Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

[littlebabyjesus]

All non-essential travel should be stopped at least until there's an international surveillance system capable of tracking Covid-19 cases, and anyone crossing borders should be quarantined for the necessary period, at least 14 days, perhaps longer. Our supposedly border-obsessed government has been lethally laissez faire.

A requirement of a fortnight's self-isolation would pretty much put paid to non-essential travel all on its own, I would think.

I dunno if I would advocate that, though, as it only really makes sense as a measure if, like SK, you're actually in a position to realistically aim for zero new infections. But testing of everyone at borders is sensible - the heuristic to work with here at the moment has to be 'don't travel around any more than you need to' whether that travel involves crossing borders or not.

 

[Azrael]

A requirement of a fortnight's self-isolation would pretty much put paid to non-essential travel all on its own, I would think.

I dunno if I would advocate that, though, as it only really makes sense as a measure if, like SK, you're actually in a position to realistically aim for zero new infections. But testing of everyone at borders is sensible - the heuristic to work with here at the moment has to be 'don't travel around any more than you need to' whether that travel involves crossing borders or not.

We should at the very least aim for zero new infections, even if it's never achieved, and the virus keeps circulating at a low level. Until there's a vaccine, the old school public health approach of suppressing the virus by denying it hosts is the best hope we have.

Even when a vaccine arrives, rollout will take a while, so travel restrictions may well have to remain in place until the kind of herd immunity that doesn't come with a six figure bodycount can be achieved.

 

[ska invita]

FT has a report about the latest thinking going on in government about lifting the lockdown. Schools back after Easter hols is one bit, thats been getting trailed for a few days now, and the other key idea is only young people under thirty being allowed back to work:

"
Separate work is being carried out on whether younger workers might be allowed back into the labour market before others. One of the ideas being studied in Whitehall is to remove restrictions initially on people based on age and living arrangements, drawing on what one Whitehall official called a “rather good” paper from economists at Warwick University.

The paper, by Andrew Oswald and Nattavudh Powdthavee, suggests removing restrictions on 20 to 30 year olds who do not live with their parents, estimating this would release 4.2m people who would be unlikely to become seriously ill and are suffering disproportionately from the lockdown.

Getting younger people back to work would be a boon for the economy “A young workforce release of this kind would lead to substantial economic and societal benefits without enormous health costs to the country,” the paper argues, although it envisages this would not be risk free for the young and could come at the cost of 630 premature deaths.

Sounds really really stupid to me

 

[Azrael]

Any easing of the lockdown before a comprehensive surveillance and mass testing system's in place would be idiotic. And that comes from someone who loathes the concept of a lockdown on general principle.

Encouragingly, Anthony Costello (ex-WHO) reports much behind the scenes work among public health experts to create this.

If only for the basest self-interest, don't expect government scientists to roll the dice a second time. What they conspired to do is getting out. If they've any hope of mitigating the personal consequences, they must now be seen to do all they can to save lives.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Any easing of the lockdown before a comprehensive surveillance and mass testing system's in place would be idiotic.

Yes and no. What I'm not confident about is where the easing will start and the priorities that will be given. There are many important things re, for instance, social services that have ground to a halt at the moment. They are what need to be prioritised because to be blunt, not getting them going also costs lives. It is again, like before lockdown, not primarily an economic calculation but a human one. Or it should be.

 

[editor]

Stub out yer fags

Professor John Newton, Director of Health Improvement at Public Health England (PHE), said: ‘In light of this unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic, there has never been a more important time to stop smoking. Not only for your own health but to protect those around you. It will also help alleviate the huge pressures on the NHS.’

Smokers told to quit now as they are '14 times more at risk from coronavirus'

But the warning comes as one expert predicts an increase in ex-smokers relapsing.

metro.co.uk

 

[Shechemite]

Single care home sees 15 residents die in coronavirus crisis

The deaths at Castletroy Residential home in Luton, which has 69 beds for elderly people with nursing or personal care needs, were announced by Public Health England today.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[SheilaNaGig]

It's a long standing and generally accepted convention on Urban that people making statements like


should back those statements up with a source and where possible a link. It's a matter of courtesy, when introducing new information into the thread, to say where you got that information from.

I'm not saying this because I didn't believe you, or because I want to have a go at you, but because I think this convention is one we should stick to.

You’re quite right.

I was very busy today and posted in haste, both the information about conjunctivitis and my later reply with the links.

Apologies for being abrupt.

 

[Wilf]

Stub out yer fags

Smokers told to quit now as they are '14 times more at risk from coronavirus'

But the warning comes as one expert predicts an increase in ex-smokers relapsing.

metro.co.uk

looks down at half rolled spliff

 

[Shechemite]

Bong for Britain!

 

[Shechemite]

Vape for Victory?

 

[andysays]

You’re quite right.

I was very busy today and posted in haste, both the information about conjunctivitis and my later reply with the links.

Apologies for being abrupt.

Apologies accepted.

And thanks for the info, which I hadn't seen anywhere until you posted it.

 

[Azrael]

Yes and no. What I'm not confident about is where the easing will start and the priorities that will be given. There are many important things re, for instance, social services that have ground to a halt at the moment. They are what need to be prioritised because to be blunt, not getting them going also costs lives. It is again, like before lockdown, not primarily an economic calculation but a human one. Or it should be.

If it can be done safely, of course: I'm simply concerned about dropping it prematurely and landing up back where we started, which would not only have devastating health and psychological consequences, but would fuel those who've never given up on the herd immunity idea. That's why I'm constantly alert to anything that might create a backlash.

 

[existentialist]

Haven't seen it on the thread, but reports yesterday (Grauniad) that Wales is unilaterally extending lockdown anyway.

We could end up with Les Mis style barricades if there's any great influx of holidaymakers - the mood around here regarding lockdown-breakers swanning into towns and villages, and onto beaches, is pretty grim. Lots of reports to police, and here in Laugharne, there have been people going up to picnic parties, berating them, and telling them to fuck off home.

And growing anger at owners of holiday lets who have rented accommodation during lockdown...

 

[bimble]

This says that the easter weekend coming will see more visible policing and enforcement as they expect an increasing minority of people to have 'lockdown fatigue' sounds like.

Police chiefs call on No 10 to tighten UK coronavirus lockdown

Easter weekend will be major test of compliance, say forces as they encourage public to report breaches

www.theguardian.com

 

[Azrael]

People overwhelmingly support lockdown at the moment as deaths rise by the day and they view it as the only way to stay safe. Most dangerous time will be immediately after that cursed peak finally passes and people start to get demob happy. Unless there's a clear exit strategy laid out, can see compliance starting to break down.

European countries past their peak are already giving dates and clear plans. People can be patient if there's an end on the horizon: indefinite detention without release in sight is a different beast entirely.

 

[andysays]

UK isn't yet past its peak, hasn't even reached it.

While I agree that there are issues around maintaining a lockdown with no end date in sight, it would be quite premature to try to set or even speculate about a date ATM

 

[Azrael]

A fixed date, sure. But nothing wrong with laying out a provisional timetable for as soon as the peak has passed (emphasis on provisional), and timing aside, explaining clearly what your exit strategy is and what you're doing to get there.

 

[platinumsage]

A fixed date, sure. But nothing wrong with laying out a provisional timetable for as soon as the peak has passed (emphasis on provisional), and timing aside, explaining clearly what your exit strategy is and what you're doing to get there.

It's not until the peak has passed that it will be clear which aspects of the lockdown might be eased first. It would be very unhelpful to lay out anything provisional that would be subject to change - best to give a clear direction once the final decision has been made.

 

[Azrael]

It's not until the peak has passed that it will be clear which aspects of the lockdown might be eased first. It would be very unhelpful to lay out anything provisional that would be subject to change - best to give a clear direction once the final decision has been made.

We can look to what other countries further along deem the lowest infection risks, but details aren't the biggest factor: it's about communicating the desired goal. There's still massive anxiety that the government will lurch back to herd immunity, managed via rolling lockdowns. I don't personally believe that's the plan, but I'm forced to infer. State clearly that's not the case, and a surveillance and suppression system based on testing and tracing will be implemented, and it'll be a weight off everyone's shoulders.

 

[redsquirrel]

They buy quinoa, vegan bacon, and oat milk.

2 out of 3, damn

 

[teqniq]

SleazyJet.

UK Gov: Now is the time to protect people and invest in our future

Join us in demanding a sustainable economic recovery that works for *everyone*, and protects the planet for the long term.

secure.greenpeace.org.uk

 

[Louis MacNeice]

My prediction is that we will never see the levels of mass testing needed to make truly informed decisions about moving away from the current lockdown. Instead the UK government will rely on modelling with data available from other comparable economies which are ahead of the UK with regard to the progress of the virus. It will be sold to us on the basis that this:

• is a sensible example of international co-operation - the virus respects no borders and neither will we in terms of the resources we draw on;
• is playing to the UK's strengths - we are world leaders in the science of infection modelling;
• it is the economically responsible thing to do - we need to get people back to work as soon as possible, paying their way, paying their taxes, paying for the NHS;
• it is the best way to get things back to normal - these have been horrific days and weeks and we need to put them, and all that they entail, behind us as soon as we can.

I'll probably be proven wrong; I hope so. If I am I just hope the reality is rather better than my prediction and not a whole lot worse.

All the best - Louis MacNeice

 

[weltweit]

People overwhelmingly support lockdown at the moment as deaths rise by the day and they view it as the only way to stay safe. Most dangerous time will be immediately after that cursed peak finally passes and people start to get demob happy. Unless there's a clear exit strategy laid out, can see compliance starting to break down.

European countries past their peak are already giving dates and clear plans. People can be patient if there's an end on the horizon: indefinite detention without release in sight is a different beast entirely.

Wuhan maintained its lockdown, a more stringent one than the UK has, for more than 3 months. I can't see UK coming out much before that either. Sorry .. [eta this 3 months is incorrect] ..

 

[ska invita]

Wuhan maintained its lockdown, a more stringent one than the UK has, for more than 3 months. I can't see UK coming out much before that either. Sorry ..

and the notion lockdown being over there isnt true either...intercity travel allowed, some shops opening, but most people still at home, from what i read

 

[teqniq]

Worth a watch, highlights the complete unpreparedness, the decline of the NHS, the need for heads to roll etc..

 

[Azrael]

Wuhan maintained its lockdown, a more stringent one than the UK has, for more than 3 months. I can't see UK coming out much before that either. Sorry ..

I've been working on a two-three month minimum timescale myself, but who knows: if any circumstantial evidence that China's outbreak was bigger than Beijing claims turns out to be true, it may be possible to ease British restrictions earlier than China did. And of course China took a regional approach from the start: must all of the U.K. be treated uniformly?

Alternatively, we may be delayed due to the woeful state of our testing and tracing infrastructure. Just saying that this is the plan, and that Whitehall's now dedicated to halting and reversing the virus' spread, would be a great step forward.

 

[weltweit]

and the notion lockdown being over there isnt true either...intercity travel allowed, some shops opening, but most people still at home, from what i read

Yes, people from non infected residential blocks are being allowed out, and people with a clean CR Health Code on their mobiles as I understand it but you are right, not everyone ..

 

[Yossarian]

and the notion lockdown being over there isnt true either...intercity travel allowed, some shops opening, but most people still at home, from what i read

Yep - doesn't sound as if intercity travel from Wuhan is a breeze either, people need to get a "green light" on a mandatory smartphone app that states they are in good health and have not been in recent contact with anybody who tested positive for the virus, apparently their neighourhood needs to have been declared virus-free before this can happen. And when travelers from Wuhan get to their destination, they are still being required to get tested for the virus and spend 14 days in quarantine, at least in some places.

 

[weltweit]

I've been working on a two-three month minimum timescale myself, but who knows: if any circumstantial evidence that China's outbreak was bigger than Beijing claims turns out to be true, it may be possible to ease British restrictions earlier than China did. And of course China took a regional approach from the start: must all of the U.K. be treated uniformly?

Yes, personally I thought we might have taken a regional approach here also, but now the spread is such that this is now irrelevant. But perhaps on lifting restrictions it could be done regionally, I don't see why not, is there a political imperative to only do things nationally, perhaps some idea of national unity?

Alternatively, we may be delayed due to the woeful state of our testing and tracing infrastructure. Just saying that this is the plan, and that Whitehall's now dedicated to halting and reversing the virus' spread, would be a great step forward.

It will certainly be interesting how many tests per day we do achieve at the end of the month!