To think they should pause meeting inside

[LastOrdersMaura]

In the last person to be overly concerned about the virus but the SAGE minutes show that there is something to be concerned about.
I think the economy can't take anymore and I really feel for all the businesses who are gearing up for opening on Monday. My friends cafe hasn't opened since October last year so she missed all the Christmas trade and has no outside seating. Her customer base are mostly elderly so unlikely to come out for takeaway. It would likely bankrupt her to hold off opening any longer.

The mixing in people's houses seems the least destructive part to hold off on. I know a lot of people have been looking forward to it but prolonged contact in a small space seems to be a major factor in transmission.
I'm looking forward to seeing others for a drink in their houses but I can see how it can go wrong. Most people aren't able to go for a meal in a restaurant every night of the week. I could however go to a different friends house every day, even multiple friends houses! Then if that friend does the same, that's a lot of indoor mixing. We have small children so the likelihood of them SD'ing is unlikely. Then there's older siblings at school, working parents, nursery etc leading to an increase in transmission. I feel restaurants are quite safe in comparison.
Those who want to will mix indoors anyway but it might make some think twice or not accept as many invitations. It has no impact on the economy. Yes it will have an impact on mental health but I think we're screwed on that part anyway. Anxiety is through the roof!
I'm fully expecting people to tell me to fuck off but this is the most sensible decision that BJ could make in light of the new variant. I'm not a lockdown lover, frankly as I haven't had a lockdown due to working out of the house throughout. I just want this to be over, properly over, not just kicking the can down the road.

Hancock is deliberately conflating the two just like they did with those who cant wear masks and those who wont so that some of the public will police others Hes a cunt

@Drawcilla

Those who are vulnerable but unprotected aren’t all vaccine refusers as Hancock is crudely painting it.

There are those with immune disorders who can’t have the vaccine.

Those with immune disorders who can have the vaccine but it didn’t work.

Those housebound who can’t get to clinics and are still awaiting a vaccine.

Those with conditions not covered by the vaccine programme. Like asthmatics who take daily steroid inhalers but here kicked out of group 6 based on a flawed algorithm. Don’t have been given it by gps who went against the advise but many asthmatics under 40 have not had it yet. Other countries vaccinate them but oh no not us.

All of those above will have more protection once all adults are vaccinated.

Right now they’re vulnerable. Especially if they work or mix with the other age groups who aren’t vaccinated. 60% of adults vaccinated means nothing if you’re a 28 year old unvaccinated asthmatic in a workplace of other unvaccinated 20 and 30 somethings.

We could wait till we are all vaccinated to help the very most vulnerable or we could not.

We’ve come so far to fail now?

My worry is our eagerness to get back to normal lands us right back in another lockdown. None of us want that!

This. Exactly this. I'm stunned at how few here manage to understand we are about to waste all our efforts. It's maddening. We all want normal again sad fact is it's not possible yet.

This. Exactly this. I'm stunned at how few here manage to understand we are about to waste all our efforts. It's maddening. We all want normal again sad fact is it's not possible yet.

Of course it is. Just stop playing into it. People aren't going to do this anymore. Get over it.

@Blossomtoes

It’s not logical. Only someone living in an alternative universe could see the logic in it. The blind belief in a group of scientists whose speculations aren’t even unanimous is beyond belief. This is the SAGE that forecast 400,000 deaths at one point, ffs. They’re not taking any evidence into account.

As I said earlier, there is a lot of covid denial about.

This comment is total denial.

The idea there is some 'evidence' an ordinary Joe knows about that the nation's advisory committee is ignoring is just not true.

@osbertthesyrianhamster

This. Exactly this. I'm stunned at how few here manage to understand we are about to waste all our efforts. It's maddening. We all want normal again sad fact is it's not possible yet.

Of course it is. Just stop playing into it. People aren't going to do this anymore. Get over it.

'stop playing into it' is also covid denial.

Scientific realities don't change just because you pretend they are not happening.

If people don't think lockdowns were required, and think the way to deal with a rising wave in future is to not 'play into it', they are

What happens if hospital rates don't rise and overwhelm the NHS after today?

Will those saying we are covid denies admit the experts got it wrong?

This thread has actually made me sympathise with BJ a bit!

Will those saying we are covid denies admit the experts got it wrong?

Of course, and be very happy.

But if they do, I can well imagine who will be shouting the loudest about how unfair it is on them and why didn’t somebody do something etc 🥱

But the other side of that I think is the denial of the impact that not opening has, the psychological, economical impact of this cannot be denied either

We now I think need to work out the measures that can happen without the other side. Hugging for example should now be limited to close close connections (to stop fully vaccinated grandparents hugging at this stage doesn’t achieve anything). Going into peoples houses still needing masks

That said there is a definite change of rhetoric on the news this morning so I think there will be those who don’t move forward with the May 17th and those who do have probably been playing fast and loose with the rules.

The science needs to be balanced now by human behaviour and managing both as much as you can.

Though I suspect one thing they would change if they could is the AZ advice and keep that down to under 30s. I think 12-15 will be cleared before two long although logistically it would make sense if you had supply to set this up before and after the holidays.

We need a middle ground because national lockdowns are no more the way than playing into it

We need to let go of June 21st because losing those restrictions is too soon and figure out what else we can add (household etc) testing siege vaccines to have a workable plan to keep this under control and have a normal we can live with (and leisure travel I think needs to be part of that)

I'll be thrilled if the experts are wrong.

But they've been right twice before and I was agreeing with them at the time wondering why it was allowed to run rampant.

@Stuffin

What happens if hospital rates don't rise and overwhelm the NHS after today?

Will those saying we are covid denies admit the experts got it wrong?

I will say the scientists got it wrong and try to understand why so that next time I am more knowledgeable.

The reasons why it didn't happen will be important.

But it wouldn't mean the deniers were not deniers. They are deniers of scientific knowledge/process, that won't change. A stopped clock is right twice a day as they say!

But of course I am not going to pretend something is happening if it isn't. That would be me denying scientific fact, and I hope that doesn't happen to me.

@KurtWilde Indeed. I'm in one of the areas where it's pretty much been lockdown since last March with constant restrictions. It totally worked in lowering cases. Oh wait.. no it didn't.

Beacuse too many people wouldn't follow the rules.

Although to add - if there is a 95% probability of something happening, and it doesn't happen that doesn't mean you were wrong to think it might.

I don't leave the iron on when I go out because of the risk of fire. But loads of people have done so and got away with it. Doesn't mean it isn't a risk.

People are clearly struggling with the maths involved in all this.

@megletthesecond

I'll be thrilled if the experts are wrong.

But they've been right twice before and I was agreeing with them at the time wondering why it was allowed to run rampant.

I'm the same. Optimistic and hoping everything will be fine but wouldn't be surprised if it spreads out of control again. Last Summer everyone was saying it was over, numbers were tiny, some Londoners thought London had achieved herd immunity because there were virtually no cases at all. How crazy that sounds now. It's right to be cautious because exponential growth means it's out of control by the time you notice the growth. Last thing we want is restrictions to come back - we'd be far better coming out slowly and permanently.

@megletthesecond

I'll be thrilled if the experts are wrong.

But they've been right twice before and I was agreeing with them at the time wondering why it was allowed to run rampant.

That depends though I think - the modelling has always been hit and miss (not least of all because there are many different variables in play here).

They are right in the sense that this is of concern and we need to be careful and it shouldnt be allowed to run rampant but that doesnt mean we need to take it all as being completely correct either.

They are not going to be wrong because it is here and it is transmissible and it is in communities in which it can easily spread. But that doesnt mean that all the modelling is right either (and I think they would say that). The SAGE reports themselves say there isnt enough data.

We need to be careful and circumspect for the next two to four weeks within the current guidelines until the picture is clearer

I don't leave the iron on when I go out because of the risk of fire. But loads of people have done so and got away with it. Doesn't mean it isn't a risk

Going with that analogy what you're really saying is you'd ban the use of irons because of the risk of fire, or that it may burn someone, or fall on the carpet and ruin it. It's always going to be potentially hazardous but this is balanced by people needing to iron their stuff.

@AmandaPlease

I don't leave the iron on when I go out because of the risk of fire. But loads of people have done so and got away with it. Doesn't mean it isn't a risk

Going with that analogy what you're really saying is you'd ban the use of irons because of the risk of fire, or that it may burn someone, or fall on the carpet and ruin it. It's always going to be potentially hazardous but this is balanced by people needing to iron their stuff.

No, I wouldn't

I'm not even advocating lockdown, although I do think overnight stays/home visits are unwise.

I'm just stuck in a permanent argument with people who can't get their heads round the numbers SAGE are discussing and are disbelieving of the possibility it could result in a high third wave.

Doom mongerers hiding behind estimated figures and scientists who they themselves have no definitive clue of how this will pan out - but the scientists do say that the vaccine DOES offer protection for the India variant. Why are you overlooking that fact??

The ones who are getting ill are in that 3% left over from the 97% protection. So we should now pause unlocking because of that 3%?? That number will never alter. No vaccine offers 100% guaranteed protection and there will always be a teeny amount for whom it doesn't work at all.

And anyone who questions the science or the figures or the bloody useless government are conspiracy theorists and covid deniers. What a laugh.

Yes I guess what we need is an acceptance on both sides that this is a balancing exercise going forward with vaccines helping an awful lot.

Working from home (for people like myself and DH) for whom it actually doesn't affect the quality of our work or life

Make sensible choices when it comes to physical contact with people

Wear masks where it makes sense and isnt onerous

Social distance where you can

If something can be done socially distanced or outside do it

Test and isolate where necessary

But I actually think to be fair to the government that a lot of this is now personal choice and I think it is that which we have to get our heads round now that we need to take some responsibility for this

@KurtWilde

Doom mongerers hiding behind estimated figures and scientists who they themselves have no definitive clue of how this will pan out - but the scientists do say that the vaccine DOES offer protection for the India variant. Why are you overlooking that fact??

The ones who are getting ill are in that 3% left over from the 97% protection. So we should now pause unlocking because of that 3%?? That number will never alter. No vaccine offers 100% guaranteed protection and there will always be a teeny amount for whom it doesn't work at all.

And anyone who questions the science or the figures or the bloody useless government are conspiracy theorists and covid deniers. What a laugh.

This is a complete misunderstanding of why there is concern. What even is that 3% figure you've plucked out - against n totally missing the issue.

This thread explains mobile.twitter.com/chrischirp/status/1394240052193107968

No one is overlooking the vaccine - the risk we face is with the vaccines. SAGE are aware of the precise vaccine situation obviously.

@Blossomtoes

It’s not logical. Only someone living in an alternative universe could see the logic in it. The blind belief in a group of scientists whose speculations aren’t even unanimous is beyond belief. This is the SAGE that forecast 400,000 deaths at one point, ffs. They’re not taking any evidence into account.

SAGE forecast this amount of deaths based on no lockdowns. It also included people who would not be treated for other illnesses because the hospitals could not cope.

@picturesandpickles yes people keep plucking numbers out of the air that has no basis in reality. So many people make up things to support their viewpoint.

@Quartz2208 the personal choice and personal responsibility message has been sung on this site since February 2020. It is also why poor people are more likely to die of coronavirus. Because if you are a professional working from home and able to afford online delivery, all you are choosing is whether your children go to school and your social life.
For poor people they are often asked to work in unsafe environments. There has been zero government enforcement against businesses. And shop in cheap food shops that do not have online delivery or have delivery charges.
The mantra of personal responsibility means the well off are largely fine, and the poor suffer. And the well off then blames the poor for what happens to them.
I do not know what is the best thing to do at the moment, but I know that your solution does not work.

[quote castemary]@Quartz2208 the personal choice and personal responsibility message has been sung on this site since February 2020. It is also why poor people are more likely to die of coronavirus. Because if you are a professional working from home and able to afford online delivery, all you are choosing is whether your children go to school and your social life.
For poor people they are often asked to work in unsafe environments. There has been zero government enforcement against businesses. And shop in cheap food shops that do not have online delivery or have delivery charges.
The mantra of personal responsibility means the well off are largely fine, and the poor suffer. And the well off then blames the poor for what happens to them.
I do not know what is the best thing to do at the moment, but I know that your solution does not work.[/quote]
The unsafe environments though is separate and also needs to be addressed and should be addressed

But without personal responsibility you are going back into things being locked down which as you rightly say hits the poor far more than it does the professional working from home so what other solutions is there that actually helps.

But the other side is that there are offices trying to get people back in far too soon - that side needs I think to slow down because it can. The message isnt the same as February 2020