Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[beorhthelm]

10pm curfew smacks of doing something without doing anything.

 

[vegster]

Seems it’s already been leaked

BORIS Johnson is to announce a 10pm closing time for pubs tomorrow, The Sun can reveal, as scientists increased the nation's alert level to FOUR.

As part of a package of measures to be unveiled to tackle soaring Covid cases, the Prime Minister will slap a curfew on the hospitality industry and enforce patrols to make sure venues are obeying the "rule of six".

And pubs, bars and restaurants could be shut completely in virus hotspots.

The measures, which were outlined to devolved leaders today, will be kept under review.

The curfew is different to the one currently in place in Wales - where they face an 11pm shutdown - but is significantly less severe than a possible two week complete shut-down which was mooted by SAGE scientists just last week.

All fine.

But they need to extend furlough for these industries

Looks like Murdoch sold his shares in Spoon's today, they are down nearly 10% on the day.

 

[highflyer]

some hint of treating the UK public as people who have a reading age of above 6 would be a start.

I very much fear that would be a tragic miscalculation.

I tend to agree with [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] on most of this debate.

I really REALLY hope the T-cell immunity effect kicks in and we see a levelling off in cases sooner rather than later (a la Sweden). It may happen I think. But there is no certainty, and feels like a very big risk to rely on it happening, given the uncertain state of knowledge at the moment. I have zero doubt that the scientists are taking whatever evidence is available into account when weighing up their options and risk assessments.

The coronavirus symptom tracker app is now calculating 10,000+ new symptomatic cases every day. And they also say that is doubling every seven days (up until a few days ago). I tend to believe that data, more than any testing data at the moment. And those numbers WILL translate into some increase in hospitalizations and deaths in the coming weeks and months.

Personally, I would be surprised (but of course very pleased) if we weren't seeing 50-100 deaths a day by mid-October. Maybe earlier. We are locked in to some extent. The younger age groups getting infected, and better treatments will help reduce the numbers of serious cases compared to number of infections, but not eliminate them. And we don't yet know what the colder weather will do. There is, I'm afraid, some evidence (from the symptom tracker team) that cold weather may increase the severity of the disease. I am sure Whitty and Vallance know that is a possibility and are factoring it in. And, as has been mentioned above, the risk is that by the time things are bad enough that people can SEE what is happening it will be too late.

We can act now, in a relatively moderate way, while we are only locked in to a 'manageable' level of problems, and try and rein things in while we sort out a proper test and tracing system (FFS) or we can roll the dice and hope to god that one set of scientists (that we all prefer to listen to, but that doesn't mean they are definitely right) are right.

IF we get to many 100's of deaths a day again (and yes, I agree, we may not), then it will iimpact on business, and on the wider heath care system, whether we do another 'hard' lockdown or not. Reducing our social contacts for a while is definitely a better option than taking that risk in my view, but it seems a lot of people would rather roll the dice...

 

[highflyer]

they need to extend furlough for these industries

Totally agree with this. Has to happen. Labour, have been pushing the line of selective support for certain industries consistently.
Also need to focus on more support to vulnerable people and people who need to isolate, but can't afford to do so.

 

[CHAPPERS]

This new curfew has to be linked to the start of the university term. Has to be. Can’t have thousands of students going out dancing and snogging and the like

 

[WATFORD zero]

...

 

[WATFORD zero]

I very much fear that would be a tragic miscalculation.

I tend to agree with [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] on most of this debate.

I really REALLY hope the T-cell immunity effect kicks in and we see a levelling off in cases sooner rather than later (a la Sweden). It may happen I think. But there is no certainty, and feels like a very big risk to rely on it happening, given the uncertain state of knowledge at the moment. I have zero doubt that the scientists are taking whatever evidence is available into account when weighing up their options and risk assessments.

The coronavirus symptom tracker app is now calculating 10,000+ new symptomatic cases every day. And they also say that is doubling every seven days (up until a few days ago). I tend to believe that data, more than any testing data at the moment. And those numbers WILL translate into some increase in hospitalizations and deaths in the coming weeks and months.

Personally, I would be surprised (but of course very pleased) if we weren't seeing 50-100 deaths a day by mid-October. Maybe earlier. We are locked in to some extent. The younger age groups getting infected, and better treatments will help reduce the numbers of serious cases compared to number of infections, but not eliminate them. And we don't yet know what the colder weather will do. There is, I'm afraid, some evidence (from the symptom tracker team) that cold weather may increase the severity of the disease. I am sure Whitty and Vallance know that is a possibility and are factoring it in. And, as has been mentioned above, the risk is that by the time things are bad enough that people can SEE what is happening it will be too late.

We can act now, in a relatively moderate way, while we are only locked in to a 'manageable' level of problems, and try and rein things in while we sort out a proper test and tracing system (FFS) or we can roll the dice and hope to god that one set of scientists (that we all prefer to listen to, but that doesn't mean they are definitely right) are right.

IF we get to many 100's of deaths a day again (and yes, I agree, we may not), then it will iimpact on business, and on the wider heath care system, whether we do another 'hard' lockdown or not. Reducing our social contacts for a while is definitely a better option than taking that risk in my view, but it seems a lot of people would rather roll the dice...

Very good points.

Until we can accurately measure what is happening, day by day, region by region, we have no choice but to continue to introduce inordinate measures whilst we do not know what we are dealing with. It is the only way to protect the vulnerable.

To get accurate timely information is a big project in terms of volumes of data and users, but it really isn't overly complex. It has been the single most important project in the UK for the last 7 months at least. It's the 21st century FFS, it shouldn't be beyond the wit of intelligent people with a plan and a bit of leadership, to put this in place

But in the absence of this, we have to be VERY careful and start introducing new measures.

 

[Bozza]

they must get away from cases and onto hospitalisation and mortality, that what matters.

Do you really think they are paying no attention to the hospitalisations, particularly given it was referenced in the briefing?

In England alone, from a base of c50 admissions a day at the end of August (28-31/8: 44, 52, 38, 52), we are now up to around 200 per day (16-19/9: 183, 199, 205, 204).

On positive reported cases, whist these are of some interest, I'm sure, I would imagine it's quite limited right now:

1. Many people can't get tests.
2. Test results are taking several days, in some cases, to be returned)

If we want to look at "people who have it" in any way. I would suspect the ONS Infection Survey is where the focus is. The headline from the last report is:

An estimated 59,800 people (95% credible interval: 46,900 to 75,200) within the community population in England had the coronavirus (COVID-19) during the most recent week, from 4 to 10 September 2020, equating to around 1 in 900 people (95% credible interval: 1 in 1,200 to 1 in 700).

This is a jump of 20,100 (50.6%) from the previously reported figure of 39,700.​

Note this is England alone, and also covers up to 10th September so is already 11 days stale. It will certainly be interesting to see what the figures are this coming Friday.

 

[Bozza]

Ultimately they are though aren't they.

Thing is though once hospitalisations and deaths are high enough that people are satisfied there is a problem, the problem is already out of hand.

I do wonder if the current restrictions are proportionate and even more so further restrictions, but if you wait to know then it's too late and more heavy handed measures would be required.

Imagine if everyone had undertook a light touch lockdown in February, who would have believed it was worth it then though?

What a job to have. I can't begin to imagine.

Earlier this year: "You acted too late - lots of people died!"

Now: "Why are you restricting us - not many people have this - hardly anyone is dying."

 

[beorhthelm]

Do you really think they are paying no attention to the hospitalisations, particularly given it was referenced in the briefing?

i believe they are giving undue weight to the case numbers. it almost doesnt matter, for the reasons noted about testing, untested, asymptomatic, cases are a bit wavey. hospital admissions will be hard numbers of what is happening. it is a difficult balance, cases lead to worse and its too late.

 

[birthofanorange]

Am I missing something, here?

Pubs will (apparently) be forced to close at 10pm, yes? Surely those of a spanner mentality will all pile in earlier, so they can get bladdered by 10pm, rather than a gradual attendance, which is part of the reasons for the relaxation of the drinking hours, many years ago?

How will this help in any way?

 

[nicko31]

Am I missing something, here?

Pubs will (apparently) be forced to close at 10pm, yes? Surely those of a spanner mentality will all pile in earlier, so they can get bladdered by 10pm, rather than a gradual attendance, which is part of the reasons for the relaxation of the drinking hours, many years ago?

How will this help in any way?

In August they encouraged everyone into pubs 3 days a week, now lets cramp them in before 10pm. They don't learn

 

[Weststander]

In August they encouraged everyone into pubs 3 days a week, now lets cramp them in before 10pm. They don't learn

Bars restrictions are in place across much of Europe, some new, after earlier easing. For example in Portgual and Denmark.

In Ireland pubs have finally reopened, but punters can only stay for 105 minutes.

Virologists and public health officials are acting across Europe as the second wave hits. What are they all not learning?

 

[birthofanorange]

In August they encouraged everyone into pubs 3 days a week, now lets cramp them in before 10pm. They don't learn

I was hoping I'd misunderstood, but it appears not. Absolutely clueless, all of them.

 

[WATFORD zero]

What a job to have. I can't begin to imagine.

Earlier this year: "You acted too late - lots of people died!"

Now: "Why are you restricting us - not many people have this - hardly anyone is dying."

I agree completely, and as I think I have made clear, I am from the conservative wing and back the Government completely on introducing tough measures all the time we are incapable of understanding what's happening in any level of detail.

As you rightly point out, being the leader of the UK is an extremely difficult job in most circumstances and particularly so in these current ones, and needs (amongst a whole range of abilities) a rare mix of leadership, humanity, honesty, intellectual prowess, diligence, conscientiousness, humility, fairness, and an ability to understand and process huge amounts of detail, simply to look after the people of the UK.

It's why people should think very long and hard before they vote. Could you imagine what would happen if they didn't and elected someone with none of those abilities ? Doesn't bear thinking about

 

[Is it PotG?]

As you rightly point out, being the leader of the UK is an extremely difficult job in most circumstances and particularly in these current ones, and needs a rare mix of leadership, humanity, honesty, intellectual prowess, diligence, conscientiousness, diligence, humility, fairness, ability to understand and process huge amounts of detail as a simple basis.

It's why people should think very long and hard before they vote. Could you imagine what would happen if they didn't and elected someone with none of those abilities ? Doesn't bear thinking about

Biting satire. Who needs Ian Hislop?

 

[WATFORD zero]

Biting satire. Who needs Ian Hislop?

I only wish it were, and people weren't dying

 

[nicko31]

I was hoping I'd misunderstood, but it appears not. Absolutely clueless, all of them.

I'm afraid the government spent £600m on eat out to help out because it was popular (it was probably acted on after results from a Tory focus group in some red wall seat). The reality was hospitality business was brisk in August with pretty much everyone holidaying at home, it wasn't really needed.

Now with cases soaring we need to restrict hospitality (especially indoors). Now is the time for financial help, using the money in Autumn to subside takeaways would have made better use of public funds.

 

[nicko31]

Northern Ireland new rules...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...orthern-ireland-ban-households-mixing-indoors

The entire population is being told they must avoid mixing indoors with people from another household, with some exceptions, while no more than six people from two households will be able to meet in private gardens from 6pm on Tuesday.

Seems sensible, they seem to recognise that mixing outdoors does carry a lower risk

 

[beorhthelm]

I'm afraid the government spent £600m on eat out to help out because it was popular (it was probably acted on after results from a Tory focus group in some red wall seat). The reality was hospitality business was brisk in August with pretty much everyone holidaying at home, it wasn't really needed.

Now with cases soaring we need to restrict hospitality (especially indoors). Now is the time for financial help, using the money in Autumn to subside takeaways would have made better use of public funds.

restaurants are worth about 10x to the economy than takeaways. they were proping up the businesses, not the punters.