Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion
- Thread starter Sasaferrato
- Start date
StoneRoad
heckling from the back!
Only one person in our household had been going out for shopping etc. Normally that would be my OH, but sometimes I went and a few times our friends would go, especially in the low cases period in the summer. Plus the rare visits to the workshop, usually for meeting that could not be conducted over email or the phone.
Since the local spike in cases started (mid-November) even those trips have been greatly reduced. Once it seemed likely that those cases were involving the new variant, we've gone onto food deliveries and other trips are just not happening.
I'm the youngest (somewhat short of my 65th) and everyone else is much closer to 70 than 65 ... and our friends are becoming increasingly worried - almost paranoid - over the risks of infection & death. Make it clear, Yes, I'm worried too and following the precautions / rules as well as I can, but not to the extent my bezza is displaying ...
Since the local spike in cases started (mid-November) even those trips have been greatly reduced. Once it seemed likely that those cases were involving the new variant, we've gone onto food deliveries and other trips are just not happening.
I'm the youngest (somewhat short of my 65th) and everyone else is much closer to 70 than 65 ... and our friends are becoming increasingly worried - almost paranoid - over the risks of infection & death. Make it clear, Yes, I'm worried too and following the precautions / rules as well as I can, but not to the extent my bezza is displaying ...
Ms Ordinary
randompointlesschemistry
This, very much - plus with some schools having 30-50% attendance there comes a point where any gains made by closing them are cancelled out - and it still puts ridiculous pressure on teachers.
And for sure, the communities with most key worker parents, or parents who can't work from home but are in non-essential jobs, are the ones most likely to be in crowded housing, multi-generational households, dependant on public transport...
PursuedByBears
Go stick your head in a pig
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Cid
Proper break this time
I mean it helps with visible compliance. I've seen it more and more where I am (student area in Sheffield)... Beyond that though it's unlikely to make any real difference to infection rates. Possibly make it compulsory for anyone out in groups...
But it means nothing without what has been needed throughout: clear messaging, effective campaigns, comprehensive measures around work etc, financial support and a leadership that at least has the appearance of taking things seriously.
elbows
Well-Known Member
I guess its time for my usual rant about how everything counts, no matter how much the government etc mess things up, other behaviour still matters, because every infection matters, and every infection avoided by behavioural changes matters.
There is a huge list of government failings that it is quite correct for people to go on about, I certainly do. But please dont frame things as pointless unless government does x. Not pointless, quite often not good enough but still not pointless. Falling well short of whats required is still better than not even bothering at all.
As for schools, 30-50% attendance is not good but is still much better than 90-100% attendance. But yes I do very much agree with pointing out all the people who are disadvantaged and forced to put themselves at risk in this pandemic, and thats certainly an area where government failings have been very visible.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
elbows
Well-Known Member
I don think the death rate really enables that cover to be effective though.
The political aspect is dreadful and people should not fall into traps on that front. But I'm not going stop commenting when people describe the behaviours people need to take in the pandemic as being pointless, no matter how much else is done wrong, it just isnt true.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
This is basically me as well. I did go out to a couple of galleries and for a couple of photo walks when the numbers were way down but otherwise it's at least 23 out of 24 hours a day stuck in a flat smaller than many hotel rooms I've been in, not speaking to a human being apart from to say "no I don't need a bag ta" for weeks. New so-called lockdown makes no difference to this really.
I could have gone out but I didn't because I didn't think it was worth the risk and you know what, I don't mind saying that I frequently feel like a fucking mug for it.
At least I've not got covid.
cupid_stunt
Chief seagull hater & farmerbarleymow's nemesis.
Thora
Differently Ethical
Sounds like it’s probably within the rules though if they have a young baby.With people doing stuff like that, there's no bloody hope in containing things.
Most people do comply with the rules, whatever they are. I don’t think it’s useful to blame individuals for forming support bubbles or putting their kids in school or whatever if that is what the government says they can do.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
And the thing is...every one of them will have their own convincing reason why it was OK for them to do it.With people doing stuff like that, there's no bloody hope in containing things.
We seem to have lost any sense of collective purpose - rather than "what sacrifices do I have to make to achieve my contribution to helping us collectively overcome this virus?", it's more "how can I game these rules to excuse myself doing the thing I want to do?".
It is depressing, although I am sure many, many more cases of the former are going on quietly, behind closed doors, which we don't get to hear about...so perhaps we can be somewhat optimistic. It's always the way that the planks are the ones who garner disproportionate attention.
this you bunch of curtain twitching weirdos.
elbows
Well-Known Member
An interesting attempt to model how many people have really had it so far:
www.theguardian.com
Contains local estimates such as:
And there is a big table with a search feature.
One in five in England have had Covid, modelling suggests
Analysis shows 12.4 million people infected since start of pandemic, against 2.4 million detected by test and trace
Contains local estimates such as:
And there is a big table with a search feature.
Cid
Proper break this time
The thing I was specifically replying to is Flavour 's post that mask wearing should be compulsory outside. Given what we know, and assuming adherence to other rules, that is unlikely to have an effect on infection rates... And it isn't without its downsides. I wear a mask outside most of the time. I also wear glasses. It is deeply annoying, and not particularly safe this time of year - my eyesight isn't that bad, and I'm fairly young, so whatever... But it's not a zero cost thing. And if you start imposing measures like that while people continue to work visibly, while you fail to enforce measures like group mixing outdoors etc, you run the risk of measures seeming arbitrary. Something that I think has been a problem throughout, and that is a substantial part of why people continue to question things like household mixing in domestic settings - which is genuinely likely to be one of the most important factors in infection rates.
So yes, every measure helps to a degree. But most come with some costs... and if those are not properly balanced, something that on a purely statistical level may provide a marginal gain, may in fact be a disadvantage when it meets the real world.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Do you know if the number of people who've already had it, is fed into models of future spread? If 20 or 30% of a population have immunity - that must be large enough to have some sort of effect.An interesting attempt to model how many people have really had it so far:
One in five in England have had Covid, modelling suggests
Analysis shows 12.4 million people infected since start of pandemic, against 2.4 million detected by test and trace
Contains local estimates such as:
And there is a big table with a search feature.
Until now I'd understood that it was assumed to be much lower - in single figures.
Here's the support bubble criteria to check against for future curtain-twitching - point 3 is relevant here.
You can form a support bubble with another household of any size if:
You can form a support bubble with another household of any size if:
- you live by yourself – even if carers visit you to provide support
- you are the only adult in your household who does not need continuous care as a result of a disability
- your household includes a child who is under the age of one or was under that age on 2 December 2020
- your household includes a child with a disability who requires continuous care and is under the age of 5, or was under that age on 2 December 2020
- you are aged 16 or 17 living with others of the same age and without any adults
- you are a single adult living with one or more children who are under the age of 18 or were under that age on 12 June 2020
Cid
Proper break this time
I mean maybe the science has moved on and, as I said, making it compulsory for meeting people outdoors seems pretty logical. But that wasn't really my point.
e2a: to be absolutely clear, I don't actually have a problem with a mask-wearing edict. The problem is context.
I had admittedly forgotten about the "child under 1 year bubble" when I reacted to that particular post. As most of the time though, my astonishment/ire was directed less at the individuals involved than at government policy. Or in this case the absence to at least appeal to people, if not legislating against support bubbles (which are providing, as the name suggests, important support - leaving aside for a moment the fact that they sort of seem by their very design to enable and encourage the most risky contacts, namely indoor-intergenerational), to really think about how necessary each individual visit is at this crucial time.
The epithet "curtain-twitching weirdo" for people noticing this kind of stuff in the current climate of extreme anxiety about the overwhelm of the health service and against the backdrop of longterm isolation, in many cases having been deprived of close contact with a single human being they actually deeply care about, and the absence of any government strategy that would seem to make this possible again this side of June, seems a little harsh.
Last edited:
Thora
Differently Ethical
Yes. It means the two families are one bubble.
Similar threads
