When will this shit end?

[steviewevie]

if we don't get a vaccine hopefully ways to treat it will improve and it will just be another virus out there that kills people every year. No way that social distancing can stay put permanently. Maybe we'd become more accustomed to wearing masks when we get a virus like they do in eastern countries...but I doubt it.

[DeanoL]

6 minutes ago, st dan said:

But why would the world change so drastically for the 0.xxx% of people this virus will cause death to? This isn’t being harsh to those effected because of course they’re lives matter and they need protecting as much as possible,  but it’s not realistic or necessary to do any of this long term or permanently. 

Best case COVID death rate is 0.1%. Worst case is 0.9%. Realistically if we let it loose it's higher than that as we don't have to capacity to treat people.

5 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

The example of gigs you use let's make it the leisure / hospitality sector for arguments sake...

Where does the money for a complete refurb as you've put it come from?

Are you expecting staff in those industries to take a wage cut because in turn the companies they work for won't be able to pay them as much?

Ticket prices will go up hugely, but it'll be manageable because people will be making huge saving working from home and not taking foreign holidays... the economy will correct itself. It can adapt. Very few things fundamentally go away without being replaced.

[Waterdeep]

2 minutes ago, st dan said:

But why would the world change so drastically for the 0.xxx% of people this virus will cause death to? This isn’t being harsh to those effected because of course they’re lives matter and they need protecting as much as possible,  but it’s not realistic or necessary to do any of this long term or permanently. 

We still don't know how long it takes the long-termers to recover. People with 'mild' cases are getting post viral fatigue and other ailments making them unable to return to work. If the post viral fatigue turns out to be chronic then potentially a lot of the workforce could be knocked out.

[steviewevie]

...we also might get stuck in a state of waiting for a vaccine ... constantly being promised that one is close...

[squirrelarmy]

The future is socialising virtually. If it’s not a virus then pollution and poor air quality will force many people to stay inside. Ready Player One is likely to be our reality. 

[efcfanwirral]

 

2 hours ago, Homer said:

What’s the big struggle for most people? I played football on Saturday and saw a comedian last night. Or are people gagging to go to an opera then go clubbing?

I use this thread to keep me grounded in the real world - I'm not too bothered about socialising in person, I've always been ok staying in touch with people remotely - occasional zoom/skype/whatever and whatsapp are fine for me - seeing friends with an activity (even just going for a meal) is usually the only times I see people anyway, it's been years since I lived near people I'd meet up with now so it wasn't that often. This thread shows me other people aren't quite as insular! 

It became clear during lockdown that literally the only thing I miss is live music and the occasional football match - I used to go to gigs all the time, probably too much and at the expense of other stuff in life. I'm now seeing live music as something I 'used' to do, which is really interesting so sets me up to take the winter and beyond completely as it comes. 

Having thinking time has also highlighted that it might not only be the music part that I enjoy and look forward to, but the drinking part so there is definitely some reframing to do...

50 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

These tossers should be put on bed pan duty when the nhs gets rammed with covid patients, with no protective equipment and see if their beliefs hold up then

My concern is that these protests will end up getting future  protests banned and restricted so that when they are actually necessary against something really happening, they will no longer be viable. 

14 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Just to be clear, it absolutely could be. 

Many of the issues we have now are around the fact that we're adopting to this as a temporary problem, as it's likely to be a temporary problem as we are likely to get a vaccine. 

If somehow we knew tomorrow that a vaccine was never going to happen, and we had to live with this forever, it's wrong to assume that it would just then need to be "well let the old and ill die".

Instead, our ways of life would adapt. Things like gigs and so on would be done socially distant, venues could permanently refurb to allow socially distanced shows, offices would be permanently redesigned for socially distant working, certain things would go away, but new things would come along to replace them. 

Regular lockdowns could be factored into business planning and hence the rental cost of properties, and insurance markets for "irregularly large" amounts of lockdown would pop up.

We absolutely could handle this as a society without having to just let loads of people die. But those sort of changes are difficult to make and would be difficult to reverse. And a vaccine is a near certainty, if we're honest.

My thoughts on this are that the answer would be to focus on both shielding and economy (with social distancing out but large gatherings beyond your every day) gone. And a huge investment in healthcare infrastructure and staff to make it so that hospitals dont get overwhelmed whatever happens. 

Unfortunately that probably means privatisation but I dont see another option if its permanent. 

 

[zero000]

7 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

I'm not saying your advocating it (you said you were playing devils advocate), but I am say people advocating not having any more lockdown are saying those people are disposable - that's literally their argument, as much as they try and say 'well it's the economic damage to lives I worry about'. I agree with John mcdonnell, economies can be rebuilt, but lives can't be resurrected. 

To be fair lockdowns aren’t a neutral intervention. An increased focus on COVID can result in excess deaths elsewhere such as the cancer diagnoses that have been missed. Whilst a lockdown protects some individuals it also harms others. Yes the economy can be rebuilt, but a recession also comes with an increase in the deaths. 
 

I’m not in the throwing in the towel camp at all, but I think we need to have a think about longer term options if we don’t have a vaccine. At the moment a lot of anxiety is coming from how uncertain the situation has been made. The government need to outline a rough plan for the next few months/year based on likely scenarios. 

[DeanoL]

14 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

If social distancing was a permanent feature of society I’d take myself down to the tube station and throw myself in front of the next Jubilee line and I guarantee you I’m not alone in that. It’s a temporary measure until we can find a vaccine, but the way we’ve lived this year really isn’t acceptable in the long run. And I don’t mean that from an economic standpoint. 

I daresay you're not alone in that at all.

But the same attitude could be taken to folk you, as you seem happy to take to the elderly or the ill. We just need to let you folk die off through suicide and then proceed with the new normal of distanced living.

And that's a fucking horrendous thing to say, but if we really want to go down this road of "do what's best for society" rather than "save as many lives as possible" then we just need to work out if the number of people that would kill themselves if social distancing was the new norm is less or more than the number that would die from COVID and proceed on that basis right?

[Mr. B]

https://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2020/09/20/news/the_mystery_of_boris_johnson_s_trip_to_perugia_-267989244/

[foolee]

38 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Just to be clear, it absolutely could be. 

Many of the issues we have now are around the fact that we're adopting to this as a temporary problem, as it's likely to be a temporary problem as we are likely to get a vaccine. 

If somehow we knew tomorrow that a vaccine was never going to happen, and we had to live with this forever, it's wrong to assume that it would just then need to be "well let the old and ill die".

Instead, our ways of life would adapt. Things like gigs and so on would be done socially distant, venues could permanently refurb to allow socially distanced shows, offices would be permanently redesigned for socially distant working, certain things would go away, but new things would come along to replace them. 

Regular lockdowns could be factored into business planning and hence the rental cost of properties, and insurance markets for "irregularly large" amounts of lockdown would pop up.

We absolutely could handle this as a society without having to just let loads of people die. But those sort of changes are difficult to make and would be difficult to reverse. And a vaccine is a near certainty, if we're honest.

It's absolutely madness to think that we could continue life socially distanced. So many businesses have already shut down and made staff redundant because they aren't making money. It's not sustainable for life to continue like that for the economy or for anyone's mental health. 

9 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I daresay you're not alone in that at all.

But the same attitude could be taken to folk you, as you seem happy to take to the elderly or the ill. We just need to let you folk die off through suicide and then proceed with the new normal of distanced living.

And that's a fucking horrendous thing to say, but if we really want to go down this road of "do what's best for society" rather than "save as many lives as possible" then we just need to work out if the number of people that would kill themselves if social distancing was the new norm is less or more than the number that would die from COVID and proceed on that basis right?

27 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

If social distancing was a permanent feature of society I’d take myself down to the tube station and throw myself in front of the next Jubilee line and I guarantee you I’m not alone in that. It’s a temporary measure until we can find a vaccine, but the way we’ve lived this year really isn’t acceptable in the long run. And I don’t mean that from an economic standpoint. 

Absolutely agree with Fuzzy Afro. Isn't the biggest killer for men already suicide? Which would only increase with further restrictions and social distancing forever. I think these days mental health issues and mental health deaths will be above that of covid-19 death rates. 

 

Also, if we're looking to ''save as many lives as possible'' shouldn't there be something more being done about potential cancer patients? We're looking ahead at another crisis with people being to scared to go to check out lumps, go to the doctors and not going for cervical screenings because of covid-19. Another lockdown impacts on this again.

Edited September 21, 2020 by foolee

[st dan]

Ultimately - visiting family, socialising with friends, going to pubs/clubs/restaurants to wind down after long week at work, going to gigs to watch your favourite bands, going to watch the football etc are the things that keep most of us going in this life. Without these what would really be the point of it all? 

So if they attempt to take these away from us (or alter them so much to the point they are unrecognisable and unenjoyable) then the mindset of a lot of people will be that there really won’t be much point carrying on. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

The more I think about it, the vaccine race is riding largely on Moderna and Pfizer. Oxford is sounding like it’s on its final warning and I’d have a hard time trying to see any Russian/Chinese backed vaccine to the British public. I think anti-vaccers would have a field day with those ones. If Moderna and Pfizer turn out to be duds then I think we should look at treatment or mass testing as more likely than a vaccine. 

[onthebeach]

1 hour ago, Mr.Tease said:

I work offering support to those people, so I don't think they're disposable. I think people who advocate the above tend to do so thinking they won't die or no one they care about will, because if they did, they wouldn't advocate it. 

Also, you misunderstand the purpose of lockdown--it's not only to protect older people and people with underlying health conditions, it's to stop the health system collapsing. Once the NHS gets overloaded it then increases mortality for all ages because basic hospital treatment is no longer available. 

Also I'd add, working in mental health, it might be hard for people during a lockdown, but the alternative is much worse for mental health - bereavements, guilt (thinking you've infected someone else), anxiety, possible long term health decline from covid- can you imagine going about your daily business with high prevelance rates of covid? Wouldn't even help the economy because no one would go out anyways if they have a high chance of getting infected. 

Could’nt agree more. Where has so many people’s basic consequential thinking gone?

As I’ve mentioned previously as well as the inevitable NHS overload if we just abandon any attempt to control the spread of infection, what if we have too many key workers going down with it at the same time leading to serious consequences for vital infrastructure like Electricity, Gas, Telecoms, Transport , Supermarkets and so on. Could this happen before herd immunity kicks in? I’m not saying it’s death/disability for the majority but having enough people being ill enough not to be working at the same time so everything goes to s**t anyway. Unfortunately, I think restrictions are needed to slow the rate - what they are I don’t know, but it can’t be ‘let it rip’ v total lockdown.

[DeanoL]

4 minutes ago, foolee said:

It's absolutely madness to think that we could continue life socially distanced. So many businesses have already shut down and lost staff because they aren't making money. It's not sustainable for life to continue like that for the economy or for anyone's mental health. 

That's because those businesses are aimed at a pre-COVID world. I'm not saying every business would survive as is. But new business models would develop, new ways of doing things will happen. It's happened many, many times before. The internet put a load of companies out of business. So did electricity. The economy can adapt. It's not easy, or fun, but it doesn't just collapse irrevocably. 

There will still be fun things to do. People will still want to spend money on fun things.

Quote

Also, if we're looking to ''save as many lives as possible'' shouldn't there be something more being done about potential cancer patients? We're looking ahead at another crisis with people being to scared to go to check out lumps, go to the doctors and not going for cervical screenings because of covid-19. Another lockdown impacts on this again.

That's something of a catch-22 though - you lockdown and people are too scared to get checked out. You don't lockdown and there's no hospital capacity to see them because of COVID.

3 minutes ago, st dan said:

Ultimately - visiting family, socialising with friends, going to pubs/clubs/restaurants to wind down after long week at work, going to gigs to watch your favourite bands, going to watch the football etc are the things that keep most of us going in this life. Without these what would really be the point of it all? 

You'll be able to do all that, just they won't be so crowded, and you'll probably have to pay more to offset that.

[Fuzzy Afro]

15 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I daresay you're not alone in that at all.

But the same attitude could be taken to folk you, as you seem happy to take to the elderly or the ill. We just need to let you folk die off through suicide and then proceed with the new normal of distanced living.

And that's a fucking horrendous thing to say, but if we really want to go down this road of "do what's best for society" rather than "save as many lives as possible" then we just need to work out if the number of people that would kill themselves if social distancing was the new norm is less or more than the number that would die from COVID and proceed on that basis right?

It’s not just about the number of lives, it’s about the quality of lives that are lost (google QALY if you’re not familiar with the concept)

 

The point is that losing a few thousand young people or diluting their quality of life to the point that they’re just depressed all the time, is worse than shortening the lives of some older people by just a few months or years. 

[Mr.Tease]

6 minutes ago, foolee said:

It's absolutely madness to think that we could continue life socially distanced. So many businesses have already shut down and made staff redundant because they aren't making money. It's not sustainable for life to continue like that for the economy or for anyone's mental health. 

Absolutely agree with Fuzzy Afro. Isn't the biggest killer for men already suicide? Which would only increase with further restrictions and social distancing forever. I think these days mental health issues and mental health deaths will be above that of covid-19 death rates. 

 

Also, if we're looking to ''save as many lives as possible'' shouldn't there be something more being done about potential cancer patients? We're looking ahead at another crisis with people being to scared to go to check out lumps, go to the doctors and not going for cervical screenings because of covid-19. Another lockdown impacts on this again.

Suicide rates are around 6,000 per year. Covid-19 took 10 times that in just a few months with a lockdown. 

Also cancer treatments can't happen with an overloaded NHS, or with covid-19 being highly prevelant as anyone who's immune system is suppressed becomes very high risk--hospitals don't feel safe treating them. The idea that letting this thing run rampant is good for people with cancer is daft. You suppress it, then you can offer cancer services, though the government failed to figure this out sufficiently over the last few months, but they've got the right idea with covid free hospitals. 

[MEGABOWL]

I think realistically the current state of play has another few months. I reckon after this Winter people will want their lives back and if that involves taking a risk with the Virus, so be it. If enough people think like that it’s effectively out of the Governments hands (beyond seriously Authoritarian shit that is a far bigger issue than this Virus). 

Our Governments need to be planning now for how we’re going to live with this if there’s no Vaccine. Shield the vulnerable, beef up Health Services, give those who are ill and those who are at risk Financial help and priority access to services. It won’t be easy and it won’t be 100% effective but it has to happen. People aren’t going to stop living their lives indefinitely.

[DeanoL]

2 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

It’s not just about the number of lives, it’s about the quality of lives that are lost (google QALY if you’re not familiar with the concept)

 

The point is that losing a few thousand young people or diluting their quality of life to the point that they’re just depressed all the time, is worse than shortening the lives of some older people by just a few months or years. 

Oh yeah absolutely on the expected lifespan thing. It's not "some older people" though. But "best case 1 in 1000 of the world population".

I think maybe you'd be surprised at how many people don't want to roll the dice on those odds.

[rivalschools.price]

2 hours ago, Ozanne said:

Most people I know were sticking to those rules of 6 anyway so it’s clear it’s more that’s contributing to the rise in infections. You know like being advised to eat out, go to pubs and back to the office etc. 

Yeah, this is the part that’s puzzling me. The vast majority seem to be socialising in groups of 6 or less anyway so not sure how it’s going to make a massive difference.

Even when the tabloids try to sensationalise people ignoring social distancing, by printing youths on night out etc., they print a load of pictures of people in groups of less than 6.

[efcfanwirral]

39 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

The example of gigs you use let's make it the leisure / hospitality sector for arguments sake...

Where does the money for a complete refurb as you've put it come from?

Are you expecting staff in those industries to take a wage cut because in turn the companies they work for won't be able to pay them as much?

To be fair Virgin Money sponsored a very impressively quick socially distanced event space in Newcastle and it sounds like it went really well.

Even if it's just next year that these things are necessary (which I'm increasingly thinking they will be) - I can see the Virgin Money arenas popping up around the country.

Until it's over, realistically indoor gigs aren't safe - however far away you are from people it isn't a ventilated situation so I cant see them happening until 2022 so we may have to cram a year of socially distanced outdoor gigs into 3 months in the middle of the year (which this year shows us is probably possible). 

If it was permanent the money would be there to innovate if needed. Many companies have done well out of this year, especially ecommerce ones, and some would likely be interested in helping to pioneer a new way of doing things. They know there is an audience and they'd make their money back. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

4 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

Suicide rates are around 6,000 per year. Covid-19 took 10 times that in just a few months with a lockdown. 

Also cancer treatments can't happen with an overloaded NHS, or with covid-19 being highly prevelant as anyone who's immune system is suppressed becomes very high risk--hospitals don't feel safe treating them. The idea that letting this thing run rampant is good for people with cancer is daft. You suppress it, then you can offer cancer services, though the government failed to figure this out sufficiently over the last few months, but they've got the right idea with covid free hospitals. 

I would argue that if we erode society to the point that perfectly healthy young people who have many decades left to live decide it’s not worth it any more, that’s far more tragic than the natural selection that is covid deaths. People getting sick and dying is absolutely tragic, and we should certainly aim to control that as much as possible, but ultimately that’s what happens to us all when we get to a certain age. But ruining society to the point where people take their own lives, that’s really awful and something that should be avoided at all costs. 

[priest17]

5 minutes in

[Fuzzy Afro]

49,000 cases per day by end of October, ouch 

[steviewevie]

Much better having just Vallance and Whitty without some bojo clown in the middle.

[steviewevie]