Does anyone think Boris is right?

[Emcont]

I'm not saying I do. But I'm curious to see if anyone agrees with the strategy they're going for as most of what I'm reading is against.

No. He’s acting like a psychopath and is playing games with people’s lives.

@Saoirse7 I know that many people are criticising the UK because they aren't following the WHO guidance but I have read the WHO technical guidance for countries and I can't see what they are doing that is against it. Genuinely interested to find that out, not trying to have an argument ( we have 4 out of 5 immediate family members in vulnerable categories ie me DH DD and DS are vulnerable.). I would criticise the UK if you could point me in the right direction, I am a firm and frequent critic of the tories

We CAN eradicate this. A lockdown enables both the NHS to get ready and tracing of existing cases to be done. When you release the lockdown, you don't do it all at once. Best case, we come close to eradicating this, as China claims to have done, as Singapore seems to be doing. Worst case, we control the amount of cases to a bearable level.

On my part, I don't think it goes against it as such, but it's more like not enough at this stage.

They did declare they basically wanted to let it run its course, with (imaginary?) isolation of the elderly, and the presumed sick, at some point in the future.
I, and most other experts, think they are creating a time bomb, and that they won't be able to control this as well as they think they will.

Yes, I do broadly agree with the approach the Govt (it's not just Boris) are taking.

The simulation from the Washington Post shows clearly what they are trying to achieve.

We are different from Italy - age profile/ density of the affected population/ housing type/social habits/size of family etc etc

There are also interesting behavioural effects which they will also be banking on:

• as evidenced on here, some people will make their own decisions and decide to socially distance themselves long before they are "told to" by Government. If you're in a position to be able to do it, it makes sense, and it's actually a socially responsible thing to do.
• others will keep up all their normal social activities until they are stopped from doing so, either because they are cancelled or there is a lockdown.

This all helps to flatten the curve because even some people social distancing reduces the transmission rate and flattens the curve - it's the one match stepping back from the line stopping the flames spreading further.

My personal view is that it's a bit silly to blindly wait to be told what to do - everyone needs to make the decision that's personally right for them.

I don't know and only time will tell.

I do see some logic in it though and the economy is fucked whatever, so I'm not completely convinced it's only about saving the economy at the expense of lives.

Please read.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/15/uk-covid-19-strategy-questions-unanswered-coronavirus-outbreak

@Saoirse7 Glad you pointed that out! 🙈

Foregone90, it can be done. S.Korea managed extremely well. If I remember correctly the head of state of S.Korea threatened the head of the church group with murder for not passing on the data. Outbreak halted. Here not even being tested. It's key. It can and has to be done. That's how chains of transmission are broken.

Yes, I do. I think people with the luxury to stay at home don't appreciate that luxury. The implications of complete poverty for many, will kill more. The social behaviour patterns proven time over in pandemics show that people would get bored isolating for so long that it wouldn't work anyway. Protect the vulnerable is a good statement.

If you can test like, ahem, your life depended on it, testing and isolating anyone in transmission chains can work well.
But you need to test many people. All those showing any symptoms, all travellers, all contacts, etc

If you can't test like mad, you have to restrict social contacts in the wider population. Keeping in mind that you're about 2 weeks behind in terms of actual numbers because you're not testing.

I'm more confident of the approach in Portugal (although not 100% by far) because they are still keeping track of transmission chains and widespread isolation, as much as possible without quarantine.

I do massively appreciate the luxury to stay home and I intend to take it. If only 1/4 of the population isolate it has a huge effect on spread. We should be pleased some people are doing it voluntarily.

www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/

Looking at the new numbers reported, and considering the trend, it looks like there could be close to 10 000 new cases in two weeks in the UK. As in confirmed cases.
Yesterday there were 330 reported new cases.

See where this is going?

Best case, we come close to eradicating this, as China claims to have done, as Singapore seems to be doing.

China and Singapore certainly have not and will not 'eradicate' Covid 19. It's impossible to locally 'eradicate' a global pandemic. If even one person still has it, it has not been eradicated. Plus, what happens when the restrictions are relaxed, as they will have to be sooner or later?

I'm not sure how much is actually down to the government and how much is down to the advice they are receiving from the health professionals.

Like Boris or not, he's in a nightmare situation in having decide what advice to implement.

Also worth reading. From the frontline.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/16/doctors-scared-coronavirus-crisis-nhs-consultant-staff

Best case it won't be like China or Sigapore because the UK isn't taking it seriously enough.

@Lweji very scary read

What about the homeless here and in Europe? I read France alone has 120,000 homeless

Even Boris doesn't seem to think he was that right after all.

I'm more confident of the approach in Portugal (although not 100% by far) because they are still keeping track of transmission chains and widespread isolation, as much as possible without quarantine.

Yes Lweji it seems to be working well in south Korea too.

For everyone wanting lockdown, and saying Boris cares more about the economy than peoples lives, do you notice the obvious class divide in what's happening now?
WFH where possible -lets see who that covers? Lawyers, financial sector, consultancy, deskbased jobs etc - all pretty well paid.
Who CANT work from home - shop staff, cafe staff, bar staff, theatre staff, tradesmen, construction, gig economy , factory and manufacturing - lots of zero hours contracts and NMW jobs at massive risk, I imagine lots of redundancies and lay offs today

do you notice the obvious class divide in what's happening now?
WFH where possible -lets see who that covers? Lawyers, financial sector, consultancy, deskbased jobs etc - all pretty well paid.
Who CANT work from home - shop staff, cafe staff, bar staff, theatre staff, tradesmen, construction, gig economy , factory and manufacturing - lots of zero hours contracts and NMW jobs at massive risk, I imagine lots of redundancies and lay offs today

This.

^^ seconded

I don't think people who can't work from home and need their jobs should not go to work. But people still going to the gym, still doing unnecessary social stuff are very irresponsible. I am in the random fortunate position of being on maternity leave with a 3 month old baby. I do get that people can't be left to sink financially.

But I don't understand this thing of children still go to school so let's not bother to take any other precautions. 🤦🏻‍♀️