stretch – this is the best case scenario for sure, and there are plenty things that can go wrong – but I’m feeling quite optimistic.

Your explanation of why people break lockdown is bollocks imo but your point is sound. Fines don’t deter people who have money, and people who don’t have money might have no choice- what happens when you get pinged by the track and trace app but furlough is over and the eviction ban is over and you’ve got bills to pay? You go to work, and risk a fine, which you can’t afford. It’s near-perfect feudal capitalism.

Don’t disagree but you offer no solution; I’m not suggesting there is a solution.
I will continue to assume our ‘leaders’ are incompetent and exist in a solution-free zone; will, therefore, continue to behave accordingly – can spell out if necessary but…you know what I’m saying.

I’m not suggesting we have armed squaddies on the streets in tanks.

We had the army involved in Sydney. I posted it on another thread I think.

They were using Army personnel to call on people at home who were supposed to be self-isolating, to check that they were. They also used the army to help run the quarantine logistics for returning travelers (all returning travelers are quarantined for 2 weeks. Not “self-isolation” – actual quarantine).

There was no hysteria about the use of the Army. I think it was a good idea to use them for this task in particular – as it didn’t result in any kind of potential for confrontation, they weren;t wrestling with youths in the parks – people were either at home, or not. No reason they couldn’t do this in the UK.

frankconway
Full Member

Don’t disagree but you offer no solution; I’m not suggesting there is a solution.

Well, in fact I did- and we’ve already seen it. Eviction bans and something like furlough. People need to be protected for doing the right thing, not incentivised to do the wrong thing. That works two ways, partly the obvious one of just letting people get on with it, and the slightly less obvious one of showing intent and making doing the right thing feel like the natural, easy option rather than the self-sacrificing option.

I totally agree our government is incompetent, and I also think they’re just ideologically unsuited to some of the things that are needed; I think they’re deeply content with people living with no safety net and with the extremes that you can push people to if they’re living one week from homelessness. And IMO it’s totally clear that they’re terrified of using some of the tools that will work, such as welfare and printing money, not because they’re not a good idea but because they are.

But equally, I think they’d like to be able to leave the house without risking getting a deadly infection, so, maybe even the biggest shitehawks can be convinced to help others in order to help themselves. This government, competence aside, is in a quandry of their own making where they fundamentally don’t want to help people, and fundamentally need to.

Northwind nails it.

So we get a press conference with the doomsters and gloomsters this afternoon (Whitty/Vallance), who will unequivocally lay out the evidence for further national restrictions, and my impression of the interview with Shapps this morning is that Boris is waiting to follow this up with a national address tonight or tomorrow at 8.

Of course, predictions of political courage from this government come with their own health warning. I suppose we may get ‘you really must behave’ from all quarters and then we can head down the pub as usual.

The “it’s here to stay” argument is on the BBC today – I think most people have understood for a while that the virus wasn’t just going to go away and it was about minimising the damage, both direct and indirect.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54228649

Also agree with Northwind that the government don’t have the courage and political will to do “the right thing” to deal with the mess that their previous incompetence has left us with.

So what form do people think any extra measures be? Pub closures? What are the main transmission route at the moment. IF the media reports are correct its drinking pubs, rugby trips but it this just the routes that make good headlines so people can tut or is this actually the major transmission routes?

Latest I read was that air-born transmission was more significant than initially though and less so surface. Intuitively this would imply crowded social situation such as pub and indoor parties and other events but when I have been in town centres it looks pretty busy too.

Northwind
Full Member
OK but, we have never faced “extreme rules” in the UK. We’ve never had a lockdown at all, really. We’ve had moderate restrictions, which some people have treated like the end of the world- but then, some people think being asked to wear a mask is the end of the world.

Spot on I have to clench my teeth when people talk about “Lock down” in the UK
I have a friend who is living in Sri-Lanka, there’s was a proper lock down a couple of hours a week where you were only allowed to go shopping based on your postcode and constant checks by the police.

What are the main transmission route at the moment.

Schools, most likely. But we want them to stay open in some form, so everything else must go. The government claims that household mixing is the worst offender, so that will be next. I’m not entirely convinced, I reckon their faulty track and trace is skewing the stats because contacts are easier to follow up because you know who’s been in your house rather than who was on the next table at the pub.

Ideally, IMO we should shut pretty much everything but the essentials to keep schools (and workplaces) open at this point.

The trend in hospital admissions, which is a more reliable indicator of the state of the pandemic, is not encouraging. Estimated doubling times mean we could be back approaching April levels by mid-October. I think we certainly have to act fast to stop ourselves diverging from TiReD’s forecast .

Schools, most likely. But we want them to stay open

We are going to need more teachers, or we are going to have to have social distancing in schools, which will mean a dramatic reduction in pupils in school.

Spot on I have to clench my teeth when people talk about “Lock down” in the UK
I have a friend who is living in Sri-Lanka, there’s was a proper lock down a couple of hours a week where you were only allowed to go shopping based on your postcode and constant checks by the police.

This seems like an absolutest argument. Is there significant evidence that this higher level of lockdown has significant improvement in reducing transmission in a society with similar demographic, population densities and distributions? Jus because it more of something that works doesn’t mean it better. It maybe but the lock down that the UK undertook had big effect on transmission.

We are going to need more teachers, or we are going to have to have social distancing in schools, which will mean a dramatic reduction in pupils in school.

That’s the ‘in some form’ I was alluding to. I’m not sure full school attendance is sustainable even with all the other restrictions.

Most people breaking lockdown don’t have £1000, they’re looking for their next fags, weed & booze whilst wandering the streets

Such classism because its not the hundreds of thousands of people hanging out in their homes mixing families, going to dinner and all that general summer socialising that happens. Its just the people with addictions. God Singletrack is such a narrow minded place at times this has to be one of the moronic statements I have read on Singletrack.

As for all the people talking about a “proper lockdown” im assuming right now you are all working from home, going to the shops once a week and only exercising from your house, and not socialising with anyone outside of your household? After all you are good citizens and would NEVER do anything that would potentially further the spread of the virus. I hope you’re all still riding solo too.

Ideally, IMO we should shut pretty much everything but the essentials to keep schools (and workplaces) open at this point.

How many workplaces will actually be open. Aside from us computery types who are now working from home anyway, most workplaces require customers physically present.

Which does bring us back to “socialise, as long as you are spending money”

What are the main transmission route at the moment.

Schools, most likely.

Any data from Scotland on this – they’ve had longer open that us down here. I wish the bloody government would publish details as to what the data suggests the transmission routes are, but I guess that may be relying on track and trace being accurate and working.

Agree our “lockdown” was not as severe as many around the world, and didn’t really justify the term. Even in places like Spain and France which had much stricter rules, the second wave is building a head of steam, maybe stricter initial lockdown led to greater “partying” after.

As for all the people talking about a “proper lockdown” im assuming right now you are all working from home, going to the shops once a week and only exercising from your house, and not socialising with anyone outside of your household? After all you are good citizens and would NEVER do anything that would potentially further the spread of the virus. I hope you’re all still riding solo too.

Pretty much, yep. Especially now the kids are back at school increasing the chances of us actually catching it and passing it on. And I’m thoroughly pissed off with it all after 6 months.

Any data from Scotland on this – they’ve had longer open that us down here.

No evidence on it, I may be wrong! The way I see children and parents interacting round my way makes it hard to believe that it isn’t a candidate, though.

No need to shut everything down this time surely? A lot of shops are now much better for protection etc, hairdressers and stuff like that follow guidelines, cafes can do takeaways. The big issue is the hospitality industry and the mixing of social groups. That is likely what will take the brunt again I think.

The big issue is the hospitality industry and the mixing of social groups. That is likely what will take the brunt again I think.

I do hope so. Everything adds a bit of transmission risk even with mitigation – some of those areas you’ve mentioned are likely to be tiny. The question is how much activity we need to remove to balance the great wodge of risk from school mixing.