Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion
- Thread starter Sasaferrato
- Start date
Good point. We've seen in Singapore that their outbreaks have been pretty much exclusively centered on the immigrant labourers who (as you say) live in squalid and overcrowded accommodation.
editor
hiraethified
Down a level to 3
Coronavirus: UK's Covid-19 alert level reduced from four to three
The virus is now "in general circulation" with a "gradual relaxation of restrictions" possible.
www.bbc.co.uk
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
It's all bullshit, wishful thinking, and (if we're lucky) hoping against hope, though, isn't it?Down a level to 3
Coronavirus: UK's Covid-19 alert level reduced from four to three
The virus is now "in general circulation" with a "gradual relaxation of restrictions" possible.www.bbc.co.uk
And "enhanced tracing" only kicks in when we reach level 2?
It doesn't mean nothing, it means this:
The third step in government's published plan, which it said was to take place "no earlier than 4 July", includes opening further non-essential services like hairdressers and beauty salons, restaurants, pubs and leisure facilities.
The third step in government's published plan, which it said was to take place "no earlier than 4 July", includes opening further non-essential services like hairdressers and beauty salons, restaurants, pubs and leisure facilities.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Good to see the random mentioning of specific local outbreaks being criticised - we need proper, timely data and an end of the pandering to the instincts of authorities to keep things quiet.
Coronavirus: 'Secrecy' claims over Cleckheaton outbreak
Health Secretary Matt Hancock revealed on Thursday there had been a localised outbreak in Kirklees.
www.bbc.co.uk
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
We made up a number, and we're reducing it. Trebles all round!
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
I loved it when they invented a five point scale then told us we were at 3.5 on it.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
The idea that the govt is in control of this is bullshit and wishful thinking, but the idea that infection levels are way down now from peak - certainly below 10 % and probably below 5 % - isn't. It's indicated by all the data.It's all bullshit, wishful thinking, and (if we're lucky) hoping against hope, though, isn't it?
And "enhanced tracing" only kicks in when we reach level 2?
It does seem to me that these announcements come quick on the heels of some significant PR disaster (this time the track & trace app clusterfuck). But then, there also seems to be a daily PR disaster, so it might just me my mind making up patterns out of absolute chaos.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
The problem is the vagueness of the terms. What does 'low' mean for level 2, for instance. We're down from perhaps 2 to 4 million infected to perhaps 100 to 300 thousand. So what will low be? 50k? 2k? 36?
Spandex
A crazy bulbous punchbag of sound
Should they still be using that chart? If we moved from Level 4 to Level 3 today, why has the measures for Level 3 (gradual relaxation of restrictions) been happening for over a month?Down a level to 3
ska invita
back on the other side
My prediction: imminently the Tories will announce a reduction in the 2 metre distancing - to 3 feet! A chance to loosen the rules AND get Imperial with the measurements.
Reducing it to 1m in Northern Ireland I heard on news earlier.
Ms Ordinary
randompointlesschemistry
Down a level to 3
Coronavirus: UK's Covid-19 alert level reduced from four to three
The virus is now "in general circulation" with a "gradual relaxation of restrictions" possible.www.bbc.co.uk
FWIW I hadn't paid attention to the official alert level lately, so if you'd showed me that graphic and asked me where we were, based on minimal listening to radio reports about shops & zoos opening & how I see people behaving around me, I'd have guessed we were settled well into Level 2.
I am kind of shocked to see we are only 'just' leaving Level 4.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I work for an organisation whose CEO (a Brexit Party supporter 
) has long gone on about how Dark Forces have been playing up the Covid-19 situation for their own Evil Ends, and is very critical of the Welsh Government for not following Westminster's line on lockdown.
I've just had a concerned email - I'm "caretaker" CEO while she's supposed to be recovering from a 3 week stay in intensive care - from one of the office team, to whom she has just sent an email saying, essentially, "any time you want to return to working in the office, I'd like that".
The problem seems to be that there's a disconnection in some minds from the reality of the situation and what Government announcements say - some people seem to believe that if "Boris" has said it's OK, then they're safe. The clear implication being that people (people, incidentally, like me) who are inclined to take a more cautious approach are discounted as being somehow timid or weak.
Because I am neither timid, nor weak, and because one of the office staff leaked the email to me - and saying that she has no intention of returning yet - I have responded to it by emailing the office staff to point out that a) Welsh Government guidelines would not permit them to work without proper social distancing - not achievable in that office - and to point out that if they feel (like I do) that the government guidelines aren't strong enough, the Society is certainly not going to look unfavourably on that decision. I have had a flurry of relieved responses from people who were clearly upset by the suggestion they should be returning to work.
It seems to me to be the height of irresponsibility that the UK government seems so willing to blur their fantasy of a return to normal with the reality - that we still don't have a decent test and trace system in place, the guidelines don't reflect the real risk (social distancing outside is a whole different ballgame from sitting in the same office as someone for several hours, even if you were 2m apart), and a series of decisions which have been shown with hindsight to have been predictably and fatally flawed.
Some people are not going to be able to stand up to managers who say "Right, that's it. 'Boris' says it's safe now, so get back into the office". It's abusive. It's reckless. And this tone is consistently being set by the Government, and it punishes the powerless, the voiceless, and those who perhaps don't have the insight (or elbows' posts) to help them make informed decisions.
It stinks. I'd like to think Johnston's chickens will come home to roost on this, but I'm not sure he'd notice or care if that happened.
) has long gone on about how Dark Forces have been playing up the Covid-19 situation for their own Evil Ends, and is very critical of the Welsh Government for not following Westminster's line on lockdown.I've just had a concerned email - I'm "caretaker" CEO while she's supposed to be recovering from a 3 week stay in intensive care - from one of the office team, to whom she has just sent an email saying, essentially, "any time you want to return to working in the office, I'd like that".
The problem seems to be that there's a disconnection in some minds from the reality of the situation and what Government announcements say - some people seem to believe that if "Boris" has said it's OK, then they're safe. The clear implication being that people (people, incidentally, like me) who are inclined to take a more cautious approach are discounted as being somehow timid or weak.Because I am neither timid, nor weak, and because one of the office staff leaked the email to me - and saying that she has no intention of returning yet - I have responded to it by emailing the office staff to point out that a) Welsh Government guidelines would not permit them to work without proper social distancing - not achievable in that office - and to point out that if they feel (like I do) that the government guidelines aren't strong enough, the Society is certainly not going to look unfavourably on that decision. I have had a flurry of relieved responses from people who were clearly upset by the suggestion they should be returning to work.
It seems to me to be the height of irresponsibility that the UK government seems so willing to blur their fantasy of a return to normal with the reality - that we still don't have a decent test and trace system in place, the guidelines don't reflect the real risk (social distancing outside is a whole different ballgame from sitting in the same office as someone for several hours, even if you were 2m apart), and a series of decisions which have been shown with hindsight to have been predictably and fatally flawed.
Some people are not going to be able to stand up to managers who say "Right, that's it. 'Boris' says it's safe now, so get back into the office". It's abusive. It's reckless. And this tone is consistently being set by the Government, and it punishes the powerless, the voiceless, and those who perhaps don't have the insight (or elbows' posts) to help them make informed decisions.
It stinks. I'd like to think Johnston's chickens will come home to roost on this, but I'm not sure he'd notice or care if that happened.
I work for an organisation whose CEO (a Brexit Party supporter
I've just had a concerned email - I'm "caretaker" CEO while she's supposed to be recovering from a 3 week stay in intensive care - from one of the office team, to whom she has just sent an email saying, essentially, "any time you want to return to working in the office, I'd like that".
Because I am neither timid, nor weak, and because one of the office staff leaked the email to me - and saying that she has no intention of returning yet - I have responded to it by emailing the office staff to point out that a) Welsh Government guidelines would not permit them to work without proper social distancing - not achievable in that office - and to point out that if they feel (like I do) that the government guidelines aren't strong enough, the Society is certainly not going to look unfavourably on that decision. I have had a flurry of relieved responses from people who were clearly upset by the suggestion they should be returning to work.
It seems to me to be the height of irresponsibility that the UK government seems so willing to blur their fantasy of a return to normal with the reality - that we still don't have a decent test and trace system in place, the guidelines don't reflect the real risk (social distancing outside is a whole different ballgame from sitting in the same office as someone for several hours, even if you were 2m apart), and a series of decisions which have been shown with hindsight to have been predictably and fatally flawed.
Some people are not going to be able to stand up to managers who say "Right, that's it. 'Boris' says it's safe now, so get back into the office". It's abusive. It's reckless. And this tone is consistently being set by the Government, and it punishes the powerless, the voiceless, and those who perhaps don't have the insight (or elbows' posts) to help them make informed decisions.
It stinks. I'd like to think Johnston's chickens will come home to roost on this, but I'm not sure he'd notice or care if that happened.
Its worth pointing out that one thing the UK government has been absolutely clear on from the start (and still are) is that you should work from home if you can. The conversation should pretty much end there.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I'm going to be speaking to the CEO in about 10 minutes. Having forwarded a copy of my response to the office staff, I imagine that we are going to have a quite...interesting conversation. I spent 10 minutes last time to her expounding something close to conspiracy theories about the whole business.
I can't stop her emailing staff, but I have made it very, very clear to the staff that if they have any concerns about anything she tells them, that they can - should - check it out with me. That system appears to be working
MrSki
Who am I to say you're wrong
We are still weeks behind. The number of hospital cases went up yesterday to 490 from 458 a week earlier but they did not do the comparison for this figure unlike all the others. 173 deaths yesterday where the EU27 had 53 combined. Still a shitshow. There won't be a second wave unless the first one finishes.
There won't be a second wave unless the first one finishes.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Seems to me that 1m still has some meaning in institutions, shops, trains, universities and the rest i.e. it's something that has to be planned for and may change working arrangements. However a 1m rule in itself and at an interpersonal level is a case of not having a rule. I was out walking with my partner the other day and realised we were naturally walking about 1m apart and that it's barely more than an arms length. So having a '1m rule' in practice is just a case of saying 'no touching', something that you wouldn't do anyway in a shop, supermarket etc. In fact when we go to 1m, I'd be surprised if small shops who put yellow tape at 6ft apart even bother to replace them with 3ft markers.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
This week I've had two work-based situations arise where, in normal circumstances, I'd go to see people in person - at their homes - and I've said something like, well, obviously that's not really possible right now, so we can perhaps work round it with video calls etc instead for now, and review things in a couple of weeks.
I've been sightly surprised that in both cases the response has been along the lines of, oh no that's fine, we've no problem with you coming here, we can just keep a 2m distance. One actually enquiring about what would be holding me back. In that instance, I'd need to do an hour or so train journey to get there. Maybe they assumed I would drive or something. But it's made me wonder if I am out of step in my current level of caution.
I've been sightly surprised that in both cases the response has been along the lines of, oh no that's fine, we've no problem with you coming here, we can just keep a 2m distance. One actually enquiring about what would be holding me back. In that instance, I'd need to do an hour or so train journey to get there. Maybe they assumed I would drive or something. But it's made me wonder if I am out of step in my current level of caution.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
I think with something like this, people are going to form their attitudes and approaches around what other people do. But at the same time most of us are having contact with a much more limited number of people and are staying much more local, so there are going to be a lot of different views and approaches.
For me it surprises me a little to see people talking about the 2m rule outdoors as if that's really an important thing. It's never really been practical here and more or less everyone seems to have settled on a 'polite distance' approach. I don't really see people worrying about others coming within 2m any more. But on the other hand I don't see the 'totally giving up' that people complain about. Maybe that is happening elsewhere though.
prunus
Tick tock.
Actually it’s worded slightly stronger than that: you should work from home unless you cannot. And businesses should provide whatever support is possible required to make sure you can.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I am DEFINITELY out of step with my level of caution.
But I take no great satisfaction in saying that I think there is a good probability that if I keep marching to the beat of my drum, quite a lot of people are going to be coming back in step. I am, I must admit, quite surprised that we haven't seen the lower slopes of an exponential increase.
. He'll be in and out of peoples' houses, too.Similar threads
