Rule breakers are NOT the reason we’re having another lockdown

[ProfessorInkling]

I don’t think that people who break the rules by eg meeting in a 7 instead of a 6, seeing long-term partners who live elsewhere, hugging their mum or not wearing a mask in the supermarket because while they may not be ‘medically exempt’ it’s still a struggle, are to blame for another lockdown.

Misinformation and misunderstanding however seem rife - the number of threads about people who are told to isolate after contact with a positive case and then not doing so because they get a negative test before the 14 days are up (a wasted test without symptoms), or not isolating for long enough, or isolating ‘except for’ supermarket trips, etc etc.. these are the actions that spread the virus, not making your own risk assessments and using common sense. AIBU?

Next week I can meet by DM and DF in a pub along with my DB. That's allowed. There'll be staff serving us and lots of strangers in the room.

All quite allowed

Can't see even one of them in their own home though. That's not allowed although much safer in the numbers game.

The rules are mad - no wonder compliance is poor from some people

then not doing so because they get a negative test before the 14 days are up (a wasted test without symptoms)

Misinformation is the reason for this though.

There has also been several threads on here where track & trace have said that people don't need to restart their 14 day counter when someone develops symtoms during a period [for example one woman's husband tested positive. She and her child had to SI for 14 days. 7 days later she developed symptoms. T&T said her DD could return to school at the end of her original 14 day period regardless of her mother's test results]

The virus does not recognise borders or time. This week people in England could go out shopping and to the pub for a meal. People in Wales 10m away could not.
Next week people in Wales can go out to the pub in groups of 4 shops are all open. The difference in some cases is one side of the street to another.
At 9.59 a pub can be open at 10.00 must be closed.
Even if everyone obeys the rules where they are it's not going to stop transmission

YABVU. Of course the rule breakers are to blame; they’re the ones bloody spreading it because of their selfishness.

Don’t try and assuage your guilt by blaming the government.

What really surprises me is that school staff & pupils are not wearing masks.
Why not?

I'm not blaming them, but it can't be helping the situation.

I agree, the virus isnt spreading from people breaking the rules in the circumstances you outlined. However there have been cases of spreading because people have broken the rules and had a party for example.
I think that just because we can do something doesnt mean we should though, for example I bet the pubs are very busy Wednesday night and while those people arent breaking the rules, to me it's a bit irresponsible when cases are rising so fast.

I think the shambles of a test and track and trace system is the biggest culprit though, we had no chance. However it seems to be socially acceptable to lie in giving your details etc so I'm not convinced even if the system was great that society would work with it

Certainly The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) (No. 4) Regulations 2020 are what we used to call a b ugger's muddle. We will rue the day we chose to strip away people's rights and freedoms. It is not for the greater good. It will do more harm than good.

I think the shambles of a test and track and trace system is the biggest culprit though, we had no chance. However it seems to be socially acceptable to lie in giving your details etc so I'm not convinced even if the system was great that society would work with it

Me neither judging by how many have admitted leaving false details, haven’t made their children stay in if sent home to self isolate and the number of adults not following self isolation or quarantine after a holiday is awful.

I would say the reason for any lockdown is that humans can't control a highly contagious virus. End of..........expecting multiple NZ, Taiwan blah blah blah responses

I think the problem is the virus will still spread even if everyone follows the rules perfectly, if we arent locked down. And even when locked down, it'll still spread because humans in a modern society can't go months without any contact with other humans or touching something someone else has touched. We aren't able to be self sufficient.

Any interaction will spread it. We chose not to go the New Zealand approach at the start of containing it, so this is the situation we have.

It'll keep going up, then we lock down, then the numbers drop, then we open up and it goes up again. This will go on until we get a vaccine or enough people have had it to have to create immunity. But then as it seems immunity only lasts 6 months, that approach will only work if we let it rip through society quickly. But our health service can't cope with lots of people catching it at the same time, so we are stuck with restrictions aiming to spread out the cases.

It will spread but with a decent testing nd tracing system that tests anyone who has been in contact with anyone positive after say 6 and again at 10 days and a socially responsible society numbers of cases could be successfully managed...as per other countries

Maybe the op's point is that people who break the rules in minor ways are not contributing to spread more than those who stick to the rules whilst doing the maximum allowed under the rules. That is probably true.
The rules are arbitrary really, and difficult to follow especially for certain sectors of society.
Controlling a contagious virus is hard for a sociable species like humans - I don't think we should blame other people for just acting like humans do.
A functioning test and trace, along with a bit more "encouragement" to stay home when ill or exposed, would improve things hugely IMO. Expecting humans to fundamentally alter their behaviour over a long period is not realistic.

@BogRollBOGOF

The trouble is that often the rules are inconsistent.

How could it be less risky to follow the rules and sit at the same table as DM in a cafe with lots of other people in the vincinity, but be against them to sit at opposite ends of a room in her house over 2m apart.

How could it be less risky to meet 5 other people from different households at the pub, to meeting another family of 4 to go for a walk?

The virus doesn't care about rules. It simply spreads from one infected person to another by close proximity in poorly ventilated spaces. The more people you crowd in together and the poorer the air flow, the more the risk goes up.

Someone following the rules may have a far higher risk of catching the virus than another person who breaks them in low-risk environments with low numbers of people.

We it doesn’t but unless you want a billion “ micro rule” what’s to stop people visiting each other as normal? Of course meeting your mum in that circumstance is as safe as a pub. On the other hand ,hospitality has had to make itself as safe as it can and it’s a choice. Mums don’t have to be safe and nor do you. There’s no reason why people can’t sit socially distanced at a cricket, football or rugby match but obviously local teams getting changed not getting a hotel to bubble in for two weeks increase the risk. If people could follow guidance we wouldn’t need any rules but they don’t, so we have broad strokes.

I suspect it is mainly being spread by people who are following the rules - people eating out, kids in schools, people going into university.

Many people are not following the rules though. I have just been in Boots and there was a family group at the till next to me all wearing masks under their mouths. On the bus someone pulled their mask down to eat a sandwich. And it’s like that all the time. If the government isn’t policing it many people see no reason to bother with the rules.
My experience is that teens are doing pretty well at following it - My bus to work is full of school kids wearing masks properly.

ok @ProfessorInkling so you have lobbed the hand grenade.

how do you think it's being spread?

how do you think it can be stopped?

I agree that even if everyone had 100% followed the rules that we would still have issues. It might well have been we’d have got an extra week or two before the numbers got as high as they have now but the rules probably allowed for too much contact to avoid problems. Some of the rules have also been inadvertently broken (a lot) as people were genuinely confused. The rule of 6 is a good example as many many people clearly didn’t realise it meant you could meet as up to 6 if individuals in separate bubble remain socially distant from one another. The government have doubtless made a number of mistakes and individuals breaking some of the rules may well have had a significant impact on outbreaks (not following quarantine protocols after knowing they were exposed/not getting tested if they had symptoms are examples where this is relatively likely to be true, meeting in 2 households of 4 for a walk is likely not). There will undoubtedly be people following the letter of the laws/rules that have had massively more contact and possibilities to spread the virus than people who have broken a rule but aimed to follow the spirit of them.

Yesterday I saw 6 Mums having a coffee after the school run. In a coffee shop with a huge awning over the table outside, like a tent.The air could not circulate. They were sitting very close together round a small table, not 2 metres apart.

If one of them had covid and was asymptomatic, the other 5 could have had it by the end of their coffee meeting.

why are people so stupid?

If you know cases are on the increase why do you need the government to tell you what to do ?

And if you are social distancing and washing your hands why do you need track and trace ?

As it stands ATM, eradication is impossible

Yes, eradication is possible. It has happened in several countries. Close the borders, restrict the movement of people. The evidence of several countries is plain to see. Whether the government and population are prepared to implement such actions is another story. (Take a look at Victoria in Australia: it took 16 weeks of hard lockdown from the virus being endemic to 0 new cases.)

Surely you need track and trace for people who are in workplaces where social distancing isn’t possible?

Meh.
The rules are arbitrary and are just there to give some limits on the levels of interactions that the government deem to be an acceptable/manageable level of risk.

Any social interaction currently carries risk if just one of the people in the interaction have the virus, and as lots of people are asymptomatic/pre-symptomatic we can't reliably tell who they are.
We can mitigate the risks through limiting our interactions/keeping distance/wearing masks/washing hands etc.

There's also masses of dangerous conspiracy theories and false information doing the rounds which is encouraging people to ignore any rules/refuse to get tests or isolate when needed etc.

I'm in Liverpool and the level of suspicion about this mass testing proposed here is extremely worrying (I am really pleased about the mass testing).

And of course the government have made a horrendous mess of the whole thing, locking down too late, giving mixed messages all the way through, the mess they've made around care homes/PPE/test and trace, ignoring rules themselves, lack of safety in schools, the outsourcing to private companies and lining their mates' back pockets etc etc etc.

Individually of course, all we can do is limit interactions, follow the rules, challenge misinformation and put political pressure on for the systemic changes that are needed, so yes on balance YABU - people are losing lives and livelihoods - the least we can do is our bit and follow the rules however arbitrary you might think they are.

People behave differently in public and in private so I understand why public meetings are different and carry less of a risk. People relax more in their own homes. All interaction carries a risk even if not to us as individuals.

People will not comply as they do not genuinely fear the state in this country. It’s usually a good thing, what a great liberal democracy we live in until now.

3 of the 4 people I know who have had it recently, caught it from 'breaking the rules'. Socialising in situations they shouldn't have, all were fully aware of the rules. The other was from work in a nursery

I'm not sure the people we are saying are stupid are in fact stupid....the example of the 6 mum's having a coffee. Maybe they know the risks maybe they don't. Maybe for their sanity it was what they felt they needed to do. There is so much judgement especially on MN - everyone so righteous and perfect, speaking about people socialising like they are mass murderers. I actually find it so depressing on here that I for one need to reduce my time on some topic areas.