Will the new law on social gatherings make you reconsider your activities?

[Redolent]

Yes or no?

Refractory

No. I'm amazed that anyone is still listening”

Radio 4 just reported that latest polls indicate that over 75% of the public agree with new guidance and 64% believe it does not go far enough.
You are in the minority.

@msgreen, I am sorry to hear about your mum💐. Some of the thick responses on here make my blood boil. LIMIT SOCIAL CONTACT AND GET ON WITH IT to all those who dont give a fig about anyone but themselves. Selfish beyond belief!

@LouiseNW

Refractory

No. I'm amazed that anyone is still listening”

Radio 4 just reported that latest polls indicate that over 75% of the public agree with new guidance and 64% believe it does not go far enough.
You are in the minority.

You might also know that the public thinks that anywhere between 1% and 7% of British people have died of C19 (depending on whether you'd use the mean or median) - thanks BBC! so that's hardly surprising.

@LouiseNW

“ ...... but it is very unfair on young people and I would much rather have many more deaths than have these laws in place”.

Respect your honesty, Xenia, but just can’t get my head round this statement.

My 17 year old is vulnerable, as is my husband who works from hone and protects the livelihoods and pensions of thousands. They’re not dispensable statistics, they’re valuable people, no more or less worthy than anyone else.
For the sake of 6 months’ more patience and consideration, most people could come through this unscathed. I also have 26 and 27 year old kids with a baby, who agree.

I'm going to be blunt.

I care about your husband and your 17 year old, but I care about them in the usual way that I care about strangers: I'm happy to pay taxes to support the NHS, I willingly submitted to the first lockdown. I am not willing to trade unknown quantities of my livelihood or my life (even the 'trivial' parts, like parties) to save them, just as you would not be willing to do that for my children.

Everyone has their pressure points. The people on here who say 'OMG it is disgusting that you would prioritise a party/going to the pub/shopping/travel/a concert whatever over a vulnerable person's health' - they have their limits, and they will almost certainly coincide with the windup of the various financial support schemes that are currently running on printed (i.e. borrowed from our kids) money.

That all being said, C19 is not a death sentence for vulnerable people, some are at a higher risk and no it's not great to be at a higher risk for death but I'm afraid this is true of any seasonal respiratory virus.

[quote MarcelineMissouri]**@ChanceChanceChance* @Tmarsh123*

That’s not wrong. If the child sent home has no symptoms then the sibling can continue going to school. You quote

When to isolate... you live with someone who has symptoms or tested positive

The sibling does not meet either of those categories as long as the child sent home does not have symptoms or a positive test.[/quote]
Are we discussing the same thing @MarcelineMissouri? the post said:

a child in year 11 has tested positive ...they sent children home who they have come into contact with but they had said it ok for the said childs siblings to go to school

It is the positive case's siblings who have been allowed back to school - presumably they live with the positive case, if so they should be isolating according to NHS guidance.

MOST PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO GIVE UP WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER FRIVOLITIES FOR THE SAKE OF DEATHS! Its irrelevant what situation you are in financially. God help us in a war with the attitude of non commitment/bad attitudes to life on this thread. We are being given too much choice during this pandemic. Let's hope that anyone on here who cant follow simple rules to keep their own family and others as safe as possible doesnt have someone die in their family, what can they then say oh sorry about that but I didn't think it would matter if I did xyz! Beggars belief.

Stop comparing it with other illness, catastrophes etc. IT isnt called a WORLDWIDE PANDEMIC for nothing. I dont like the rules & yes it hasn't been handled greatly etc etc etc but why not worry about all that when and if it finishes.

What's with the 'six months more patience'? Does it magically disappear then? It might reduce a lot .... if a lot of people have caught it ..... but if we all stay away from each other for six months as you ask, what happens then that stops it? Love to know what you think happens.

Oh, it's the magic vaccine isn't it?

Do you know the average length of time to develop a new vaccine?

We were originally told vaccine by September. Oops. Now its vaccine by, what, March?

Average length of time to develop a new vaccine is fifteen YEARS btw
I guess they are just mostly drinking coffee in those labs and spinning it out for their jobs

How many viruses have we eradicated so far?

Ooooh ... two .....

I guess they are just mostly drinking coffee in those labs and spinning it out for their jobs

This is a horrible remark, I appreciate things take a long time but the research scientists I know have worked incredibly hard to get where they are (degree + PhD) and tend to work hard at their research, including antisocial hours etc checking on experiments.

Maybe you're judging others by your own standards?

www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid

Some light reading for anyone that fancies it.

@Timeforredwine

Stop comparing it with other illness, catastrophes etc. IT isnt called a WORLDWIDE PANDEMIC for nothing. I dont like the rules & yes it hasn't been handled greatly etc etc etc but why not worry about all that when and if it finishes.

It’s not called a ‘worldwide pandemic’ at all. A pandemic is, by definition, world wide. So absolutely no need to add ‘worldwide’ to the beginning.

They don’t. Schools all have staggered finishing times. They leave in their bubble

The staggered finish times at my DC's school means approx 800 students leaving at the same time. So as soon as they set foot outside the school boundary, they will theoretically be illegal. I imagine school will have to stand staff by the gates and encourage them to disperse quickly.

Prem another six months of data should stick least give us an idea of long term side effects of covid. I'd rather not risk long term problems that would affect my ability to parent / work / exercise etc. This winter was always going to be a pain in the arse. I don't think they'll be a vaccine for years.

I'll admit I'm a pessimist with no social life but things were never going to be semi normal until spring 2021.

Yes. We are supposed to be going on a UK caravan holiday in October with another family. Them in their caravan, is in ours, but we are a family of 4 and they are a family of 5. After a crappy year the kids are going to be devastated. I get why they have said 6, but they could have left the no limit on the size of 2 families. We haven’t been pubbing it with our mates, with NO social distancing for the last few months, it feels like we see being punished for the actions of the twenty something pub goers.

We were sticking to the rules as much as possible. Means our youngest can no longer have their party in a few weeks

@LovelyIssues

We were sticking to the rules as much as possible. Means our youngest can no longer have their party in a few weeks

I’m genuinely surprised at how many parties were still going on, especially with SD still being in place.

It does make sense to cap numbers where possible as large gatherings mean more spread.

Sort of, my darling MiL is 90 next week and we were hoping to take her great grandson for a visit but we'd be too many. However she's ill and has been in and out of hospital so I don't even know if she's going to be home.

@Kaktus thanks for pointing THAT out.

ALSOTHEREASON IT IS CONSIDERED a PANDEMIC is because it's spread globally, causing deaths and possibly annually . Comparing to seasonal flu etc is no good as this is classed as a Seasonal EPIDEMIC. Just thought I would point this out as others are being pedantic. By the way NONE of this matters what matters is people doing the right thing.

@ChanceChanceChance

I guess they are just mostly drinking coffee in those labs and spinning it out for their jobs

This is a horrible remark, I appreciate things take a long time but the research scientists I know have worked incredibly hard to get where they are (degree + PhD) and tend to work hard at their research, including antisocial hours etc checking on experiments.

Maybe you're judging others by your own standards?

Erm yeah that was sarcasm

Oh god this site sometimes!

I agree that the lives of vulnerable people are valuable but I think as a society, the longer this drags out, the more people would lose patience.

I was very pro lockdown when it started but I was also the first to go back to the shopping centres when it opened (albeit with mask) and to eat out in restaurants. As I recognized that it would probably be a year at least and I wasn't locking myself in the house for a year until the vaccine was developed.

My long awaited wedding has been postponed till 2021 (we married in 2015 but never celebrated as we were too busy saving to buy our first home). It kinda sucks.

I think as time goes by, people would lose patience with the rules and as the economic reality starts to bite, there would be protests a la Germany, perhaps even civil unrest when the furlough scheme ends. Tbh. I am more scared of that than about covid. I think we have to be realistic that covid would be around for a very long time and isn't going anywhere. Are we destined to live half-lives forever? I don't know how the government can balance infection rates while allowing us to lead relatively normal lives, but what we have now isn't sustainable.

@hoping4onlychild

I agree that the lives of vulnerable people are valuable but I think as a society, the longer this drags out, the more people would lose patience.

I was very pro lockdown when it started but I was also the first to go back to the shopping centres when it opened (albeit with mask) and to eat out in restaurants. As I recognized that it would probably be a year at least and I wasn't locking myself in the house for a year until the vaccine was developed.

My long awaited wedding has been postponed till 2021 (we married in 2015 but never celebrated as we were too busy saving to buy our first home). It kinda sucks.

I think as time goes by, people would lose patience with the rules and as the economic reality starts to bite, there would be protests a la Germany, perhaps even civil unrest when the furlough scheme ends. Tbh. I am more scared of that than about covid. I think we have to be realistic that covid would be around for a very long time and isn't going anywhere. Are we destined to live half-lives forever? I don't know how the government can balance infection rates while allowing us to lead relatively normal lives, but what we have now isn't sustainable.

Completely agree with this and I’m terrified they will keep restrictions until there is a vaccine (which could take years). Surely they should just keep masks in public places, ban large events (as in the 1000s), and protect the extremely vulnerable (the shielders, not the general vulnerable group) and then let everyone get on with their lives. This half living can’t go on for much longer, people won’t accept it if it goes into next year.

Pisses me off from some of the 'No' responses here that we are not learning the lessons from the start of the pandemic.

Government didn't pay attention to what was happening in Europe and were late to take action. Huge death total.

Now they are paying attention to what's happening in Europe and taking measures, and people are refusing to comply.

Makes me despair at the stupidity.

@tornadoalley if they had locked down in Feb, that wouldn't be after 6 months of lockdown. We are speaking now as people who have been under these restrictions for 6 months. on another thread, there was a poster who used to parrot 'lives over the economy' and now she says enough is enough. She isn't the only one.