Jump to content

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

Things is .... what is the Swedish way of doing things? Asking the public to do social distancing and the usual hygiene stuff...but no other restrictions? No masks? So, some control of the spread, but not as much as we have now? More people will die of course...but the hope is we get more immunity, and less social/economic damage? It is a big fuckin gamble for sure...will No.10 really do that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Things is .... what is the Swedish way of doing things? Asking the public to do social distancing and the usual hygiene stuff...but no other restrictions? No masks? So, some control of the spread, but not as much as we have now? More people will die of course...but the hope is we get more immunity, and less social/economic damage? It is a big fuckin gamble for sure...will No.10 really do that?

I’d imagine masks will stay, social distancing will stay but as guidance. The key point is though that you’d be allowed to invite family and friends round to your house if you like. You can choose to shield if you feel vulnerable, but there wouldn’t be draconian restrictions on the population at large. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

I’d imagine masks will stay, social distancing will stay but as guidance. The key point is though that you’d be allowed to invite family and friends round to your house if you like. You can choose to shield if you feel vulnerable, but there wouldn’t be draconian restrictions on the population at large. 

I mean, it sounds great to me...they can bin the mask thing too.....but just wondering what it would look like. Uk not same as Sweden....not as attactive for a start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, FestivalJamie said:

Why the hell are the university letting the students get away with this behaviour? And in an area of local lockdown! 

Regrettably, there are absolutely no 'punishments' or 'consequences' that a university can (or will) act on their students. They want the students' fees, and if they kick them out they don't get them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Things is .... what is the Swedish way of doing things? Asking the public to do social distancing and the usual hygiene stuff...but no other restrictions? No masks? So, some control of the spread, but not as much as we have now? More people will die of course...but the hope is we get more immunity, and less social/economic damage? It is a big fuckin gamble for sure...will No.10 really do that?

It’s far too risky. The pandemic is not over yet, we haven’t seen Sweden’s final figures, for all we know they could suffer a resurgence in 2-3 months time when antibody/t-cell immunity starts to fade, and their deaths could be even more catastrophic than they already are. We also don’t know any long term health effects of covid yet and therefore the herd immunity strategy could leave thousands of people with underlying health problems which they wouldn’t have otherwise suffered from.

At the end of the day, if young people catch the virus, it Filtrates into the older and more vulnerable communities, through transmission in shops, public transport, family meetings etc. It’s not a feasible strategy just to let the virus take its toll on the population and see what happens.

It might look like it’s working out for Sweden, for now, but we haven’t got the complete picture yet as the pandemic isn’t over.

Germany’s strategies are the ones I look up to, sure it’s not stopping the virus, but it’s mitigating deaths far better than other european countries.

Also as for masks, they need to stay, it’s not fair for young people to go round freely getting infected and then to pass it on in the shops or on the bus to vulnerable people. But the main issue at the moment is our mask policy isn’t strictly enforced, and if you are going for Sweden’s strategy you would need to enforce masks way more strictly than we are to protect the vulnerable in those settings.

Edited by FestivalJamie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, FestivalJamie said:

It’s far too risky. The pandemic is not over yet, we haven’t seen Sweden’s final figures, for all we know they could suffer a resurgence in 2-3 months time when antibody/t-cell immunity starts to fade, and their deaths could be even more catastrophic than they already are. We also don’t know any long term health effects of covid yet and therefore the herd immunity strategy could leave thousands of people with underlying health problems which they wouldn’t have otherwise suffered from.

At the end of the day, if young people catch the virus, it Filtrates into the older and more vulnerable communities, through transmission in shops, public transport, family meetings etc. It’s not a feasible strategy just to let the virus take its toll on the population and see what happens.

It might look like it’s working out for Sweden, for now, but we haven’t got the complete picture yet as the pandemic isn’t over.

Germany’s strategies are the ones I look up to, sure it’s not stopping the virus, but it’s mitigating deaths far better than other european countries.

Also as for masks, they need to stay, it’s not fair for young people to go round freely getting infected and then to pass it on in the shops or on the bus to vulnerable people. But the main issue at the moment is our mask policy isn’t strictly enforced, and if you are going for Sweden’s strategy you would need to enforce masks way more strictly than we are to protect the vulnerable in those settings.

yeah, well we're obviously not capable of doing what Germany is doing...we're just not up to it.

Probably not able to do what Sweden are doing either...there is far more trust between govt and people there. But, at moment we are all over the shop here, it is chaotic, and you can just sense more and more anger...and it just becoming part of the stupid culture war along with brexit, blm etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, WestCountryGirl said:

Regrettably, there are absolutely no 'punishments' or 'consequences' that a university can (or will) act on their students. They want the students' fees, and if they kick them out they don't get them.

Depends on the university really. We can and do kick students out for serious disciplinary breaches...but we train doctors and pharmacists, so in addition to handing them a degree that allows them to go on to register to practice, we also have a statutory obligation to declare that they are fit to go into either profession. If, based on their behaviour we feel we can’t do that without leaving ourselves legally liable, we wouldn’t hesitate to terminate their registration. It happens from time to time, and an audit of disciplinary action forms part of the process of recertification for our programmes every few years. Most universities aren’t legally liable for what their graduates do afterwards, so Med schools are a special case. All graduates (even those at the bottom of the class) have to be deemed competent to practice or it would put patients at risk, so it’s taken very seriously. Sure fees are important, it’s what pays for everything else, but our reputation is far more important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Toilet Duck said:

To be fair, unless you absolutely have to go to work, it’s not entirely rational to bring in restrictions like these and not ask those who can work from home to do so (which is what the measures above are accompanied with here)...I agree, just shutting pubs and restaurants on their own may not achieve the aim (I know workplaces can have more stringent measures in place, but none are as good as not actually physically interacting). The point here is to limit contacts. I don’t entirely understand why the idea of having a core group that you meet and only meet isn’t pursued further. Theoretically, under the existing measures, you can meet another household and have a group of 6 at any one time...but how many times you do that increases your contacts (a household with a couple in it could meet 20 different people indoors over a five day period (the average time it takes from infection to symptoms) and do that every 5 days and still follow the guidelines)...having say 10 people that you limit your contacts to would make a lot more sense to me. But I’m sure there is some reason why the current route has been chosen, I’m just not entirely clear on it!

Sounds a good idea to me. I’m really not sure why systems like that aren’t being considered or what the logic is behind what steps are being taken. It all just seems to be firefighting now with no Goal or strategy in sight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...