Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

Masks at work everywhere from tomorrow apart from when sitting at your own desk.

Not a big change for me as I normally wear a mask for 6-7hrs a day already. On the rare occasion I go back to my desk it'll be nice to take it off.
 
Masks at work everywhere from tomorrow apart from when sitting at your own desk.

Not a big change for me as I normally wear a mask for 6-7hrs a day already. On the rare occasion I go back to my desk it'll be nice to take it off.

you get used to it after a while


my companies been doing it for months now


Twat MD is now trying to get us to wipe the printer after each use which is more annoying

:facepalm: i worked through out the full lockdown with my team and none of us got covid from the fucking photocopier
 
Don’t need to wear a mask at my desk either but do when moving around the building or talking with anyone etc.

All the banks of desks are in a W formation but where I’m sat there’s no-body that close.

Entire office block is fogged every weekend and every desk which has been used (you get your own KB/mouse which you put away) is thoroughly cleaned every night (you overturn a card), communal doors cleaned regularly.

Free masks too.
 
I’ve just been on the daily mail website

Have a wash.

and the top most upvoted (agreed with) comments there under today’s article on the infection figures are all saying Don’t believe the hype Get back to normal It’s just flu etc.
That is not at all how it was first time round.

50,000 deaths wasn't enough for them.

I'm hearing more and more of the type of comment you are talking about. People are thick and have no stamina for long term news. It's depressing.
 
I’ve just been on the daily mail website and the top most upvoted (agreed with) comments there under today’s article on the infection figures are all saying Don’t believe the hype Get back to normal It’s just flu etc.
That is not at all how it was first time round.
If they’re not all trollbots that is concerning.

Think it's natural in many respects a lot of people are increasingly unhappy with restrictions. Was always going to be the case if the virus didn't go away.

During the first wave most people supported the measures. There were no anti-lockdown protests, and it didn't feel like a particularly partisan issue which was provoking great ideological divides.

Right now a lot of people do still support lockdown measures, according to polling - but there's obviously a much more sizeable portion of the country who are opposed to them and feel we need to get back to normal. That group will, in all likelihood, probably continue to rise if we successfully contain death numbers.
 
50,000 deaths wasn't enough for them.

I'm hearing more and more of the type of comment you are talking about. People are thick and have no stamina for long term news. It's depressing.

The most common argument against measures we hear now is that deaths numbers are low - but this, of course, ignores that death will rise as cases rise. Especially if the virus is allowed to spread unchecked.

But I do understand the frustrations of a lot of people. We're essentially being told to put our lives on hold for an indefinite period of time. That's a genuinely huge ask in many respects. And as we try to target restrictions, some of them are genuinely becoming confusing, especially when coupled with poor comms. Rising unemployment will only make anti-lockdown sentiment worse as well.

But ultimately, no matter how annoyed people get, I've yet to see any other solution which won't see cases and therefore deaths skyrocketing before long.
 
It was Belgium, with their European drinking culture. Oh, and a curfew that required everyone to be home between 11.30pm and 5am.

Article about it, and British interest in it, here: Bed by 11: how a strict curfew helped Belgium suppress a second coronavirus wave

And due to the fact they are keen to stop such measures at the earliest opportunity, I dont think they suppressed the second wave for very long. They damped down a particular hotspot and sent the overall numbers in a downwards direction for a period, but things have gone up a lot again recently and yet they still seem as interested in loosening measures as strengthening them.

I'll put their graphs in a spoiler tag since this isnt the best thread for them but they do fit into the conversation.

 
Got the app today - I was quite amused that in its privacy etc agreement they felt the need to explain that it's theoretically possible someone using the app will guess you are the infected person if you're the only person they've come into contact with. :D
 
I’ve just been on the daily mail website and the top most upvoted (agreed with) comments there under today’s article on the infection figures are all saying Don’t believe the hype Get back to normal It’s just flu etc.
That is not at all how it was first time round.
If they’re not all trollbots that is concerning.
Yougov has support for the new measures at 78%, with almost half of those surveyed thinking they don't go far enough. Recommend you don't read too much into what goes on btl on the daily mail tbh.

 
Yougov has support for the new measures at 78%, with almost half of those surveyed thinking they don't go far enough. Recommend you don't read too much into what goes on btl on the daily mail tbh.

Was it them or someone else reporting yesterday that split opinion almost entirely in labour/Tory lines?
 
I went out tonight to a comedy event, all outdoors on plastic seats in pairs of two, with the drinks ordered either in advance or via a QR code on the back of the chair (we had them in advance). Masks weren't expected while sitting down - you were quite far apart from other people - but were expected when moving around the site; most people remembered. The arrival and leaving times were staggered, and impressively well organised.

It felt very safe - a good compromise as a way to enable an event without actually killing people. Though they won't be able to do any more this year, really, it's simply too cold.

Then when we left we - I think a thousand people, maybe? - were all leaving and getting public transport at the same time because, by 9:30, everything had shut or was preparing to shut - at least that means the establishments were all following the rules stringently. The DLR was by far the riskiest part of the trip. (I don't think many people attempt to drive to Greenwich).

Going there, we were able to choose our times, and arrived earlier than needed - the tube and DLR was way quieter on the way in, at 4:30, than on the way out.

I wish they'd allowed a coffee shop or two to stay open so that we could sit down, not drink alcohol (which does increase the risk of not obeying social distancing rules) and been able to wait before getting on the DLR.

Staggered leaving times makes more sense to me than a simple curfew. Maybe pubs could be allowed to stay open till 11, but only selling soft drinks and hot drinks after 10pm, or even earlier. That would encourage some people to leave earlier, but some would stay, because it's about the socialising more than the booze, really, especially if you're not allowed to meet up at home.

You could have six people at home, but presumably that includes your household members. So for a family of four, that'd be two guests. To see three-five friends, you'd need to go out. And in some ways it probably would be safer, or at least more trackable. But it doesn't have to be boozy.
 
Somebody who understands in far more detail than I, could someone tell me why this wouldn't work?

Extend each school half term by another week. So roughly every 12 or 13 weeks or so, when schools would be shut and a large number of people would have been making childcare arrangements anyway; with plenty of advance preparation time, and at a known time to allow for scheduling purposes (for things like non-urgent medical procedures). Shut down, hard. Everyone bunker down for 2 weeks; minimal essential shopping trips only, 1 hour daily exercise again. 2 weeks at a time, months apart.

I've seen a lot of talk around politicians not wanting to use the word "lockdown" again, instead calling it a "circuit-breaker". In that case, do something more than fucking pubs shutting an hour early that actually breaks the circuit - starve the virus of hosts, then the time in between "circuit-breakers" could be managed from a low starting point for transmission with basic restrictions only.

The major issue with that is that half terms are every six weeks or so, not every twelve weeks.

Two weeks out of eight with those strict requirements would be really hard to manage, financially and mentally. I don't know how companies would be able to keep people on with that amount of time without income, especially since some of them would probably have to plan for occasional closures if they have an outbreak even with those measures. And then people would have to recheck the rules all the time, kids would have even more time out of school, and rescheduling "non-urgent" medical procedures would be even harder - even non-urgent ones often require aftercare, and who'd be able to give it, if there's a lockdown?

One "circuit breaker" in October does seem like a good idea, but repeated ones every six weeks would be chaotic.

Even planning for strict two-week shutdowns every twelve weeks would make planning anything really hard. Every twelve weeks schools already shut for around two weeks (Christmas, Easter, then it's summer), so that wouldn't actually change anything.

I went to a house party during the summer, the first one I have been to in years, and it started at 2pm and no pub was involved at all. Therefore I am assuming that is what all house parties do nowadays.

So did the one I went to in July. Though actually it was a party in a car park outside the flat.

A lot of the "house parties" I've been to or hosted since I became a parent 22 years ago started at 2pm, but house party is a very generous term for most of them. :D They might still have gone on till 3am but that was usually after the early crowd had left.
 
Last edited:
Got the app today - I was quite amused that in its privacy etc agreement they felt the need to explain that it's theoretically possible someone using the app will guess you are the infected person if you're the only person they've come into contact with. :D
How’s the battery of your phone being affected by the app?
 
213 new cases this week in Leeds’ student areas. :eek:

I know there's the other thread for universities. But this was always going to happen, given the infection rate wasn't reduced low enough during the summer.

The biggest dangers for so many young people contracting this in those circumstances are still that they might pass it on to more vunrible groups. That some of them may have underlying conditions, knowingly or otherwise. And the Longcovid thing that effects a minority.

Don't know why I wrote all that, bit Captain Obvious....
 
Back
Top Bottom