Chris Whitty in The Times today - don't meet friends and family unnecessarily

[MrsMiaWallis]

"Emergency patients will be turned away from hospitals, causing “avoidable deaths”, unless the public starts obeying the lockdown, England’s chief medical officer warns today.
In a stark intervention designed to shock, Professor Chris Whitty warns that everyone who meets friends and family unnecessarily is a “link in a chain” that threatens the lives of vulnerable people"

Worth noting. I had to pick up a prescription from my local town and was surprised to see so many people - mainly middle aged women, some of whom I know and had always seemed like rational intelligent people - walking around town and chatting on the pavements, unmasked, no social distancing.

Apologies I don't know how to do share tokens.

I also fail to see why talking to someone at a distance outside is any risk whatsoever to anyone. if you can smell someone’s perfume you are at risk

"I just can’t understand why people are crying out for more and more restrictions"

I agree with you. But if restrictions are necessary, they have to be imposed by the government. This culture of the government imposing law which is less onerous than the guidance and then criticising people who are doing things they are allowed to do is really toxic.

@Wherediditgo

I don’t understand the call for even further restrictions before we’ve had chance to see what impact the latest ones are having?? People crying out for further sectors to close because of case and death rates seem to not understand that restrictions take a while to have an impact. Surely, you wait two weeks after the initial lockdown was put in place and re-assess??

Nurseries are kept open because they’ve been shown not to have a massive impact on cases in the community - unlike schools.
They’ve shut schools to lower the transmission rates... not because they’re worried about the actual pupils (or, dare I say it, teachers) but to stop chains of infection.

One other thing we have now that we didn’t have back in March is a vaccine roll out. This widely will have an impact on transmission as well.

I just can’t understand why people are crying out for more and more restrictions!!

I have noticed on mumsnet that a significant number people want to restrict any joy or happiness in people’s lives - talking to one friend in the flesh, getting a takeaway, support bubbles to allow people to work and pay taxes. It’s just bizarre. Glad my real life friends don’t think like this, otherwise they wouldn’t be my friends!

There is a canoe club next to where I live where large groups indoors have flouted the rules throughout, gathering in large numbers indoors. They were there for hours yesterday after their ‘exercise on the river’ even though on their website of course they say that the club is 100% closed. Even if the police arrived, unless they broke the door down they wouldn’t be able to do anything as no-one would answer the door...
They’ done it though all the lockdowns do probably think they are just above the law..

@5zeds

I also fail to see why talking to someone at a distance outside is any risk whatsoever to anyone. if you can smell someone’s perfume you are at risk

I don't think that's quite right. Or at least I hope not. I can smell my mum's perfume for about a 5 mile radius. Bless her - she does like to make sure people know she's wearing it!

I am always baffled by the fact that so many posters get worked by individuals who meet one other person for a walk (which is legal, v good for MH and much lower risk than meeting the same person inside), but not at all worked up by the employers who make their staff come into the office even though the work can be done from home (which is illegal and significantly increases risk - even if the employees stay 2m apart, I'm not sure that is enough to avoid transmission if you're working in the same office together all day).

It's like people love judging individuals but have a massive blind spot when it comes to employers. So weird.

My question is why a government scientist has chosen to write in The Times behind a paywall, rather than address his message to everyone?

I noticed that in my town centre yesterday. There were lots of couples and families around - clearly from the same households but then middle aged to older ladies were out having coffee with friends. To give them their due, the local teenage population seem to have stayed at home and stopped hanging around in gangs. The only ones I saw appeared to be out with their parents.

Great, fear tactics and increased restrictions now to make up for the consistently incompetent leadership. Too busy sitting on the fence and not making any decisions so we end up in no mans land with high virus rates, damaged economy and now longer and tighter restrictions.

@Drinkarsefeck

If people would rather pop their clogs than live like this then they need to consider that their becoming ill and taking up a hospital bed will mean the person who gets cancer, has a stroke or heart attack may well be denied treatment. Considering a vaccine is now available, not being careful because you're fed up of restrictions is totally irresponsible. Plus its an extremely unpleasant way to die, I'm sure they'd think differently while slowly suffocating.

Exactly. I expect the ‘I would rather die than live like this’ brigade will have a different approach if they are actually in danger of dying. Idiots.

This culture of the government imposing law which is less onerous than the guidance and then criticising people who are doing things they are allowed to do is really toxic.

I agree. I’m genuinely confused by the really strong pushing of the “stay local to exercise” message, when they didn’t put it onto the law that came into force four days ago.
Does anyone know why it isn’t law? Is it because they know that really it makes no difference if you drive 10 mins to go for a walk. Or is it because they want the guidance to be strict, but the law to be less so, so that when an MP is caught they can probably find a loophole to show that they didn’t break the law.

It's a disgusting abhorrent thing to say that Emergency patients will be turned away from hospitals, causing “avoidable deaths”.
How fucking dare he.
I am one of those bloody patients. And my death shouldn't be just dismissed in this way because of a lack of fucking beds.
Blame it all on us when your shambles of a health service fails.
Twat. Never liked the red faced fucker.

Are they still sharing figures about where they believe transmission is occurring? I don't like the "telling offs" they like to give out now and again.

I was able to keep my pre schooler and baby at home last lockdown, because the WFH expectations were lower and I could work more flexibly in the evenings and around my husband's shifts (emergency services).

This time, I'm expected to be glued to my laptop, live teaching during school hours every day meaning that while I can, I am still sending my children to nursery.

@MajorBumsore

My question is why a government scientist has chosen to write in The Times behind a paywall, rather than address his message to everyone?

It's an interview.

People really just need to cut their social interactions to the bear minimum for a few weeks, so we get this thing back under control.

I don't understand why people do what they want. Bend the rules and then justify it with their own guilt.

@Orangeblossom77777

I feel cross with their messaging and fear campaign- this is a result of some areas being in low tiers and Christmas mixing, two weeks ago all of which they allowed

Now it is about two people meeting to walk right.

Completely agree

There is apparently 90% compliance with restrictions now.

They don’t get to fuck about and put half arsed measures in place and then blame us when it all inevitably goes to shit.

Or is it because they want the guidance to be strict, but the law to be less so, so that when an MP is caught they can probably find a loophole to show that they didn’t break the law.

I think you hit the nail on the head here.

One other thing we have now that we didn’t have back in March is a vaccine roll out. This widely will have an impact on transmission as well.

Actually they’re still trying to establish whether vaccination stops transmission. It is perfectly possible that vaccinated people get less ill but can still transmit Covid. If this is the case, the vaccine rollout could actually increase transmission rates (because asymptomatic people are more likely to be out and about than sick people).

Fewer very sick people as a result of the vaccination programme should mean that we can be less worried about transmission. But assuming the aim of vaccination is zero transmission is ludicrous.

Well, my df had to queue for 40 minutes outside his surgery yesterday, waiting for his covid jab, so if they expect 80-something, vulnerable people to do that, apparently putting them at high risk of getting covid from all the others waiting in line immediately before their vaccination (or hypothermia...), then it is somewhat aggravating to be told that walking side by side, 2m distant from a friend is too dangerous to contemplate.

@Hatstrategicallydipped

It's a disgusting abhorrent thing to say that Emergency patients will be turned away from hospitals, causing “avoidable deaths”. How fucking dare he. I am one of those bloody patients. And my death shouldn't be just dismissed in this way because of a lack of fucking beds. Blame it all on us when your shambles of a health service fails. Twat. Never liked the red faced fucker.

Why is it abhorrent? It's true.

I had a bad accident during the last lockdown with a head injury. Ambulance took 3 hours to come. I could have died. And it wasn't even as busy then as it is now.

I don't think meeting one person outside is having an impact on the infection rates.

However, I agree with pp's that there are things the government could do:

Tell employers that if the job can be done at home, it gets done at home. No micro-managers whining about not being able to control their staff. Nope if they have a laptop and phone and broadband they don't need to be in the office in the vast majority of cases.

Sort out the definition of key worker so that schools and nurseries have far fewer kids in.

I am not sure about the "under 5" exemption for meeting up outside. Babes in arms yes, but I don't think the government has thought about a situation where 2 adults meet up with 2-3 kids each. That's a big group.

Maybe also say you can have a childcare bubble or a support bubble but not both, although I don't know how you police that. And of course a family with a childcare bubble may be a support bubble to a different person who can't also be childcare for them because eg they are too frail. But then seeing that person would come under the care exemption anyway.

I don't really know what more you can do though without over the top policing. Close garden centres? More retail? I'm not convinced they're the sources of infection though.

This culture of the government imposing law which is less onerous than the guidance and then criticising people who are doing things they are allowed to do is really toxic.

Yes this. I find it very sinister. “Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should” well tell people they CAN’T do it then.

I don't think meeting one person outside is having an impact on the infection rates

Why? Because it's something that you want to do?

Average onset of symptoms of Covid-19 is 6 days (note, that is an average and can be up to 2 weeks)

Persons with symptoms gets tested and 2 days after that gets results and case numbers are updated. That’s 8 days at least.

Every person they live with may not catch it at the same time either - so you’ll have a lag there with other members of the household not necessarily testing positive until a good chunk of time after the first person brought it in.

Today is only 6 days after that one day when everyone’s kids went in to school. Even if we all barricaded ourselves in our homes and welded the doors shut from today, cases will still continue to rise in the next week or two. It is inevitable. The horse has bolted.

This is why it is surely more sensible to wait until that time frame is up before we can possibly say whether or not the current restrictions are having any impact.

Don’t forget that along side this there is a large scale vaccination program running which will have an impact.

And as for shutting absolutely everything other than supermarkets... all that will happen is people will all pile in to the one or two shops that are actually open rather than be a little more spread amongst garden centres and B&M.

And that’s before you even consider the economic impact of closing ALL shops and nurseries.
Nurseries can’t collect fees. More staff on furlough etc etc