Current Affairs

[Onelife]

Exeter Nightingale Hospital is yet to treat a single case.
A senior manager at North Devon Hospital is a regular customer of Mrs B and told her that they are fully prepared for any situation that they may encounter.
It’s best if it’s left to the professionals instead of government ministers

I think that senior manger made the right call in hiring that red bus with the slogan “350 million deaths for the NHS”…if you don’t adhere to the rules.

[Gill W]

So I'll ask my question from the other day again in a different way. Sir Chris Whitty has apparently said we should have a new two week national lockdown now. Of course he only advises on the basis of science and medicine. If I was in his position I'd probably be saying the same.

The Prime Minister of course also has to take into account the impact on jobs and the economy among other things.

So if you were the PM today would you now order an immediate 2 week national lockdown?

Speak up now or don't come back with hindsight recriminations later.

This thing about the 2 week lockdown came from someone called Anthony Costello, ex WHO person.

He’s tweeted that he’s now heard that Chris Whitty didn’t say that we should have a two week lockdown after all.

At the moment I think it’s difficult to judge what’s going on. I think the amount of cases reported each day is artificially low because so many tests are stuck in the system.

My gut feeling is that it’s starting to spiral, so we probably should be locked down sooner rather than later if we don’t want a repeat of 6 months ago. But I don’t think there will be another national lockdown, just ever increasing local measures.

[towny44]

So I'll ask my question from the other day again in a different way. Sir Chris Whitty has apparently said we should have a new two week national lockdown now. Of course he only advises on the basis of science and medicine. If I was in his position I'd probably be saying the same.

The Prime Minister of course also has to take into account the impact on jobs and the economy among other things.

So if you were the PM today would you now order an immediate 2 week national lockdown?

Speak up now or don't come back with hindsight recriminations later.

This thing about the 2 week lockdown came from someone called Anthony Costello, ex WHO person.

He’s tweeted that he’s now heard that Chris Whitty didn’t say that we should have a two week lockdown after all.

At the moment I think it’s difficult to judge what’s going on. I think the amount of cases reported each day is artificially low because so many tests are stuck in the system.

My gut feeling is that it’s starting to spiral, so we probably should be locked down sooner rather than later if we don’t want a repeat of 6 months ago. But I don’t think there will be another national lockdown, just ever increasing local measures.

Gill, as long as the backlog remains the same and is not growing then any positive tests will eventually be added to the numbers. The more likely scenario is, rather like the empty supermarket shelves at the start of the pandemic, selfish people are rushing to have an unnecessary test and overloading the system. That does not excuse Dido Harding from not ensuring we had sufficient capacity, although it does appear that the new labs were over reliant on cheap undergraduates to undertake the testing, and are now seeing these people preparing to return to their universities.

[towny44]

Just a further thought on whether we locked down too late. Although our death rate was, just about, the highest in Europe, our health service was never in any danger of being overrun, in the way that France, Italy and Spain were. Which, IMHO, seems to suggest that quite possibly the major factor leading to our mortality rate, could well have been due the inherent poorer standard of health in our population, rather than any delay in lockdown.

[Kendhni]

Just a further thought on whether we locked down too late. Although our death rate was, just about, the highest in Europe, our health service was never in any danger of being overrun, in the way that France, Italy and Spain were. Which, IMHO, seems to suggest that quite possibly the major factor leading to our mortality rate, could well have been due the inherent poorer standard of health in our population, rather than any delay in lockdown.

That is a very interesting postulation, especially since we have and still lag behind mainland Europe so, in addition to your thoughts, we actually get an additional 2-4 weeks of advance warning and prep time (which, assuming it is used wisely, should help to reduce infection and death rates).

There is an interesting analysis of COVID stats at https://uk.news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-e ... 49035.html (watch the video) ... a little bit of good and a little bit of bad in there.

[Onelife]

So I'll ask my question from the other day again in a different way. Sir Chris Whitty has apparently said we should have a new two week national lockdown now. Of course he only advises on the basis of science and medicine. If I was in his position I'd probably be saying the same.

The Prime Minister of course also has to take into account the impact on jobs and the economy among other things.

So if you were the PM today would you now order an immediate 2 week national lockdown?

Speak up now or don't come back with hindsight recriminations later.

This thing about the 2 week lockdown came from someone called Anthony Costello, ex WHO person.

He’s tweeted that he’s now heard that Chris Whitty didn’t say that we should have a two week lockdown after all.




At the moment I think it’s difficult to judge what’s going on. I think the amount of cases reported each day is artificially low because so many tests are stuck in the system.

My gut feeling is that it’s starting to spiral, so we probably should be locked down sooner rather than later if we don’t want a repeat of 6 months ago. But I don’t think there will be another national lockdown, just ever increasing local measures.

Hi Gill…nice to see you treading the boards again

My concern with these sporadic half measure lockdowns is that we will end up on an ever-revolving merry go round where infections get further out of control which will ultimately require “extended” national lock-downs. To my mind, if we all take the two-week medicine at the same time, we will have a more controlled lockdown which will be easier to plan for and potentially less disruptive in the long run…. two-week medicine will be hard to swallow but a three-month lock- down could be catastrophic for our economy.

[barney]

It’s already proven that it’s quite easy to lockdown but much more difficult to come out of it.
I’d wager that the majority who are calling for another national lockdown no longer go to work or have any business interests.

[Onelife]

It’s already proven that it’s quite easy to lockdown but much more difficult to come out of it.
I’d wager that the majority who are calling for another national lockdown no longer go to work or have any business interests.

There’s no easy solutions Barney but I think we have reached the point where we need to stop putting plasters on the problem and bring infections back under control…easier to plan for a two-week planned lockdown than one which could go on for months, I would suggest?

[barney]

So what happens after two weeks keefy?
It all starts again?
The best solution in my eyes if if you consider yourself vulnerable, stay home as much as possible to protect yourself.
It’s not compulsory to go out and about but if you choose not to, others may need to.
The stats show that young people are not susceptible to the worst of covid.
We can’t expect them to be locked up but they must respect that should keep away from elderly.

[Onelife]

So what happens after two weeks keefy?
It all starts again?
The best solution in my eyes if if you consider yourself vulnerable, stay home as much as possible to protect yourself.
It’s not compulsory to go out and about but if you choose not to, others may need to.
The stats show that young people are not susceptible to the worst of covid.
We can’t expect them to be locked up but they must respect that should keep away from elderly.

Yes! It will Barney…but a two-week lock-down combined with tighter policing compliance should keep the infection at bay thus enabling a more sustainable flexible working environment…if with carry on with these nether here or there restrictions we will end up closing shops up for months on end.

The young may not be as suseptable but they are apparently the root cause of most of the ongoing infections, so I believe.

[Gill W]

It’s already proven that it’s quite easy to lockdown but much more difficult to come out of it.
I’d wager that the majority who are calling for another national lockdown no longer go to work or have any business interests.

There is a lot of online chatter about lockdowns at the moment and some people are calling for a new lockdown.

Therefore, if there’s not a new lockdown and cases/hospitalisation/deaths spike again, and people subsequently say we should have lockdown earlier - the hindsight card can’t be played. It’s here on the forum record that this is currently being discussed

[towny44]

It’s already proven that it’s quite easy to lockdown but much more difficult to come out of it.
I’d wager that the majority who are calling for another national lockdown no longer go to work or have any business interests.

There’s no easy solutions Barney but I think we have reached the point where we need to stop putting plasters on the problem and bring infections back under control…easier to plan for a two-week planned lockdown than one which could go on for months, I would suggest?

If you could guarantee that 2 weeks would work, then I guess even BJ might agree with you.
But since it took 4 months the first time what evidence do you have that 2 weeks would solve the problem now?

[Gill W]

So what happens after two weeks keefy?
It all starts again?
The best solution in my eyes if if you consider yourself vulnerable, stay home as much as possible to protect yourself.
It’s not compulsory to go out and about but if you choose not to, others may need to.
The stats show that young people are not susceptible to the worst of covid.
We can’t expect them to be locked up but they must respect that should keep away from elderly.

The trouble is, a lot of people under estimate their vulnerability and won’t take into account all risk factors.

I suspect nearly all of us are over 60 on this thread, and that puts us in a category of increased vulnerability.

However, statistically I’m still less at risk from serious complications from Covid than the rest of the current posters in this thread.

I’m not sure people would weigh up all factors

[david63]

I think that, as usual, the media is driving things here. We seem obsessed with "headline" numbers rather than getting down the the basic facts.

The number of cases is rising, but that is no surprise as it was predicted that would happen when the country started getting back to school/work/businesses re-opening. Also testing is now more targetted into areas where there is a perceived problem, meaning that it will follow that more cases are found.

Looking at the number in hospital, which to my mind is a more relevant figure, as of 17th September there were 953 which is less than at the end of July - yes I agree that that number is rising.

There is no need for a national lockdown, and quite honestly I cannot see what difference two weeks would make, but there does need to be more adherence to social distancing and the wearing of masks - especially by the young and, dare I say, the Asian community.

[barney]

Absolutely Gill.
It’s really quite simple.
If you are vulnerable, stay home.
If you are over 60, take extra care.
If you’re 25, go to work and keep the country turning.
As I’ve said previously, the stats on fit, healthy young people being badly affected are ridiculously low.

[towny44]

Absolutely Gill.
It’s really quite simple.
If you are vulnerable, stay home.
If you are over 60, take extra care.
If you’re 25, go to work and keep the country turning.
As I’ve said previously, the stats on fit, healthy young people being badly affected are ridiculously low.

I agree with you Barney, but if the young drive up the infection rate, by not observing the rules, to include the elderly which is now happening, then more frequent, widespread, and tighter local lockdowns are inevitable.

[Kendhni]

I suspect nearly all of us are over 60 on this thread, and that puts us in a category of increased vulnerability.

You can tell I am under 60, I can remember the 1970's

[Kendhni]

I would suggest the government should return to the 'work from home if you can rule' - not as a 'you must' but as a suggestion. That would provide additional space and freedom to those that cannot work from home. Probably too early for a full lockdown (although I suspect that we will have at least one more full lockdown before this is over - maybe starting late this year or early in the new year).

I took the dogs for a walk down the town last weekend and the bars were full of, shall we say, the more elderly population - the younger ones were standing and sitting outside in a pseudo/pay-lip-service/almost socially distanced manner. We all need to work together rather than finger point.

[Mervyn and Trish]

It’s already proven that it’s quite easy to lockdown but much more difficult to come out of it.
I’d wager that the majority who are calling for another national lockdown no longer go to work or have any business interests.

There is a lot of online chatter about lockdowns at the moment and some people are calling for a new lockdown.

Therefore, if there’s not a new lockdown and cases/hospitalisation/deaths spike again, and people subsequently say we should have lockdown earlier - the hindsight card can’t be played. It’s here on the forum record that this is currently being discussed

You're right Gill that it is currently being discussed here. And between us we're identifying all the different factors the government has to balance. No easy decision.

But not one person on the forum has yet said definitely we should lockdown now. So if anyone here says in three months time we should have locked down mid September you can bet I will play the hindsight card!

Place your bets now. You can't do it after the horse passes the winning post!

[Onelife]

It’s already proven that it’s quite easy to lockdown but much more difficult to come out of it.
I’d wager that the majority who are calling for another national lockdown no longer go to work or have any business interests.

There’s no easy solutions Barney but I think we have reached the point where we need to stop putting plasters on the problem and bring infections back under control…easier to plan for a two-week planned lockdown than one which could go on for months, I would suggest?

If you could guarantee that 2 weeks would work, then I guess even BJ might agree with you.
But since it took 4 months the first time what evidence do you have that 2 weeks would solve the problem now?

I have no evidence that a two-week lockdown will solve the problem but there is evidence to show a National lockdown slows the spread.
What we are seeing now is tinkering round the edges hoping we can contain the spread…it ain’t working.

[Onelife]

It’s already proven that it’s quite easy to lockdown but much more difficult to come out of it.
I’d wager that the majority who are calling for another national lockdown no longer go to work or have any business interests.

There is a lot of online chatter about lockdowns at the moment and some people are calling for a new lockdown.

Therefore, if there’s not a new lockdown and cases/hospitalisation/deaths spike again, and people subsequently say we should have lockdown earlier - the hindsight card can’t be played. It’s here on the forum record that this is currently being discussed

You're right Gill that it is currently being discussed here. And between us we're identifying all the different factors the government has to balance. No easy decision.

But not one person on the forum has yet said definitely we should lockdown now. So if anyone here says in three months time we should have locked down mid September you can bet I will play the hindsight card!

Place your bets now. You can't do it after the horse passes the winning post!

I couldn't have said it much clearer Sir Merv

[Gill W]

I would suggest the government should return to the 'work from home if you can rule' - not as a 'you must' but as a suggestion. That would provide additional space and freedom to those that cannot work from home. Probably too early for a full lockdown (although I suspect that we will have at least one more full lockdown before this is over - maybe starting late this year or early in the new year).

I took the dogs for a walk down the town last weekend and the bars were full of, shall we say, the more elderly population - the younger ones were standing and sitting outside in a pseudo/pay-lip-service/almost socially distanced manner. We all need to work together rather than finger point.

The government has been quick to ‘encourage’ people to go back to the office. Maybe too quick. ( not hindsight, but reacting to current events) Trouble is, if they now turned round and said everyone should work from home again, it’d be regarded as the mother of all U turns, and they’d face even more ridicule.

We tend to go out during the week when it’s likely to be quiet, and have found that most people are careful most of the time. The majority of people are over 60, but we observe that several people certainly look as if they wouldn’t survive a bout with Covid, so I’m not sure if they are really doing a risk assessment of whether it’s ok to be out and about. Also there’s the obligatory few who wear their mask with their noses hanging out, or forget to wear their mask when it’s appropriate. So older people are not perfect when it comes Covid, and many younger people are very careful and sensible.

[Gill W]

There’s no easy solutions Barney but I think we have reached the point where we need to stop putting plasters on the problem and bring infections back under control…easier to plan for a two-week planned lockdown than one which could go on for months, I would suggest?

If you could guarantee that 2 weeks would work, then I guess even BJ might agree with you.
But since it took 4 months the first time what evidence do you have that 2 weeks would solve the problem now?

I have no evidence that a two-week lockdown will solve the problem but there is evidence to show a National lockdown slows the spread.
What we are seeing now is tinkering round the edges hoping we can contain the spread…it ain’t working.

I’m with you on this.

There’s definitely the feeling that the virus is on the march again. Although, as my area is still lower than average, it’s difficult to feel the personal urgency that I had in mid March.

The virus is still the same as it was in March, and we now understand what exponential growth is. So what happened 6 months ago can happen again, and quickly

Therefore, quick action is required. If they are proposing a national lockdown, they should do it now, before it looks like an absolute necessity.

Like you, I think the tinkering won’t be sufficient. Do it now, if they genuinely want to save lives.

There, I’ve set my stall out.

[oldbluefox]

A chap on the radio has just said, "Some of these people don't have the sense to cover a postage stamp!" And he's right!!!
Another contributor this morning said she had a shop and did not need the government to tell her what to do. From the outset she only allowed two people in the shop at any one time and insisted they wore masks. No mask, no shopping (it might have been barney's missus as it was down that way). A publican had taken similar measures and had been quick to remind his customers if he was unhappy with the situation. Unfortunately it means those who have done as they are told will suffer because of those who cannot/ will not or are too stupid to do as they are told.
Looking at the local lockdown conditions they would make no difference to our comings and goings as we are already doing it. It's not rocket science.

[Stephen]

Mrs S and I were in Tesco this morning and noticed a few people not wearing a mask and a couple in front of us at the checkout wearing those full face plastic screen masks. So we were wondering why those who won't or cannot wear a regular cloth mask wear one of these full face screen masks instead. It doesn't come into contact with your face anywhere, there is a good gap at the bottom for air. There really is no excuse.