So it doesn’t look like the lockdown is going to be extended does it?

[HighlandSpring101]

Just caught the daily news briefing. Despite a lot of people on here last week thinking there’s no way they’ll be easing the lockdown before the end of May (and I admit, I too thought this!) it looks like BoJo may announce relaxations of the lockdown Sunday, possibly taking effect as of Monday?

I am a bit confused though as though the majority of the criteria for relaxation looks like it’s being met, there are still 4000 new infections each day, which is the pretty much the same amount as at the start of this pandemic so surely that’s still too high?

Read the regulation! And then maybe recalibrate your trust in what politicians tell you.

@Karcheer you are right that yes the guidelines are exercise once a day, go to the shop the minimum possible but that wasn't stated in the law so some people are pushing everything to the limit that they can do. The problem comes in because the laws themselves run for a lot longer, 6 months, so if they made those too tight then they wouldn't be able to release us as easily.

Thanks @goaty just read it... off to take the dogs out.

It's people's interpretation of the 'rules' and going out several times a day is what makes some of us cross.

The advice was really very clear, leave home as little as possible but some people just don't want to do this, they want to be rebels and say "but look at the guidelines, it doesn't say we are only allowed out once a day".

Common sense interprets staying home as much as possible as you can walk/run with the dog and kids on bikes in one trip out a day.

Why would more people be dying because someone drove 40 miles to a shop instead of using a shop nearby?

It would not necessarily mean more people dying, but the person driving 40 miles could take the virus to an area where there are no cases. Surely that is the reason for staying local.

Hi @Wtfdoipick

The problem comes in because the laws themselves run for a lot longer, 6 months, so if they made those too tight then they wouldn't be able to release us as easily.

Being somewhat pedantic, this is wrong too - see para 12.

Expiry
12.—(1) These Regulations expire at the end of the period of six months beginning with the day on which they come into force.

China were literally welding apartment doors shut so people couldn't leave them. Our Gov's own research say two people in every 15 admit to breaking lockdown rules. I think you mean, what a fuck up by our friends and neighbours.

@Impiz Nope I definitely mean a fuck up by our Government. The lockdown should have been earlier and more harsh to start with. Hence why the countries with harsher lockdowns are now able to start coming out of theirs. Meanwhile, our infection rates just keep climbing

the government cannot win. There would be uproars if the lockdown was stricter, there's already enough talks about lost of freedom, Mental health torture and all kind of nonsense.

Whatever the government decide, they will be criticised. When it's all over, there will be tons of reports and studies proving they have done it wrong, taken the wrong decisions, at the wrong time.
Insight is a wonderful thing and sofa experts will have a field day.

The rule is: STAY HOME until strictly necessary. Exercising once a day is tolerated, for everybody's sake.

You can't blame the government because people are too childish and stupid and try to make their own rules. You have to laugh at people who have decided that it means they are allowed outside 1 hour a day to pop in Boots and others to buy make-up... nowhere is that "1 hour" or non-essential shopping trip in the guidelines. Read all the threads about people willingly confusing shopping TRIPS (to be kept to an absolute minimum) and the content of your actual shopping...

In Germany, the advice to stay home as much as possible was from early on given to over-60s,
because the risk really escalates from then.

With the system we have here of "Altersteilzeit" not many people are working over 60

What the UK should do is give a UBI to everyone aged 60+ equal to the full pension

• no means tests, no savings test, just DOB -

to help the more vulnerable population stay home if they wish

Everyone advised to shield should get UBI as well

Then the rest of the population can be sent back to work - and school - in stages
with the aim of 80-90% of the economy running over the full summer months

Then the rest of the population can be sent back to work

except that the rest of the population is not magically immune, perfectly healthy and young people die or have life-changing effects

Much better to plan a safer ease of lockdown, instead of pretending we can go back to "normal".

It would not necessarily mean more people dying, but the person driving 40 miles could take the virus to an area where there are no cases. Surely that is the reason for staying local

Actually I would class 40 miles as pretty much local but that aside - this virus is going to spread around the entire country, the lockdown is highly unlikely to have prevented that happening and even if it could, presumably you accept that it must be lifted at some point and then the virus will spread.

except that the rest of the population is not magically immune, perfectly healthy and young people die or have life-changing effects

So what are you suggesting - waiting for a vaccine that may never come?

there's already enough talks about lost of freedom, Mental health torture and all kind of nonsense

Why do pp who are supposedly so concerned about the health of others in terms of CV, think it's ok to post offensive stuff like this?

@GoatyGoatyMingeMinge that says exactly what I said that the regulations run for 6 months ie longer than the 3 weekly review.

When it's all over, there will be tons of reports and studies proving they have done it wrong, taken the wrong decisions, at the wrong time.

Finally something I can agree with you on!

"It’s weird though, because the all singing all dancing new corona hospital in Birm has been put on standby after not receiving a single solitary case, and the one in a London has also been put on standby after only receiving 41 cases, which is nothing for the corona hotspot"

There was an interesting thread about this based on a german virology expert. In a nutshell.. in the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic a similar thing happened. People heard about this nasty virus and prepared, field hospitals were built and many were not needed. It turned out that there were a few bad clusters/hostspots across the country and loads of areas that were hardly effected. And people said it wasn't that bad. Then people relaxed and carried on with their lives and over the summer they all but forgot about it apart from a few cases here and there. Except the virus was spreading uniformly with more mild or asymptomatic cases. Then in the winter, the second wave came and everywhere was a hotspot and the hospitals were deluged, and fatalities were very high.

The impact of the second wave in 1918 related to a deadly strain being spread by the particular circumstances of the war - the most ill were sent away from the front thus spreading the worse strain. So the parallels to a second wave of coronavirus may be limited.

@JustinMyJustin I haven't even got kids and I hear you.

FliesandPies

Instead of waiting for a vaccine, we could do as Germany did and get the infection level down before easing lockdown. Therefore lessening the chance of a bad second wave. If we wanted to save lives and the economy.

We could also do what we should've two months ago. Get enough PPE (so we stop having frontline staff die on us), get accurate tests, drugs and equipment to treat patients, masks for the public. And start treating patients rather than leaving them to die at home or only admitting them at a stage when survival is less likely.

Other countries have managed it.

Agree it's very offensive speaking of 'loss of freedom' and torture. Both to genuine victims of torture and to the many permanently housebound.

We are allowed to get out and about. To the shops, to pick up takeaway food, get a coffee, go out for exercise, pop into acdiy store, provide care to the vulnerable. We're not living the lives of the housebound.

Xtinak that’s interesting, I don’t know that.

Agree it's very offensive speaking of 'loss of freedom' and torture. Both to genuine victims of torture and to the many permanently housebound.

As I think you know I was referring to the use of the work 'nonsense' as being offensive in context of the quote. I won't bother arguing the point about the effect of lockdown on many people as I can see you have no sympathy for this.

What the UK should do is give a UBI to everyone aged 60+ equal to the full pension
- no means tests, no savings test, just DOB -
to help the more vulnerable population stay home if they wish

DH is 65 and would be classed as vulnerable in that example. I'm younger than him and wouldn't be so what happens then? He won't have to to work but I'll still be going out to work and we can hardly avoid each other.

justasking111

They don’t need to live like that even if they’re shielded, like my mother is as she has had blood cancer. It is fine to open windows and go into private gardens.