Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

Society: takes drastic action to avoid a catstrophe
Idiots: 'but there never was any catastrophe so all that stuff we did was a waste of time'
It's the "security problem". Security, done right means...nothing happens. And some pillock will inevitably come along and go "why are we paying all these people to do, effectively, nothing?". So they cut back, and then the shit hits the fan.
 
Triggles tune has evolved very slightly over recent days, so I shall record this day as the day of the Triggle wiggle, although its not much of a wiggle really, its the least he could do given his predictions from a day or two ago are already defunct.

Part of his latest positioning via the BBC story about 10pm closing time:


It seems inevitable that the virus will continue to spread - that's what respiratory viruses do during winter, especially one for which there is limited immunity and no vaccine.

But how quickly and widely is something no one knows. The risk of trying to suppress the virus is the government will soon find itself having to make another decision about further steps.

How far are ministers prepared to go? Every restriction that is taken has a negative consequence to society.

But the nature of the virus means lives will undoubtedly be lost the more it spreads. Balancing those two harms will define the next six months.

Thank fuck Triggle isnt in charge of this balancing act, since that would probably resemble walking a tightrope with shoelaces tied together.
 
If you don’t think the secondary effects of wrecking the economy won’t kill more people over the next several years than the virus will I can’t help you.

Apart from the cancer deaths because of all the people who missed scans, suicides die to loneliness, alcoholism. That doesn’t even take into account domestic violence, depression and other mental health issues.

How do you think allowing covid free rein will help? An overwhelmed nhs with many staff off ill or dead or grieving or isolating cant treat cancer patients. Do you not think covid itself causes mental health problems? You dont think abusers will abuse partners they should be nursing?

Pretending covid isn't a problem any longer doesnt make it go away.

As for Sweden do you think everyone just ignored covid and behaved as normal?

And what others have already said about the economy. Going back to the unsustainable 'normality' shouldn't even be an option.
 
At least now landlords have to give you six months' notice before evicting you. Only till March, mind, but still a relief.


? I got this email from Shelter today

(sorry about the formatting I just c&p'd )
Arthur,

After being in place for six months, yesterday the government ended their temporary ban on evictions.

If you are – or you know anyone who is – worried about being evicted from their home, we've updated our housing advice pages with the latest advice and guidance.​
From today, courts are open and they are beginning to deal with evictions. But this doesn’t mean renters can be evicted immediately.

Landlords have to serve an eviction notice before they can apply to court, and for many renters that's months away.

If a landlord has already applied to court there's currently a backlog of cases. This means courts are having to prioritise cases with very high rent arrears or antisocial behaviour.​
Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, housing campaigners from all over the country, including Shelter supporters like you, have been demanding greater protections for renters.

So far, over 8,000 supporters have emailed Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick, and 72,000 have called on the government to make sure everyone has a safe home during the crisis.

We've helped build up pressure, and together we've made sure renters are better protected.

Thanks for your support,

James
Campaigns team​
 
hold on a second,

the health secretary

didn't realize that cv could spread asymptomatically :confused:


Matt Hancock has said he had wished he had known the coronavirus could spread asymptomatically sooner - despite the government’s advisers saying symptom-free transmission could “not be ruled out” in a document drafted in February.
The health secretary said not having a developed understanding of how the virus spread was his biggest regret in the aftermath of the UK outbreak, which has led to the deaths of 41,788 people and 136,330 hospitalisations.

 
Last edited:
I see that the Scottish half-term holidays in some places there are close enough that they are still considering that plan.


Despite the holidays in England being a poorer timing fit with this viral resurgence, I have concluded that they may still keep this part of the plan anyway. Because we arent looking at 6 months of the same measures, they are clearly going to change different things at different times. So its not like they just need to get one date & set of measures spot on. There is a need to restrict some stuff now but they may figure that if they do a few of those things now, they might get away without doing some other stronger things till the October half-term period. I'm still not sure they will get away with that timing, but like I said, there are a lot of different things they can try in the meantime although having to wait a number of weeks to see how well they are working doesnt help either.
 
I suppose I will be tracking news reports relating to the risks from coinfection with Covid-19 and flu at the same time.


Its not really surprising that the likes of Van Tam are mentioning this issue given that they are trying to encourage people to get the flu jab.

There are several unknowns relating to how big an issue this will be, but I am really not looking forward to finding out. I hope the opportunities to really find out remain somewhat limited, or it turns out not to be as big a deal as feared. But I dont place much weight on hope alone in this pandemic.
 
Are you some sort of sleeper troll? :confused:

Its more likely an example of someone whose approach to coping with and interpreting the aftermath of the first pandemic wave resulted in what I would consider to be a dead end that is detached from reality.

If I came to such conclusions myself and then ventured onto this forum, perhaps I too would be tempted to wonder why the majority here were singing a very different tune and had interpreted the pandemic so far rather differently. Perhaps I would invent some uninspired explanations for why most people here had settled on the rather different and incompatible version of pandemic reality.

Some people were no-nothing pandemic fools since before the start and never improved, others had a clue to start with but something in what happened later caused them to take a wrong turn. I would like to better understand exactly what that was in all cases. What exactly would they have needed to see in the first wave in order to stick to the idea that its a bad pandemic that was mitigated late via lockdown, and that until we have other options available we will have to keep reaching for crude tools to stop that magnitude and worse of horror from emerging again after the requisite infection buildup time? Twice as many deaths as we had under a late lockdown? Three times as many? Hospitals actually reaching and going beyond capacity everywhere? Not enough oxygen and ventilator shortages for them the first time around? Too much spare PPE, not enough dead Prime Ministers? 65000 excess deaths not worth thinking about compared to the everyday hardships of having to walk uphill to school both ways? Alternatively if the answer is just Sweden Sweden blah blah then I probably dont want to know after all ;)
 
View attachment 231060

Clearly we are at level 4 nationally, and 5 in some areas, and about to go to 5 on a national basis,
_112982562_r_alert_level_v4_640-nc.png
Apparently, for every doubling of the number of cases, we will move closer to lockdown by half the distance from where we are at the time, given that lockdown now only begins at level 5. Either that or we'll suddenly find there's a level 6, at which lockdown really, truly begins, honestly :hmm:
 
Last edited:
View attachment 231282
Apparently, for every doubling of the number of cases, we will move closer to lockdown by half the distance from where we are at the time, given that lockdown now only begins at level 5. Either that or well suddenly find there's a level 6, at which lockdown really, truly begins, honestly :hmm:
insert photo of Johnson or Hancock pointing to volume control on an amplifier

"this one goes up to eleven"
 
Back
Top Bottom