Second National Lockdown...

[Dustydazzler]

Would you support it , would it have any affect and is it necessary...?

Coronavirus: Two-week national lockdown in October proposed by top scientists - report

Chris Whitty is advising PM for a two-week national lockdown."

uk.yahoo.com

 

[littlespark]

I don’t think it is required. A national lockdown before Xmas will cause panic buying again... you won’t be able to get a big tub of Quality Street for love or money..

The problem being people don’t adhere to the current level of restrictions, so going back a step won’t be listened to.

Schools are not the problem, if they can get the kids to wear masks when needed. Scotland govt failed in that respect after saying masks should be worn 2 weeks after they went back.

The biggest problem is opening the pubs. If they couldn’t get customers to behave properly before, how can they get them to now?

North Northumberland is now in a local lockdown, which means my local supermarket is back to marshalling queuing customers outside, counting them in and out....
But the pubs now have a curfew! They must close 1 hour sooner than they have been. What a lot of difference that’s going to make!

 

[Dustydazzler]

I don’t think it is required. A national lockdown before Xmas will cause panic buying again... you won’t be able to get a big tub of Quality Street for love or money..

The problem being people don’t adhere to the current level of restrictions, so going back a step won’t be listened to.

Schools are not the problem, if they can get the kids to wear masks when needed. Scotland govt failed in that respect after saying masks should be worn 2 weeks after they went back.

The biggest problem is opening the pubs. If they couldn’t get customers to behave properly before, how can they get them to now?

North Northumberland is now in a local lockdown, which means my local supermarket is back to marshalling queuing customers outside, counting them in and out....
But the pubs now have a curfew! They must close 1 hour sooner than they have been. What a lot of difference that’s going to make!

just means get To the pub 1hr earlier

just close all pubs after lunchtime , simples...

 

[telectrix]

just means get To the pub 1hr earlier

just close all pubs after lunchtime , simples...

i will have my lunch at 11.00 p.m. from tomorrow.

 

[Zerax]

Not needed in my view.

We now know far more about this virus and how to treat it than we did 6 months ago... at that time it was generally perceived by the media as an 'instant-killer'. We just need to make sure that the NHS/PHE is better organised to deal with any patients that need help.

I have a suspicion that long term (a few more years yet) the approach that Sweden took might have been the right one.

 

[Wilko]

There’s no doubt this heartless virus is readily transmitted and can be fatal.

However the purpose of lockdown was to “protect the NHS and save lives” (sorry can’t quite remember the nightly broadcast statement now). My understanding is it was achieved, one way or another, in that the NHS didn’t collapse and the poor folks that needed hospital care were able to get it, thankfully. Today the UK death rate has dropped significantly (thankfully a fact) and I understand that hospital intensive care beds are no longer anywhere near full of CV19 (I’m happy to see data on this aspect, as I’ve only anecdotal info from Mr. I-Can’t-Say-Who). And this is while the number of cases is going up again.

I don’t think additional lockdown will help anything just now.

 

[snowhead]

This possible Lockdown is not proposed as a full lockdown like the first one.
Work and schools would continue, it's seems to be aimed at restricting leisure.

 

[Risteard]

Would you support it , would it have any affect and is it necessary...?

Coronavirus: Two-week national lockdown in October proposed by top scientists - report

Chris Whitty is advising PM for a two-week national lockdown."

uk.yahoo.com

No. I didn't support the first either.

In fact I believe all of the restrictions are an unlawful interference in our lives.

The fact that the virus has an infinitesmally small mortality rate makes it all the more criminal.

Countless more lives will have been lost to the lockdowns/restrictions than the virus ever killed.

 

[UNG]

Not needed in my view.

We now know far more about this virus and how to treat it than we did 6 months ago... at that time it was generally perceived by the media as an 'instant-killer'. We just need to make sure that the NHS/PHE is better organised to deal with any patients that need help.

I have a suspicion that long term (a few more years yet) the approach that Sweden took might have been the right one.

I don't think we know much if anything more about this virus than we did at the start of the year, a lot of the science seems to be very assumptive and unpredictable

This possible Lockdown is not proposed as a full lockdown like the first one.
Work and schools would continue, it's seems to be aimed at restricting leisure.

We haven't had a full lockdown yet. The first one was a feeble attempt at a lockdown as we didn't close our borders, the police and the military were not on the streets enforcing it

No. I didn't support the first either.

In fact I believe all of the restrictions are an unlawful interference in our lives.

The fact that the virus has an infinitesmally small mortality rate makes it all the more criminal.

Countless more lives will have been lost to the lockdowns/restrictions than the virus ever killed.

Spoken like someone who hasn't felt the effects of the corona virus yet and I really hope you don't, I have and it is something I would not wish on anyone, it took me about 3½ months to recover to something close to normal.
A mate of mine spent 3 weeks in hospital with it, his wife, M-I-L and 2 other family members also caught it
Would you think it criminal if you caught it and it ultimately killed you? or you unknowingly were a carrier any one of your family caught from you and didn't recover
While the mortality rate might be considered low the stats don't tell you how many will never fully recover and have lasting effects or how long it will take those who are lucky enough to make a full recovery to get back their full health

 

[Zerax]

Spoken like someone who hasn't felt the effects of the corona virus yet and I really hope you don't, I have and it is something I would not wish on anyone, it took me about 3½ months to recover to something close to normal.
A mate of mine spent 3 weeks in hospital with it, his wife, M-I-L and 2 other family members also caught it
Would you think it criminal if you caught it and it ultimately killed you? or you unknowingly were a carrier any one of your family caught from you and didn't recover
While the mortality rate might be considered low the stats don't tell you how many will never fully recover and have lasting effects or how long it will take those who are lucky enough to make a full recovery to get back their full health

You've highlighted an important point... when you're managing a country you need to look at the macro level, not the micro level. You have to do what is good for the country as a whole and not what is good for Mrs Jones at No. 32 or your M-I-L.

Whenever the government or indeed commentators on this forum, talk about the general situation, someone will always bring up a specific case of someone they know who has died or might die. That seems to instantly trump the situation of the whole country... so we never get anywhere.

The simple fact is that the vast majority of people that catch the virus have either no symptoms or very mild symptoms. The number of people that have symptoms that require medical attention is incredibly small... and yes yes yes I know that 'small' does mean that 'some' will suffer, but it's a very very small proportion.

An example of the nonsensicalness of all this is the school teachers saying they didn't want schools to reopen until it was 'safe'. Kids are far far more likely to get run-over on the way to school than from the virus when they get there !!

 

[GBDamo]

There’s no doubt this heartless virus is readily transmitted and can be fatal.

However the purpose of lockdown was to “protect the NHS and save lives” (sorry can’t quite remember the nightly broadcast statement now). My understanding is it was achieved, one way or another, in that the NHS didn’t collapse and the poor folks that needed hospital care were able to get it, thankfully. Today the UK death rate has dropped significantly (thankfully a fact) and I understand that hospital intensive care beds are no longer anywhere near full of CV19 (I’m happy to see data on this aspect, as I’ve only anecdotal info from Mr. I-Can’t-Say-Who). And this is while the number of cases is going up again.

I don’t think additional lockdown will help anything just now.
View attachment 60898

I think all we are seeing is testing picking up the true prevalence of the virus, and indirectly confirming it is in the majority benign.

More tests = more positives.

If the test is 99% accurate, which by all accounts is about right, there will be 1% erroneous results.

For simplicity say these split evenly between false positives and false negatives.

In a population of 65million thats 325,000 false positives and 325,000false negatives.

So if by some miracle we tested the whole population overnight, with the current test, we would see 325,000 cases reported in errors alone.

Now, it has long been suspected the virus is a lot more prevalent and the majority of people have either had it or are carrying it asymptomatically.

We are entering sniffle season so every mallingering halfwit with a cold is getting tested in the hope of getting a two week holiday, maybe harsh, or the hysteria whipped up has people genuinely petrified.

The death rate.

The death rate is not increasing now as it did previously.

There are three possibilities,

1, The vulnerable have already been taken and those left are much more resilient.

2, The original deaths were wrongly attributed to Covid.

3, The virus has mutated to something much less virulent.

Unfortunately the government has reacted in a manner that has forced their hand as to future action.

If they say "It wasn't as bad as we thought" they are blamed for trashing the economy and possible avoidable deaths as a result of limiting access to health care.

So it looks like they are doubling down but I can't see an exit strategy, when and how do we return to normal?
[automerge]1600590419[/automerge]

You've highlighted an important point... when you're managing a country you need to look at the macro level, not the micro level. You have to do what is good for the country as a whole and not what is good for Mrs Jones at No. 32 or your M-I-L.

Whenever the government or indeed commentators on this forum, talk about the general situation, someone will always bring up a specific case of someone they know who has died or might die. That seems to instantly trump the situation of the whole country... so we never get anywhere.

The simple fact is that the vast majority of people that catch the virus have either no symptoms or very mild symptoms. The number of people that have symptoms that require medical attention is incredibly small... and yes yes yes I know that 'small' does mean that 'some' will suffer, but it's a very very small proportion.

An example of the nonsensicalness of all this is the school teachers saying they didn't want schools to reopen until it was 'safe'. Kids are far far more likely to get run-over on the way to school than from the virus when they get there !!

If a similar argument was used for road traffic we would have to ground all vehicles until driving can be made safe.

What is safe, no deaths, no injuries, no crashes?

 

[Baddegg]

BREAKING NEWS...

 

[GBDamo]

I don't think we know much if anything more about this virus than we did at the start of the year, a lot of the science seems to be very assumptive and unpredictable


We haven't had a full lockdown yet. The first one was a feeble attempt at a lockdown as we didn't close our borders, the police and the military were not on the streets enforcing it


Spoken like someone who hasn't felt the effects of the corona virus yet and I really hope you don't, I have and it is something I would not wish on anyone, it took me about 3½ months to recover to something close to normal.
A mate of mine spent 3 weeks in hospital with it, his wife, M-I-L and 2 other family members also caught it
Would you think it criminal if you caught it and it ultimately killed you? or you unknowingly were a carrier any one of your family caught from you and didn't recover
While the mortality rate might be considered low the stats don't tell you how many will never fully recover and have lasting effects or how long it will take those who are lucky enough to make a full recovery to get back their full health

It became very apparent very early that there were groups who were significantly more susceptible.

They should have been locked down and protected.

The vast, vast majority had almost negligible symptoms, if any.

It is as if the government had a prepackaged response, formulated in COBRA meetings, that they put into action, but the virus didn't materialise as expected.

Now they seem to be blindly following that plan as they have no exit strategy, or an exit strategy that maintains face.

 

[telectrix]

it's all a big con. harmless bug transmitted by 5G network to make people feel ill. then they go into hospital where all the old are euthanised to save the NHS and Dept. of Pensions budgets.

 

[GBDamo]

it's all a big con. harmless bug transmitted by 5G network to make people feel ill. then they go into hospital where all the old are euthanised to save the NHS and Dept. of Pensions budgets.

Or,

The Chinese staged thousands of Internet videos of people dying in the streets, incineration camps, overflowing hospitals and locked down a few minor cities.

They then released a fairly benign virus hils claiming there is nothing going on in China and the more they deny the more we believe it is huge.

We get a few cases in the west and all the Western economies panic and shut down.

The Chinese laugh, with pinky in the corner of the mouth, at the silly westerners.

 

[Ian1981]

Dam I need me a ginger cat then

 

[Moley]

Dam I need me a ginger cat then

My daughters boyfriend is ginger. What should I do? Do I lock him in the attic and pretend he doesn't exist or should I just send him to Switzerland and have him euthoniszed?

 

[Midwest]

I think a lot more people have become indifferent to all the restrictions now. Early on we had people visiting places they shouldn’t, the raves, people like Cummings etc. But now, it’s as if there was no lockdown.

Went into town for my appointment with my barbers, had to wait outside as others had just walked in. Barber wore a visor, which was sat on the back of his head, so he’s breathing all over me. No other customers, apart from me, wore a mask. Town was packed, it was like a normal Saturday with people stood around chatting, no masks. Went into a shop, no social distancing and nobody wearing a mask, including the shop assistants.

It will go through the roof again, and you guys won’t have any work again.

 

[mattg4321]

Even if it does go through the roof we can’t afford as a country to shut workplaces down as happened before.

Most sparks I know are stacked out with work so a slight reduction in demand won’t hurt this winter imo. Long term is more the problem when the job losses/cuts the idiotic restrictions caused start to bite.

Should always have been a case of protect the vulnerable, while everyone else goes about their business with a low level of restrictions until we have vaccine/herd immunity.

 

[GBDamo]

My daughters.....

Is just me who wondered where that was heading?

 

[Ian1981]

My daughters boyfriend is ginger. What should I do? Do I lock him in the attic and pretend he doesn't exist or should I just send him to Switzerland and have him euthoniszed?

Buy him factor 50 at Christmas

 

[Midwest]

Even if it does go through the roof we can’t afford as a country to shut workplaces down as happened before.

Most sparks I know are stacked out with work so a slight reduction in demand won’t hurt this winter imo. Long term is more the problem when the job losses/cuts the idiotic restrictions caused start to bite.

Should always have been a case of protect the vulnerable, while everyone else goes about their business with a low level of restrictions until we have vaccine/herd immunity.

I understand the impact its had financially on some, I was lucky and was able to carry on working during the lockdown. However, as @UNG said, this virus is a particularly nasty one; I don't think some people realise that. It seems its the youngsters that spread it, with no ill effect to themselves, and the older or more vulnerable die of it (I have no medical evidence of that).

 

[Wilko]

2, The original deaths were wrongly attributed to Covid.

So true it scares me. These brainiacs are STILL recording a CV19 death if Poor Person has tested positive and subsequently died in a car crash, drowned or got hit by bus etc.

I hope someone can show I’m wrong and it's been fixed...

 

[Baddegg]

So true it scares me. These brainiacs are STILL recording a CV19 death if Poor Person has tested positive and subsequently died in a car crash, drowned or got hit by bus etc.

I hope someone can show I’m wrong and it's been fixed...

I was speechless when I read that exact fact in the small print of a bbc news at ten report....that’s sensationalism at it’s absolute worst!

 

[Vortigern]

We have seen a shortage of supplies of all sorts and prices increasing. The economy (GDP) has shrunk 30%, worse than the 2008 recession. Thousands of businesses are going to the wall, hundreds of thousands of people are going to be unemployed. All as a result of lockdown. Now, add to that the end of furlough, and the end of mortgage/rent holidays, evictions and unemployment are going to go through the roof. Anyone for more lockdown?
Given the conflicting information as to CV19 that people in there droves are dying/not dying, it is fatal/non fatal etc. etc. it is very hard to see a justification based on such information to further destroy the economy. Don't get it twisted, I am not dismissing covid, at the same time I am aware there is very poor information and strategies. For instance no more than six, unless you are trashing statues then you are immune. No more than six unless you are going to the office or glueing your hands to the pavement, then you are immune. Bear in mind if a family meets another family and stops to talk they could be breaking the law, whereas if you are in a pub or restaurant you aren't. Please tell me I am not going insane. Lockdown or no lockdown we are f0099sd.
[automerge]1600626351[/automerge]
For another thing the polymerase chain reaction test is nonsense. The person who invented it said it should never be used for testing/diagnosis. It is for research only on DNA/RNA sampling. In different countries the amount detected of the pathogen is set at a certain figure, if it is too low then there is no illness if it is set higher then epidemic. Many opinions are based on the idea that good old clinical symptoms should be the gold standard test. CV19 is apparently part of a family of virus that are pretty much the same, only SARS was much worse, no lockdown then, I wonder why?

 

[littlespark]

I don’t want to come on an argue against anything anyone has said, one way or another... but let’s have a go anyway

young people are not at fault. Not the ones I know. They have a sense of self preservation that older adults don’t. The same trait that causes the “snowflake” behaviour. Why would they risk catching it?
its the 20, 30, 40,year olds that couldn’t wait for the pubs to open, the ones that Dont listen to anyone when they’ve had a drink... not the bar staff, not the police.
Its not the schools either. True, Lifting any restrictions will increase the infection rate... but the schools should stay open, close the pubs and the open public spaces in London where the anti-vaccine brigade are massing these days.

Testing. I think they’ve engineered the test to give false positives over false negatives.
They would rather have someone wrongly told they had it, and had to isolate, than tell someone they didn’t have it, when they did... and was going out infecting others. So we can presume that the reported positive test results are exaggerated.

death reporting. They report it as a Covid death if they die within 28 days of a positive test. Day 29, it’s not Covid....??

yes, I’m getting fed up with this.... I’m fed up with the ever changing guidelines.... I’m fed up with the idiots that think Covid is a conspiracy theory, and think they have the right to put other people in harms way... selfish gits!
I’m fed up with the doom and gloom economical forecasts. We will get through this, and we’ll end up paying for it through taxes... but our taxes pay for a shed load of things no one wants anyway...

 

[Midwest]

The restrictions are an attempt to mitigate peoples exposure. If you applied them across the board, we would not be able to work. They are applied to households, because that has a limited affect, and in restaurants, so they could open again.

I agree pub hours should be limited though, because those young people I said about, don’t follow social distancing etc, when they even just get tipsy. Should be like the very old licensing hours, or even more restrictive.

The Covid death reporting is very complex, so I’ve read. But the new recording method, brings England into line with the other Home Counties.

 

[Dustydazzler]

This can’t be good... 50,000 new cases in a matter of weeks

Coronavirus: 50,000 new daily cases by mid-October at current rate

The government's two chief scientists said there would be 200 new daily deaths in the UK by mid-November if the current rate of infection continues.

uk.yahoo.com

 

[UNG]

The problem is there are large portions of the population who are carrying on like nothing is happening. Bolton is an example of the problems that one infected person can cause by dismissing the guidance and hitting the town for a pub crawl

A lot will ignore MSM in favour of getting news from less well known sources while some sources are quite legitimate and give an alternative view to the mainstream others can fall into the category of being subversive where there could be underlying reasons for them to want to keep the infection rate up and would support the theory that the virus is man made and has been selectively released

How we stop this virus is the big issue that needs to be solved, people seem to get the infection despite being isolated, others don't get infected even when in contact with an infected person yet they are now saying the antibodies having had the disease don't last that long and it is possible to be infected a second time so how reliable and effective is a vaccine going to be

There are a lot of questions that have no clear unambiguous answers and the scientists do not seem to be united on the way forward to eradicate this disease so we appear to have a long term problem

 

[Zerax]

There are a lot of questions that have no clear unambiguous answers and the scientists do not seem to be united on the way forward to eradicate this disease so we appear to have a long term problem

Having read around the subject quite alot over recent months... I'd suggest that the general consensus is that this virus will be with us for a very long time... many many years at best, but probably forever. We just need to learn to live with it.

Living with it will involve people dying earlier than they might have done before it came along... as has already been seen.

If we want to prevent anybody dying prematurely from this virus, we need to hermetically seal each individual into a plastic cocoon and provide sterilised food via an air-sealed trap.

If we really really want to do things to lessen the risk of people dying prematurely we could start by not pumping people full of antibiotics the minute they get into hospital or have a sniffle.

Just saying...

 

[Midwest]

Having read around the subject quite alot over recent months... I'd suggest that the general consensus is that this virus will be with us for a very long time... many many years at best, but probably forever. We just need to learn to live with it.

Living with it will involve people dying earlier than they might have done before it came along... as has already been seen.

If we want to prevent anybody dying prematurely from this virus, we need to hermetically seal each individual into a plastic cocoon and provide sterilised food via an air-sealed trap.

If we really really want to do things to lessen the risk of people dying prematurely we could start by not pumping people full of antibiotics the minute they get into hospital or have a sniffle.

Just saying...

That sort of opinion, is something I can't agree with.

Even now, vulnerable people have access to an annual flu vaccination. I've read though that some 7000 people die annually from complications from flu. In a bad year it can be as much as 20,000.

I read the figures of fatality for Covid is (depending on which statistics you believe) is between 38,000 and over 50,000 (England & Wales). Thats with all the preventative measures taken, thus far. And the year is not over yet.

If your suggesting, just letting it run riot unchecked, I suggest you do some more research. If you research figures for the Spanish Flu 1918/19 for example, it was 228,000. There are other such examples.

Its ok to say, just lets live with it, as long as your not one of those people(s) affected by it.

Sorry thats a shocking opinion, if thats what your suggesting.

 

[UNG]

I have a suspicion that long term (a few more years yet) the approach that Sweden took might have been the right one.

It seems that Sweden is being lauded as the way to handle the virus while it might work for them with a population density of 25 people / Sq Km when compared with the UK's population density of 275 people / Sq Km it is not really surprising that we are finding it more difficult to control the virus spread with 11 times more people per Sq Km.

I wonder how the virus spread looks when compared to the density of the population in other countries that are reportedly doing better than the UK

 

[Zerax]

It seems that Sweden is being lauded as the way to handle the virus while it might work for them with a population density of 25 people / Sq Km when compared with the UK's population density of 275 people / Sq Km it is not really surprising that we are finding it more difficult to control the virus spread with 11 times more people per Sq Km.

I wonder how the virus spread looks when compared to the density of the population in other countries that are reportedly doing better than the UK

You're analysis assumes that the population is evenly spread across every square km... this is of course not the case. The major cities in Sweden such as Stockholm, Gothenburg, Malmo etc. will have a very high density, whilst vast swathes of the north will be uninhabited.

However, that's just a correction to your point.

The reason why we won't know, for many years, if Sweden's approach was the right one... is that there are many facets to how you measure it. Destroying a countries economy will undoubtable cause many deaths, as will removing someone's livelihood etc. etc. We would need to take a 'on balance' type view... weighing up a wide and varied 'scorecard' of measures, many of which we don't even know about yet !

 

[7029 dave]

I have mixed feelings, because to friends have died, two were in hospital for months and one that survived will never be the same again slight brain damage.
Its a bloody mess.

 

[OnlQQker]

Nothing much to say, so I'll just add the background music to this thread!

View: https://youtu.be/zxCXqC8YbOI

 

[UNG]

You're analysis assumes that the population is evenly spread across every square km... this is of course not the case. The major cities in Sweden such as Stockholm, Gothenburg, Malmo etc. will have a very high density, whilst vast swathes of the north will be uninhabited.

However, that's just a correction to your point.

The reason why we won't know, for many years, if Sweden's approach was the right one... is that there are many facets to how you measure it. Destroying a countries economy will undoubtable cause many deaths, as will removing someone's livelihood etc. etc. We would need to take a 'on balance' type view... weighing up a wide and varied 'scorecard' of measures, many of which we don't even know about yet !

Not sure why you feel the need to correct a point where I was only using those numbers to highlight the population disparity

But to add context to your point one London borough has a population density just shy of 3 times the population density of Stockholm.
The population of Sweden is less than one sixth of the UK's population so it makes it really difficult to make meaningful comparisons as to how they have handled and how the UK have handled it

 

[Dustydazzler]

A few new rules introduced today but nothing out the ordinary

pubs close at 2200, masks for retail / hospitality staff and no Indoor team Games over 6 people

 

[DPG]

Seems mostly sensible advice. Let's hope people stick to it.

 

[pirate]

Where I am currently, in Spain, everybody wears a mask, in the street, in shops, some shops won't permit entry without a mask, and Lidl will give you a mask if you have forgotten yours.
No smoking in bars or restaurants, even in the terraces outside, nor in the street. In the restaurants, the waiting staff wear masks at all times, and most customeres put their masks on between courses. Bars and restaurants have to limit the number of customers to 50% of normal capacity, and in the schools the children wear masks in lessons and in the street. Nobody seems to object to these restrictions, and as the holiday trade has been disastrous for many businesses, those that remain open are very careful to adhere to the regs. or esle the Guardia Civil will shut them down and impose heavy fines. It seems to be working, but how effective the regs are will only be measured in time. The incidence here, as opposed to the big cities like Madrid and Barcelona, is very low. I believe the regs are working. The beach is off-limits after 9pm to prevent "raves" and everyone seems to accept this now. Back in Scotland, I can still go to the pub and meet strangers, but i can't visit my daughter...strange times.

 

[Midwest]

I think that when the restrictions can be rescinded, those pub & club opening hours should be kept!

Keeping places open to 2-5am is just ridiculous. Its only pee heads who wanna drink to those hours anyway. They can't be trusted to behave themselves. Cost us a fortune in policing and NHS bills. If they feel the need to stay open that late, their rates should go up to reflect the cost to the tax payer.

 

[Zerax]

But to add context to your point one London borough has a population density just shy of 3 times the population density of Stockholm.
The population of Sweden is less than one sixth of the UK's population so it makes it really difficult to make meaningful comparisons as to how they have handled and how the UK have handled it

Agreed... population density is largely a red herring... that was the point I was making. It's far more to do with how people live and socialise that pure statistical population densities.

I found it intriguing that the media tried to make out that there was some sort of racism going on due to proportionally more BAME people contracting the virus. No mention was made of the simple fact that they tend to be far more social than native brits...

 

[DPG]

Agreed... population density is largely a red herring... that was the point I was making. It's far more to do with how people live and socialise that pure statistical population densities.

I found it intriguing that the media tried to make out that there was some sort of racism going on due to proportionally more BAME people contracting the virus. No mention was made of the simple fact that they tend to be far more social than native brits...

Sadly it seems to be the current trend to look for racism.

 

[littlespark]

I just watched Boris’s announcement on TV... Channel 4 to be exact... Then started to watch Great British Bake Off which started with new host Matt Lucas take the mick out of Boris doing a TV announcement. “Save Loaves!”

The fact that it followed the real Boris made it 10 times funnier

 

[GBDamo]

Sadly it seems to be the current trend to look for racism.

Ooh , miss he's being a bigoted, miss, tell him..

 

[Maji236]

From what I've been told from doctors, it may have more to do with amount of viral load you get that determines how sick a person gets. ie: The more exposure; the sicker or worse symptoms will be. Granted, health & age plays a bit of a part in too, to be sure. But masks in public & social distance seems the best solution, in general. And least invasive.
It has also been suggested, that in places like NYC or LA, etc., a kind of community (hurd) immunity may have been reached. Although businesses, (in NY at least) have been enforcing mask mandate. Even the guys who think they're 'tough guys' on the job site, are wearing masks.

My two cents from this side of the pond. Hopefully an innoculation may be available soon.

 

[littlespark]

Students are not the problem....
Oh, apparently they are .... all of them! So what does Nicola sturgeon do? Ban all of them from travelling home.

my daughter in Aberdeen had a bus ticket bought from before this happened. £36 to Edinburgh and we would pick her up. Coming down for my parents 50th wedding anniversary meal. The pub were being really good organising it.
She’s now can’t come... so she got her ticket refunded.... cost her a tenner to cancel! Why?

this new round of restrictions is confusing again. Having certain groups of people exempt just gives a “they can do it, why can’t I” attitude.

 

[Zerax]

So what does Nicola sturgeon do?

The Sturgeon is simply playing politics... like issuing her announcements 15 mins before Boris or slightly amending Boris' rules so that she can say that's she's gone one better... whilst all the time, the Scottish economy crumbles, Scottish education gets worse etc. etc.

 

[telectrix]

The Sturgeon is simply playing politics... like issuing her announcements 15 mins before Boris or slightly amending Boris' rules so that she can say that's she's gone one better... whilst all the time, the Scottish economy crumbles, Scottish education gets worse etc. etc.

scottish education is fine. all scots know that 2 fingers of single malt is a double measure. what more do they need? .

 

[littlespark]

Right through this, sturgeon has said and done anything to go against the uk govt. it would have been better for the 4 nations to agree to either compromise, or go with the worse case scenario rather than 4 different rules for 4 govts. One set of guidelines for everybody.
I’m on the Border. We don’t know which rules to go by depending which side of the line we are in.
alcohol is cheaper on the English side.