When will this shit end?

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Oh, its fair enough to blame the government for this fuck up. I think a Uturn will piss too many people off at this stage. I think changing it to 5 to 3 days would be better in the sense of reducing contacts still IMO

As I’ve said that will no good at all.

Trust me I’ll be upset if we can’t meet people at Christmas, I live on my own and love that day. But I realise it’s for the greater good that it needs to be cancelled, look at the numbers it just isn’t wise. If people are saying they’ll do it anyway if the relaxation is cancelled then surely they are just as likely to take the piss with the relaxed rules? It works both ways. 
 

I think some people’s desperation for normality is clouding the fact that we are close to the end so we should let up now. 

[steviewevie]

Gavin Williamson really going for it against these schools wanting to close in Greenwich....bit weird to be honest, but maybe he's worried it will set a precedent for next term when things could be equally as bad or worse.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, SwedgeAntilles said:

 

 

That’s pretty damming. The medics in the country feel it’s wise to not do it now. When will they wake up?

[topmarksbri]

If they did decide to u turn maybe they could offer a bank holiday next summer to counteract this? Label it "frontline day" or something to recognize work of frontline workers. 

[steviewevie]

bah humbug

 

[Homer]

5 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Kuenssberg confirms the government is considering a partial u-turn. 

This is possibly the least assertive statement of intent of all time!

[topmarksbri]

Just now, Homer said:

This is possibly the least assertive statement of intent of all time!

[Ryan1984]

1 minute ago, topmarksbri said:

If they did decide to u turn maybe they could offer a bank holiday next summer to counteract this? Label it "frontline day" or something to recognize work of frontline workers. 

I’ve been saying this for months. They should have came out at the end of summer/beginning of autumn saying Christmas will be different this year, but if things progress as we hope, you’ll get two days off for the late May Bank Holiday. People got very excited about Queenie’s double one in 2022.

[st dan]

If they do cancel the Christmas household mixing, they will need to play the ‘Oxford vaccine approval’ card at the same time to help keep any uproar to a minimum. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

7 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

 

I think that would actually be better, as staying locked down in a Christmas bubble for longer is better than going back to work!

Yeah - it's a weird hill to die on, to be honest. And if I'm frank I think it often comes from a fairly selfish place of people not being that bothered about seeing their families and not getting that others are.

I mean, broadly I agree with it. We should stop the Christmas household mixing.

But we should also close the schools today.

We should also close all shops and restaurants today.

We should also instruct people not to go to work unless they are key workers.

We should close the gyms.

We should shut the bloody pubs!

There are so many other things we can do and it does really bother me that some people think the Christmas mixing thing is "the one thing" they should change. The UK has, broadly, had more restrictions on household mixing than other EU countries, while being more lax on hospitality and retail. Hence, I think, the need for some sort of social "circuit break" from lockdown - especially in those places that basically haven't left it since March. It's been fairly obvious that compliance with the last lockdown has been low, I think letting people have some time where they can actually see family will help with the inevitable January lockdown anyway.

Yes, the economy and all that. It is a thing. But so is the nation's mental health and general wellbeing. And I think we do need something. And if the numbers say things are going to get out of control, then lets make the sacrifices elsewhere for once.

(It's all a moot point for me as we're now temporarily living with my parents, who would be our Christmas bubble, until we can safely return home or find somewhere else to live).

Interested in why you think the bolded?

- I haven’t seen any evidence of outbreaks from retail (where customers are masked and only walk past one another rather than spending prolonged periods in close contact) 

 

- Gyms are probably a net positive (yes they’ll cause a few cases, but having them open increases the health of society)

 

- Schools probably ARE superspread environments but the general consensus is that having them open is so necessary to society that it’s worth the upward pressure on R generated by them. If you’re just talking about closing early for Christmas though then I agree. 

[Homer]

1 minute ago, Ryan1984 said:

I’ve been saying this for months. They should have came out at the end of summer/beginning of autumn saying Christmas will be different this year, but if things progress as we hope, you’ll get two days off for the late May Bank Holiday. People got very excited about Queenie’s double one in 2022.

TBF, most people I know have already got more holiday than they know what to do with.

[steviewevie]

I wonder how things would be if we didn't have these vaccines...?

[topmarksbri]

1 minute ago, st dan said:

If they do cancel the Christmas household mixing, they will need to play the ‘Oxford vaccine approval’ card at the same time to help keep any uproar to a minimum. 

This would be the play in my opinion - basically say cases are high and we need to stop NHS getting overwhelmed but there's light at the end of the tunnel, Oxford vaccine means we'll be able to lift most restrictions by x date and we just need to hold on till then. At the moment the indecision and lack of clarity is what seems to be annoying most people I know.

[steviewevie]

Just now, topmarksbri said:

This would be the play in my opinion - basically say cases are high and we need to stop NHS getting overwhelmed but there's light at the end of the tunnel, Oxford vaccine means we'll be able to lift most restrictions by x date and we just need to hold on till then. At the moment the indecision and lack of clarity is what seems to be annoying most people I know.

well, the regulators are independent from government, right?

[Homer]

12 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Reading between the lines of what the government are saying, I don't think they want to u-turn, I think what they want to say is:

"If you're middle-class, work at home, can drive to your Christmas bubble, then go ahead and see your family. If you're working class, still have to physically go to a place of work and have interactions with other people, and would need to get public transport to your bubble, please don't, it's too dangerous."

Which is a statement that is both true and yet *too* divisive for even this Tory government to make.

(I'm not saying that should be the rule either, just if we want to go properly with "follow the science" then it would be true. And if you feel like a rule like that would be unfair - like I do - then you acknowledge it's not entirely about following the science, and that other things are at play in your thinking)

I'm 3/3 for being able to go home - but the wife and I decided last night it's not happening. (London to Bristol.)

I reckon Xmas will be a weird blend of drunkenness and going to the gym (or both at the same time possibly).

[DeanoL]

8 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

That’s pretty damming. The medics in the country feel it’s wise to not do it now. When will they wake up?

The medics also think pubs and restaurants should be closed, schools should be closed, etc. They've just made those points months ago and feel like they've already lost that argument.

2 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Interested in why you think the bolded?

- I haven’t seen any evidence of outbreaks from retail (where customers are masked and only walk past one another rather than spending prolonged periods in close contact) 

 

- Gyms are probably a net positive (yes they’ll cause a few cases, but having them open increases the health of society)

 

- Schools probably ARE superspread environments but the general consensus is that having them open is so necessary to society that it’s worth the upward pressure on R generated by them. If you’re just talking about closing early for Christmas though then I agree. 

You don't get outbreaks in retail because outbreaks happen where the same people visit the same place every day. That doesn't mean you don't get transmission in retail. It's just never focused on a particular store. Someone with COVID touches something, then someone buys that item, takes it home, and then everyone in the home gets sick. That's a "home" outbreak in the stats. But it came from a retail store.

The health point is a good one, but the nation's mental health is the reason for the Christmas relaxation in the first place. 

Schools again - it just depends what you value. The "general consensus" at the moment is we should still get to see family at Christmas. But that could change. But again, as soon as we accept that some things are more important than keeping numbers of COVID down, be it "education" or "the economy" or "people's mental health" or "easing lockdown fatigue" - then it just becomes a matter of what people value as more important.

For many the order of the list appears to be: education, the economy, COVID, people's mental health/easing lockdown fatigue. That's been the way the governement have approached it since July. I'm just suggesting it being re-ordered for five days is probably a good idea.

[st dan]

I do think the BMJ and HSJ both had to come out with the statement that they strongly advising against any relaxations - I mean it’s obvious for even us on here to see, and this is their reputations on the line. So they have to be seen publicly opposing the measures as we have seen today. 
The relaxation announcement a few weeks ago was always a political one, as will be any decision to reverse it. 

[Homer]

This whole apocalypse vibe is making me want to get one more day of living to the max. Think I'm gonna go sit in the Leicester Square IMAX and watch Muppets Christmas Carol with a bottle of port later. (Might treat myself to some cheese too.)

[Fuzzy Afro]

2 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

The medics also think pubs and restaurants should be closed, schools should be closed, etc. They've just made those points months ago and feel like they've already lost that argument.

You don't get outbreaks in retail because outbreaks happen where the same people visit the same place every day. That doesn't mean you don't get transmission in retail. It's just never focused on a particular store. Someone with COVID touches something, then someone buys that item, takes it home, and then everyone in the home gets sick. That's a "home" outbreak in the stats. But it came from a retail store.

The health point is a good one, but the nation's mental health is the reason for the Christmas relaxation in the first place. 

Schools again - it just depends what you value. The "general consensus" at the moment is we should still get to see family at Christmas. But that could change. But again, as soon as we accept that some things are more important than keeping numbers of COVID down, be it "education" or "the economy" or "people's mental health" or "easing lockdown fatigue" - then it just becomes a matter of what people value as more important.

For many the order of the list appears to be: education, the economy, COVID, people's mental health/easing lockdown fatigue. That's been the way the governement have approached it since July. I'm just suggesting it being re-ordered for five days is probably a good idea.

That’s not really how covid spreads. With other viruses like the flu, the main transmission vector is fomites which work as you describe with a common surface being touched. We initially assumed covid spread like this but later found that not to be the case)
 

Covid is more spread by aerosol transmission (I.e. literally breathing in the air that’s been breathed out by a covid patient). This is why masks are far more important than we initially thought.

 

I’m sure @Toilet Duck would be able to articulate this point better than me but SAGE estimate that opening non-essential retail has very minimal impact on the R number and there’s little reason to think it shouldn’t be open. 

[efcfanwirral]

35 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Yeah - it's a weird hill to die on, to be honest. And if I'm frank I think it often comes from a fairly selfish place of people not being that bothered about seeing their families and not getting that others are.

Not true at all. 

We lost my Mum in September and my dad is making such an effort over Christmas, as he's from the old school of following the rules, despite being a critical thinker normally. Obviously I want to go there but Christmas is just a day and I'd like him to be there for many christmases to come (he's only 63). Everyone's mental health would be much worse if he got covid and died than by maybe seeing each other outdoors at some point and sacking off one day. 

Add in my brother's housemate (his partner's friend) is working in an office until next week, my Grandad needing to come round and I'm shitting it but feel too guilty to cancel it while the rules are as they are. 

Obviously under normal circumstances I'd want to go, but in the real world I feel pressured into going, and then we're bounced into breaking the rules as my girlfriend's parents refuse to see us as theyve been tier 3 since summer pretty much, so she's insistent on seeing them too which is fair enough. Id rather just see them if we have to if she/they are willing to take such a risk, but again the circumstances make that difficult. 

So that's 4 households with a clear transmission risk. It's only 2 months til the people I'm worried about are vaccinated. Its mental and wrong

I think genuine mental health needs should be the line around who should see family - I'd say mine is generally poor, but never anywhere near the edge and therefore not a problem personally (obviously everyone else has different thresholds) so I could deal with not doing christmas. 

 

24 minutes ago, Ryan1984 said:

I’ve been saying this for months. They should have came out at the end of summer/beginning of autumn saying Christmas will be different this year, but if things progress as we hope, you’ll get two days off for the late May Bank Holiday. People got very excited about Queenie’s double one in 2022.

If they want to make it 'Christmas like' then adding thursday and Tuesday around easter would've been good (with at least one day, say the sunday, with almost everything closed christmas day style) if they could 100% guarantee it would be ok by then 

Edited December 15, 2020 by efcfanwirral

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, Homer said:

This is possibly the least assertive statement of intent of all time!

A partial u turn then, which will probably do nothing. 

[DeanoL]

3 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

That’s not really how covid spreads. With other viruses like the flu, the main transmission vector is fomites which work as you describe with a common surface being touched. We initially assumed covid spread like this but later found that not to be the case)
 

Covid is more spread by aerosol transmission (I.e. literally breathing in the air that’s been breathed out by a covid patient). This is why masks are far more important than we initially thought.

 

I’m sure @Toilet Duck would be able to articulate this point better than me but SAGE estimate that opening non-essential retail has very minimal impact on the R number and there’s little reason to think it shouldn’t be open. 

It doesn't help though. 

And having stores open means people travelling to them, having more contacts (even brief ones), using public transport, meeting people they're not meant to meet (just like pubs, people who think everyone is only shopping in household bubbles are kidding themselves). All I'm saying is if the position is we are taking is it's so bad we have to cancel Christmas to stop it, we should also be pushing for other measures too.

[DeanoL]

3 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

Not true at all. 

We lost my Mum in September and my dad is making such an effort over Christmas, as he's from the old school of following the rules, despite being a critical thinker normally. Obviously I want to go there but Christmas is just a day and I'd like him to be there for many christmases to come (he's only 63). Everyone's mental health would be much worse if he got covid and died than by maybe seeing each other outdoors at some point and sacking off one day. 

Add in my brother's housemate (his partner's friend) is working in an office until next week, my Grandad needing to come round and I'm shitting it but feel too guilty to cancel it while the rules are as they are. 

Obviously under normal circumstances I'd want to go, but in the real world I feel pressured into going, and then we're bounced into breaking the rules as my girlfriend's parents refuse to see us as theyve been tier 3 since summer pretty much, so she's insistent on seeing them too which is fair enough. Id rather just see them if we have to if she/they are willing to take such a risk, but again the circumstances make that difficult. 

So that's 4 households with a clear transmission risk. It's only 2 months til the people I'm worried about are vaccinated. Its mental and wrong

The bit that is most mental and wrong there is your brother's housemate being forced to go into an office to work.

I do have a lot of sympathy for your situation, but you seem to be able to make the right choices on what is and isn't safe or right for you, you don't need the rules to back you up (especially if you're breaking them anyway - which highlights why changing them now won't help much). 

[Fuzzy Afro]

4 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

It doesn't help though. 

And having stores open means people travelling to them, having more contacts (even brief ones), using public transport, meeting people they're not meant to meet (just like pubs, people who think everyone is only shopping in household bubbles are kidding themselves). All I'm saying is if the position is we are taking is it's so bad we have to cancel Christmas to stop it, we should also be pushing for other measures too.

Well everything has a cost in terms of the R number.
 

It could only ever go to 0 if we have everyone in an isolated zorb bubble and shut down literally everything, even key services. It could only ever go back to its original R0 of around 3 if we scrapped all the rules and told everyone to get back to their lives. 
 

In between that, it’s a game of keeping it below 1. SAGE minutes suggest that the net impact of retail being open is a very very minor impact on the R number, so there’s little point closing it. I was surprised retail closed in the November lockdown tbh. 

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

Not true at all. 

We lost my Mum in September and my dad is making such an effort over Christmas, as he's from the old school of following the rules, despite being a critical thinker normally. Obviously I want to go there but Christmas is just a day and I'd like him to be there for many christmases to come (he's only 63). Everyone's mental health would be much worse if he got covid and died than by maybe seeing each other outdoors at some point and sacking off one day. 

Add in my brother's housemate (his partner's friend) is working in an office until next week, my Grandad needing to come round and I'm shitting it but feel too guilty to cancel it while the rules are as they are. 

Obviously under normal circumstances I'd want to go, but in the real world I feel pressured into going, and then we're bounced into breaking the rules as my girlfriend's parents refuse to see us as theyve been tier 3 since summer pretty much, so she's insistent on seeing them too which is fair enough. Id rather just see them if we have to if she/they are willing to take such a risk, but again the circumstances make that difficult. 

So that's 4 households with a clear transmission risk. It's only 2 months til the people I'm worried about are vaccinated. Its mental and wrong

I think genuine mental health needs should be the line around who should see family - I'd say mine is generally poor, but never anywhere near the edge and therefore not a problem personally (obviously everyone else has different thresholds) so I could deal with not doing christmas. 

 

If they want to make it 'Christmas like' then adding thursday and Tuesday around easter would've been good (with at least one day, say the sunday, with almost everything closed christmas day style) if they could 100% guarantee it would be ok by then 

I agree. I think it’s harsh for someone to suggest that because people feel that Christmas should be cancelled we ‘don’t understand the importance’. That’s some strange mental gymnastics. It’s important to a lot of people but some are just in the place where they feel it’s too risky considering the current state of the pandemic in the country.