Shocked at people blatantly ignoring rule of 6!

[chestergirl39]

I knew it would happen, but it has still shocked me, especially the types of people who are doing it! (Eg not always younger ones). Someone at work, who has only just returned from shielding has flouted it 3 times already. She has bad chest and heart problems, so I’d have thought she’d be more careful. It’s hard not to feel cross about it, especially when you’re keeping to the rules yourself, mainly to protect people like them!

The virus doesn't give a shit, simply because it's a virus and doesn't think!!

That's kind of the point.

@Fortyfifty im in Scotland, so under this rule can't meet my mum and sister at the same time. I cant meet 2 friends at the same time. So I'll break the rules to do it.

It's the snitchiing encouragement from government that worries me the most. The thought of becoming a snitvhing society makes me shudder. Think Nazi. Think communist China cultural revolution. I urge everyone NOT to be a snitcher.

According to strangers who didn't know the arrangements they put in place these family and friend carers seemed to be breaching lockdown

Yeah we were accused of allsorts when we broke lock down rules...in that instance we were organising my mums funeral.

@11secretllama why can't you meet your mum and sister at the same time?

@Fortyfifty because I'm in Scotland like said. 2 household rule here.

@jasjas1973

The figures just do not bear out the claim that a ‘huge’ number of people are at risk.

There are certain groups like men and some BAME people who are at higher risk- but still very low overall.

The two key risk factors for death and serious illness are 1. age and 2. certain health conditions (around 93% of COVID victims have other conditions).

The average age of victims is above the UK’s life expectancy, so it is not a case of thousands of healthy 65 year olds being wiped out.

Sorry - I thought you said you can meet 2 friends but not your mum and sister. Why can't you stick to 2 households though? Surely you can see people separately.

So do we just all do what we want then, if the rules are so nonsensical, and the test and trace isn’t working?

But then we have to accept that more people will get the virus and unfortunately more will die from it, and hospitals will again be overwhelmed.

In an ideal world test and trace would be up and running how it should, results should be back the next day, schools would have received funding and planned for smaller class sizes and be more spread out, a vaccine would be nearly ready etc etc but none of that is happening, and yes heads should roll for that, but does not agreeing with the rules justify you breaking them?

Hospitals have been been anywhere close to overwhelmed at any point @chestergirl39.

I am more concerned that when people are observing the rule of 6, they are not observing social distancing. Less of an issue when outside but inside it is very important. Far too many people are meeting up inside within the number rule but then not keeping 2 metres apart. Remember that the 1 metre advice is 1 metre + other measures. How many people are doing this in reality?
Very few homes are large enough to accomodate visitors within sd guidance.
These coming months when people won't meet inside are going to be very challenging for the many who have become complacent over sd.

@Fortyfifty because I want to see my mum and sister at the same time. We are a family. If that makes me a criminal well so be it.

The rules make no sense and change constantly, and are different in England, Wales and Scotland.

I'm kind of following them, but the fact are kids are counted is ridiculous in England

@Ecosse

Hospitals have been been anywhere close to overwhelmed at any point *@chestergirl39*.

Do you work in one? Maybe not overwhelmed from a bed capacity point of view, but believe me from a staffing, stress and workload point of view it was massively overwhelming.

Sorry but I have just finished shielding and I have heart issues
Those of us who have shielded are still getting used to the rules. I hAve to remind my self constantly that I have to stand away from others. It's still new
Sadly, some of my work colleagues don't stand away.

@bigvig

I'm in a bubble of over 1000 at my college. Class sizes are the same as usual, cleaning is sporadic. Staff are not provided with PPE because there is no money. I don't think it s reasonable to ask me therefore not to visit my sister and her children at the weekend so I won't be following that rule.

Yes I get what you mean completely, and feel that meeting up outside and keeping 2 metres distance is a reasonable compromise. But there is a high chance if you are mixing with that many people without ppe that you will come into contact with the virus and depending on your age, may well be asymptomatic. The same with her children if they are in school/nursery. Are you comfortable with the fact you could pass it to them or vice versa? This is what stops me from mixing with too many others indoors, as with work and 3 kids in different year groups it ramps up our risk factors and I would hate to inadvertently pass it to someone vulnerable.

@42secretllama I'd like to see my mother also but she lives 200 miles away and the last lockdown prevented that.

Whilst rationally I cam see little reason for you to see your mum and sister (currently permitted in England) people's behaviour is strongly influenced by others' behaviour. Every person who floats on mn saying they're not going to follow for x, y z reason, has an impact on the decisions someone else makes.

Quite quickly, vthe small transgressions escalate. Person A justifies meeting in a group of 7, person B then justifies meeting in a group of 9, person X, seeing everyone else making their own rules, decides there's no pint following any rules and throws a party for 40 people.

I would meet up with 15, 20 people at a protest (for money for schools during covid) SD and wearing masks outside.

And I KNOW that is so much lower risk than my kids being in non SD school with shoulders touching, indoors, cramped, unventilated for 6 hours a day as to be insignificant in driving transmission.

Scientifically, my position IS right.

The government are trying to get the economy moving and schools open without having to spend any money, and restrict only people's interactions which are not important economically.

The problem with this is that those non-economic interactions are important for mental health and wellbeing and also people aren't stupid.

It exposes the government for who they are. They don't care about people, they don't care about mental health (though are willing to use it as an excuse for their schemes)- all they care about is that money keeps flowing into their pockets and their friends pockets. So they can live the high life off the backs of the people of this country.

How much has been squandered to totally unqualified firms in non-tendered contracts for PPE /testing? When it obviously wasn't going to work and is a massive transfer of wealth from state to mates?

That funding could have been used to open schools safely (following best practice) so that they could stay open and it was sustainable (as my daughter's school did for 4 weeks in the summer term).

Teachers are now working in unsafe environments. Children with coronavirus symptoms are taking 5-6 days to get results (I know because my DD had coronavirus symptoms - and 5 days later no result though I finally got a test for her yesterday) - so their close contacts are in unventilated, crowded schoolrooms for 5-6 days spreading whatever they have.

There's no point to the rule of 6 while schools are back with no SD. Community transmission is at a level now I think that schools would keep driving it even if they do close restaurants and pubs, particularly while test and trace is so broken. It's unenforceable and it pisses people off.

It’s not about money @IloveJKRowling. Schools have the same buildings as normal, where is the space coming from for socios distancing?

Actually, I've just realised, the rule of 6 is a distraction.

They know there are kids spreading coronavirus for a week in schools because their positive classmates can't get a test.

They know they've sent schools back in an unsafe, dangerous way, against all scientific advice.

They don't want to give an extra penny for soap to schools because it doesn't enrich their mates.

They want to blame everyone else when the inevitable happens.

Don't let them.

I don't get people saying "its hard to follow rules when Dominic Cummings, Stephen Kinnock, Tahir Ali etc didn't" its as though the poster didn't grasp that she is responsible for herself !

@Fortyfifty
I'm sorry you can't see rationally why I'd want to see them both at the same time. If that's not something you understand then nothing I will say will change that. On the flipside, you won't convince me not to break the rules to see them both.

My daughter's school managed it in the summer term - opened whole school. Used the school hall, outdoor space. If they used the village hall (freely offered) they could do so again throughout the winter with extra TAs.

How about do it where possible? That would reduce community transmission more than rule of 6.

Italy managed it. (4000 new staff, used community buildings)

In Spain everyone over 6 has to wear a mask.

US states where I have friends have half week in school learning, half week at home. They do SD and MASKS all day except lunch (at own SD desk) for everyone over 5. If my friend's child can manage it at 5, why is my 10year old daughter unable to wear a mask?

I'm betting that Italy, Spain and the US states I know of will have better education for all children, and lower coronavirus transmission.

My older daughter has been off, perfectly healthy, all week with no learning provided while her sister waits for a test. She is being denied her right to education currently and this will happen AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN.

IT's worse for her mental health than lockdown.

@Ecosse

Hospitals have been been anywhere close to overwhelmed at any point *@chestergirl39*.

You obviously didn’t need hospital treatment for anything in March/April then!

I (and plenty of others) had to wait MONTHS for urgent cancer surgery due to hospitals not running services normally. In normal times my surgery would have been done in two weeks!

Did they run out of capacity for COVID patients? No. Did they run out of capacity for cancer patients? Yes. I’m sure others can provide other examples.

And for the record whilst hospitals, including mine, crowed about how they kept cancer services running throughout lockdown that’s of little consolation to those who were STILL waiting for surgery at the time. Operating at 20% capacity means nothing to the 80% still waiting.