• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

Glenda's Legs said:
But had we locked down sooner, the peak may have been reached earlier (less spread of the virus, fewer infections) with fewer mortalities?

I do think the type of 'lock-down' we have in the UK has in itself created the circumstances where people can more easily begin to ignore the advice. ('Advice' being a key term). It has been less stringent than some other European countries and enforcement has been on a persuasive rather than a punitive basis. There are arguments in favour of that overall approach of course but a lock down environment where there's really nothing stopping me going out ten times a day if I were so inclined, where I can travel for non-essential work, where DIY stores are re-opening their doors etc. is almost designed to encourage people to start relaxing their adherence. Add to that the PM announcing with a flourish that we have now passed the peak, it's not really a surprise to see more people out and about.
Click to expand...
I am one of those people out there enforcing the lockdown law. My job is to make sure that businesses identified by the legislation are closed. Unfortunately the legislation is an absolute “dogs dinner” not one thing or another. There are so many exemptions and grey areas. So for example, if you are one of the businesses that is on the closure list, the government guidance is that you can stay open if you sell any items from the list of businesses that can remain open. Which is why 6 weeks into the lockdown many businesses should be closed if you follow the spirit of the law, remain open. An example is a garden centre with a cafe. The garden centre which is on the closure list can remain open as the cafe is not. It’s why garden centres near me are rammed full of people.

Now I love plants as much as anyone but the focus imo should have been staying at home, suppressing the virus in the community and lifting the lockdown. I am not surprised our death rates are so high.
 
Robspur12 said:
I am one of those people out there enforcing the lockdown law. My job is to make sure that businesses identified by the legislation are closed. Unfortunately the legislation is an absolute “dogs dinner” not one thing or another. There are so many exemptions and grey areas. So for example, if you are one of the businesses that is on the closure list, the government guidance is that you can stay open if you sell any items from the list of businesses that can remain open. Which is why 6 weeks into the lockdown many businesses should be closed if you follow the spirit of the law, remain open. An example is a garden centre with a cafe. The garden centre which is on the closure list can remain open as the cafe is not. It’s why garden centres near me are rammed full of people.

Now I love plants as much as anyone but the focus imo should have been staying at home, suppressing the virus in the community and lifting the lockdown. I am not surprised our death rates are so high.
Click to expand...

I have huge sympathy for those who have to enforce the rules. The rules are neither one thing or the other. By design I think.
Reminds me of a couple of weeks ago being waiting at the checkout in Sainsburys behind a woman chatting to the cashier about the (what seemed like) dozen t-shirts she was buying for her kids. Now maybe her kids had suddenly grown out of all their clothes but I got the sense it was the discounted price tags that played a greater part. Hardly essential shopping.
The non-food areas should be roped off imo.

Anyway, a huge thank you to you for trying to keep us safe.
 
Robspur12 said:
I am one of those people out there enforcing the lockdown law. My job is to make sure that businesses identified by the legislation are closed. Unfortunately the legislation is an absolute “dogs dinner” not one thing or another. There are so many exemptions and grey areas. So for example, if you are one of the businesses that is on the closure list, the government guidance is that you can stay open if you sell any items from the list of businesses that can remain open. Which is why 6 weeks into the lockdown many businesses should be closed if you follow the spirit of the law, remain open. An example is a garden centre with a cafe. The garden centre which is on the closure list can remain open as the cafe is not. It’s why garden centres near me are rammed full of people.

Now I love plants as much as anyone but the focus imo should have been staying at home, suppressing the virus in the community and lifting the lockdown. I am not surprised our death rates are so high.
Click to expand...
Surely this is the perfect time for people to get all that brick done if they're stuck at home?
 
scaramanga said:
Surely this is the perfect time for people to get all that brick done if they're stuck at home?
Click to expand...
Here's the thing though. The lockdown wasn't put in place just to inconvenience people. The more people go out the more chance of virus spread, this was especially likely because you can excrete the virus asymptomatically and we had stopped testing and contact tracing. Getting things done around the house is ideal but any goods should have been delivery only. Because as nice as it is to get things done it's not more important than saving lives, lifting the lockdown and getting things back to normal.
 
scaramanga said:
Doesn't matter - I'll be posting avoidance instructions here for any device.
Click to expand...
The track and trace is doomed to failure.

If general restrictions are relaxed, then asking people on a an individual level to isolate just won't work.

If, for example, someone has a positive test and the app/tracing indicated 100 people you've been near or in contact with need to be contacted, let's say 50 of them are 15-29 year olds, good luck with telling them they have to stay in/isolate for 7/14 days or until they've been tested and have the results. Not going to happen, especially when everyone else has a modicum of freedom back.
 
Robspur12 said:
Here's the thing though. The lockdown wasn't put in place just to inconvenience people. The more people go out the more chance of virus spread, this was especially likely because you can excrete the virus asymptomatically and we had stopped testing and contact tracing. Getting things done around the house is ideal but any goods should have been delivery only. Because as nice as it is to get things done it's not more important than saving lives, lifting the lockdown and getting things back to normal.
Click to expand...
Yet it has inconvenienced people, so it's only to be expected that they would bend the rules to minimise that inconvenience.
 
SpurMeUp said:
In hindsight, delaying the lockdown must have been a mistake? The R number that the government are now banging on about must have gone up massively during that period of delay. Part of the reason we are still in lockdown is because we didn't act quickly enough? Lockdown fast, stop the virus spreading, test and track infected people, exit lockdown.

Is there any doubt that acting faster would have saved many lives and businesses?

I have no political affiliation to a party it just seems obvious.
Click to expand...

scaramanga said:
Had we locked down sooner, people would have started spending more time out and about sooner.

That would have coincided with the peak of the infection rate.
Click to expand...

Yep and lockdown would have been the same length of time so business would have gone under sooner not saved.

If a business can’t survive 3 months lock down it can’t survive 3 months of lock down. That doesn’t matter if it started 1st Jan or 1st March.
 
scaramanga said:
Doesn't matter - I'll be posting avoidance instructions here for any device.
Click to expand...

Why though? I can understand post covid-19 doing that. But why do something that will harm your country and cost lives?

Especially considering you are tracked by apple and Google anyway.
 
DTA said:
Why though? I can understand post covid-19 doing that. But why do something that will harm your country and cost lives?

Especially considering you are tracked by apple and Google anyway.
Click to expand...
Because the govt does not have the right to impinge on our privacy in that way.

It's really easy to keep people safe if nobody has any privacy but that's not the deal we have with the govt. Remember when ID cards were supposed to stop both terrorism and illegal immigration in one go? We didn't want them.

Once we accept individual tracking for one safety issue then we've lost the privacy Vs safety argument for good. The govt doesn't give back powers, once they have them they have them forever. In a few years' time the govt will claim that there's a terrorist threat somewhere and we can foil it if we'll only just enable that app again for a few weeks, etc. We won't have any reasonable argument not to because we've already accepted that safety us more important than our privacy.

Apple and Google can track you if you don't care to stop them - that's a trade off I allow at times on the basis that so far, they've heavily resisted the attempts of police forces to snoop. If they start relaxing that then I'll install a custom OS that's built around privacy - there's plenty out there.
 
Four million of the 10 million needed in Australia have downloaded the app. Including me. If the government or police want to track anyone they already can if they own a phone. This app will speed up the time its takes for me to be reunited with loved ones and get back to the pub. All this infringement in rights bullsh!t is exactly that, BS.
 
I genuinely now can't see my kids going back to nursery or primary school again, it will be primary and secondary school for them in September

It's the social distancing that will be impossible to be maintained for kids, be hard enough for adults to do this back at work
 
Italy went into lockdown the better part of a fortnight before us. They don't appear to have seen fit to come out yet.

The fact that our lockdown is fraying around the edges (to put it mildly), despite being the better the part of a fortnight behind theirs suggests to me that the government were absolutely right to be concerned about exercising such extreme measures too soon.
 
I would love to see some behavioural science studies or theories which predict how long before lockdown gets ignored by different sections of society. If delaying lockdown was compelled by this then I want to see the evidence. I have no issue with it as you have to factor it in. People are idiots. Unfortunately I am agreeing with Scara here. Go out today and see how many people are not following the rules. The fear has passed for those who haven't lost loved ones and it has passed for those who may have had symptoms.
 
SpurMeUp said:
You are correct of course, because the UK would have exited lockdown sooner, with far less people infected.
Click to expand...
Which, as has been discussed, might be a worse starting point than a country that has had more people infected.

We have no way of treating or preventing transmission beyond what we've done. And it's safe to say that no country has starved the virus to death 100%.

If you make the assumption that people have immunity from being infected. Then greater infections equals greater protection as the fresh host pool is diminished.

I'm not saying earlier or later lockdown is better just that the above is a logical think thru.
 
It’s an equation of stopping exponential growth of the virus in the population ASAP

Vs

Not locking down too soon so people don’t respect it


Choosing the latter is a false economy in hindsight as every day you left people mingling you grew the virus’ exposure lengthening the required lockdown.

Easy to say in hindsight.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
Parklaner81 said:
Italy went into lockdown the better part of a fortnight before us. They don't appear to have seen fit to come out yet.

The fact that our lockdown is fraying around the edges (to put it mildly), despite being the better the part of a fortnight behind theirs suggests to me that the government were absolutely right to be concerned about exercising such extreme measures too soon.
Click to expand...

Its also a case of us seeing green shoots a week ago and going out like this was all over which fudged the project.
 
SpurMeUp said:
You are correct of course, because the UK would have exited lockdown sooner, with far less people infected.
Click to expand...
There's no evidence we would. We clearly lacked the capacity and infrastructure for large scale testing.

The government has also made it clear that they consider testing to be a vital prerequisite to lifting the restrictions as the only alternative to their (far better) plan of immunity. So we'd have been stuck in lock down until a few weeks from now either way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back