When will this shit end?

[mikegday]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

Take a pub on a Saturday evening, they aren’t going to be filled with nice civilised couples sitting enjoying a quiet drink. They are going to be filled with people after hours of drinking, that won’t be as socially distanced because they’ve been drinking. It’s the drinking that’s the main part and a busier (than a home) pub. As I said if you can’t see that drinking alcohol will make people less likely to socially distance then I don’t know what else to say. 

I obviously see that drinking will make people less likely to socially distance! I’ve never said that isn’t the case. Again don’t feel like you’re really portraying my argument fairly. Im saying drinking in a pub is less dangerous right now for spreading the virus than doing it at your mates house.

Bear in mind pubs arnt chocka, their enforcing limits of people, things arnt normal down the pub right now. 

You seem to suggest everyones out clubbing losing their shit, it just ain’t the case. 

[Lizzim]

I may be a bit out of touch these days but when I was young house parties were way messier than drinks down the pub.  

[shoptildrop]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

As long as the guidance is clear, no one will ever breach it. 

It's not though is it and I think you know people will break it, I doubt most folk will even know about this until later tomorrow

Also, my hairdresser is mobile one so goes into people's houses so in effect her business has been stopped but that's not 100% clear from noises tonight - I really feel for her having to wake up to this in the morning  

[mikegday]

Just now, Lizzim said:

I may be a bit out of touch these days but when I was young house parties were way messier than drinks down the pub.  

Exactly my point.

[Ozanne]

18 minutes ago, mikegday said:

I obviously see that drinking will make people less likely to socially distance! I’ve never said that isn’t the case. Again don’t feel like you’re really portraying my argument fairly. Im saying drinking in a pub is less dangerous right now for spreading the virus than doing it at your mates house.

Bear in mind pubs arnt chocka, their enforcing limits of people, things arnt normal down the pub right now. 

You seem to suggest everyones out clubbing losing their shit, it just ain’t the case. 

A pub isn’t less dangerous, it’s been confirmed by experts that going to a pub is one of the riskier things you can do. 
Your point wasn’t about house parties, it was about generally going to a family members house 😂 you even used the scenario of a couple.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/avoid-these-risky-activities-during-the-coronavirus-pandemic/

Pubs - 

How to reduce risk:

In this case, totally avoiding bars is the best way to reduce risk. For now, drinking at home or outdoors is best.

 

The riskiest item on the list are bars. 
 

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/places-higher-risk-for-covid-19#Bars

‘Many of us miss socializing with friends over an evening drink, but experts say bars are among the worst place to be during a pandemic — in part because they’re designed to encourage close quarters.’

[Ozanne]

I better stop as that same person is downvoting my posts again, it’s making it very difficult to feel comfortable here.

[mikegday]

3 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

A pub isn’t less dangerous, it’s been confirmed by experts that going to a pub is one of the riskier things you can do. 
Your point wasn’t about house parties, it was about generally going to a family members house 😂 you even used the scenario of a couple.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/avoid-these-risky-activities-during-the-coronavirus-pandemic/

Pubs - 

How to reduce risk:

In this case, totally avoiding bars is the best way to reduce risk. For now, drinking at home or outdoors is best.

 

The riskiest item on the list are bars. 
 

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/places-higher-risk-for-covid-19#Bars

‘Many of us miss socializing with friends over an evening drink, but experts say bars are among the worst place to be during a pandemic — in part because they’re designed to encourage close quarters.’

Lol. Pretty sure that’s referring to drinking alone at home vs. Visiting a pub. It’s not referring to having your mates around for drinks vs. meeting your mates at the pub.

i give up, no worries. Agree to disagree.

[mikegday]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I better stop as that same person is downvoting my posts again, it’s making it very difficult to feel comfortable here.

Who?

[mikegday]

7 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

A pub isn’t less dangerous, it’s been confirmed by experts that going to a pub is one of the riskier things you can do. 
Your point wasn’t about house parties, it was about generally going to a family members house 😂 you even used the scenario of a couple.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/avoid-these-risky-activities-during-the-coronavirus-pandemic/

Pubs - 

How to reduce risk:

In this case, totally avoiding bars is the best way to reduce risk. For now, drinking at home or outdoors is best.

 

The riskiest item on the list are bars. 
 

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/places-higher-risk-for-covid-19#Bars

‘Many of us miss socializing with friends over an evening drink, but experts say bars are among the worst place to be during a pandemic — in part because they’re designed to encourage close quarters.’

Also my point was about people online saying if ‘they can’t visit someone’s house then pubs should be closed.’ 
 

I don’t agree that those two things are the same, or that one should follow the other. I believe there is valid reason for a pub staying open and visiting them to be allowed even though you can’t go and sit in your mates/family’s houses

[henry bear]

25 minutes ago, mikegday said:

Who?

@Sdsm123 - dude it’s not cool to keep downvoting the same person’s posts.

[Toilet Duck]

On the pub vs household debate, you can argue the pros and cons about risk all night, but you’ll be (partly) missing the point. From a public health perspective, if one of the individuals in a group is infected, then there are far more contacts in a pub and the potential to fuel a super-spreading event that can seed a higher number of clusters is far greater. Contact tracing is also straightforward when individuals that know each other congregate at home, much more complex when you mix large numbers of strangers in an indoor environment like a pub. The limited number of contacts people had during lockdown was the whole point of the exercise. While a large family gathering can result in the whole family being infected, it much easier to control than a pub with a couple of hundred punters who then all go off to 100 different households. 

[FestivalJamie]

18 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

On the pub vs household debate, you can argue the pros and cons about risk all night, but you’ll be (partly) missing the point. From a public health perspective, if one of the individuals in a group is infected, then there are far more contacts in a pub and the potential to fuel a super-spreading event that can seed a higher number of clusters is far greater. Contact tracing is also straightforward when individuals that know each other congregate at home, much more complex when you mix large numbers of strangers in an indoor environment like a pub. The limited number of contacts people had during lockdown was the whole point of the exercise. While a large family gathering can result in the whole family being infected, it much easier to control than a pub with a couple of hundred punters who then all go off to 100 different households. 

Exactly why I am avoiding the pubs.

I didn't realise the infections today were the highest they have been in a month. Crazy to think how quickly time flies, and worrying to see cases on the rise again.

[sdvruxk]

And if you’re sat across from this other couple (surely less than 1m if on one table) then what difference is it making? Yes you may touch more things when in a familiar household but if one of the four people has it, chances are four out of four are going to have it by the end of the night,  whether that’s at home or in a pub. The only difference is, as pointed out above, is there’s a higher chance of passing it onto someone outside of the four people. 

[steviewevie]

My kid was going to go camping with friends this weekend, she was really looking forward to it. Not sure if she can now....

[squirrelarmy]

Full rules on what we’re allowed and not allowed to do in localised lockdown

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/north-west-of-england-local-restrictions-what-you-can-and-cannot-do?fbclid=IwAR206HlnuolNDQeahiHqltOeK3JDLWa_tNfxeCFwLLwiVJnq0OmS8zK5bZc

[steviewevie]

I was going to visit my Mum next weekend too for first time since god knows when...not going to be able to do that now. Bloody stupid bastard virus.

[Matt42]

The reason why they are letting pubs open is purely economic. They need to keep cash coming through the tills (albeit steadily). Many pubs, restaurants, and bars are on the brink of collapse even with financial support. It’s nothing to do with safety, it’s because the service industry is on its knees.

[steviewevie]

7 hours ago, Toilet Duck said:

On the pub vs household debate, you can argue the pros and cons about risk all night, but you’ll be (partly) missing the point. From a public health perspective, if one of the individuals in a group is infected, then there are far more contacts in a pub and the potential to fuel a super-spreading event that can seed a higher number of clusters is far greater. Contact tracing is also straightforward when individuals that know each other congregate at home, much more complex when you mix large numbers of strangers in an indoor environment like a pub. The limited number of contacts people had during lockdown was the whole point of the exercise. While a large family gathering can result in the whole family being infected, it much easier to control than a pub with a couple of hundred punters who then all go off to 100 different households. 

This is all true...but a pub has rules that people have to adhere to. I guess there's pros and cons with both setting for meeting up.

Anyway, weather is nice so everyone can just get some booze and head to the park.

[foolee]

Does anyone find it strange that Leeds and Liverpool are not having localised lockdowns but these other places are, does anyone know what has been said to cause these lockdowns? Because of celebrations on the street can happen with no spike then surely festivals and outdoor gigs can continue however whatever is causing the spikes should stop? I know things aren’t that linear but it would be good if things like this were considered more. Also if we aren’t going to be getting a vaccine shouldn’t we be piloting events all the time to see how infections spread and at what rate so we can see what works and what doesn’t to keep the economy moving. 

[Matt42]

12 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Full rules on what we’re allowed and not allowed to do in localised lockdown

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/north-west-of-england-local-restrictions-what-you-can-and-cannot-do?fbclid=IwAR206HlnuolNDQeahiHqltOeK3JDLWa_tNfxeCFwLLwiVJnq0OmS8zK5bZc

Can I travel outside of the lockdown area to attend a wedding ceremony?

Yes.
 

 

—- 

 

This is nothing to do with containing a spread inside Manchester.

[Ozanne]

10 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I was going to visit my Mum next weekend too for first time since god knows when...not going to be able to do that now. Bloody stupid bastard virus.

Sorry to hear that mate, I hope you get to see her soon and she’s doing well. 

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, foolee said:

Does anyone find it strange that Leeds and Liverpool are not having localised lockdowns but these other places are, does anyone know what has been said to cause these lockdowns? Because of celebrations on the street can happen with no spike then surely festivals and outdoor gigs can continue however whatever is causing the spikes should stop? I know things aren’t that linear but it would be good if things like this were considered more. Also if we aren’t going to be getting a vaccine shouldn’t we be piloting events all the time to see how infections spread and at what rate so we can see what works and what doesn’t to keep the economy moving. 

lockdowns are in areas where there have been an increase in cases. Simple as that. Don't think anyone understands why these numbers have increased yet.

[whitehorses]

3 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

The reason why they are letting pubs open is purely economic. They need to keep cash coming through the tills (albeit steadily). Many pubs, restaurants, and bars are on the brink of collapse even with financial support. It’s nothing to do with safety, it’s because the service industry is on its knees.

Yes. And not just pubs, restaurants, and bars, but whole swathes of tourism and visitor services are on the brink (or have already teetered). 1,200 National Trust jobs gone yesterday, for example. The lengthy public health cataclysm of a wrecked economy will be uglier than the virus, I suspect... 

[steviewevie]

On newsnight last night they were talking about Leicester and the fact that the death rate had not followed the same trajectory as the number of positive cases...they didn't have an explanation for it though.

[squirrelarmy]

4 minutes ago, foolee said:

Does anyone find it strange that Leeds and Liverpool are not having localised lockdowns but these other places are

I find it very strange especially when you look at the Leeds/Bradford border. In the pic below, on the top half of the main road you are now under lockdown but on the bottom half you’re not. 
 

The areas are based on the health authorities, Bradford is my closest hospital so if I was to become hospitalised due to Covid then I would count in the Bradford figures even though I actually live in Leeds.