"Keep Britain Free". Some excerpts from their website (the founder of it is currently calling Whitty a dictator on twitter and seems to be a big Farage fan)
Also people on their forum calling Covid a "psyop" and mentions of David Icke.
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Also people on their forum calling Covid a "psyop" and mentions of David Icke.
Manchester's had a "no visitors" to houses/gardens since the end of July. It hasn't brought infection rates down, (though maybe it reduced the growth rate). Certainly it didn't offer the quick tap on the brakes that people were hoping for. Sustainability of measures is a massive issue now, and I think part of the reason why Manchester is seemingly misbehaving so badly is that the no visitors rule isn't viable for very long.
People coped in the initial phase, but as weeks turn to months, the Dominic-Cummings School of "I'm using my best judgment" - as a parent, or as someone with older or vulnerable relatives who need support, or just as someone living alone and who starts to find it stifling. Personally I liked the simplicity of the 6-person rule, I just think the simplicity arrived too late to become a routine. Worst still there's a big chunk of the country where different rules were already in play, and it just sounds like another irrelevance.
I now think we're at the point where too many people are looking for loopholes, or they're resigned to extra restrictions and are making hay while the sun shines. I also worry that as the rules intensify (and so do the fines etc) we'll actually see people becoming more hesitant about answering the contact tracer's questions, or even to get tested, which won't help anyone. I know people are demanding restrictions but you only have to look at the restrictions that are already in place to know that compliance with rules matters, and for that people have to find the rules easy to follow over months.
People coped in the initial phase, but as weeks turn to months, the Dominic-Cummings School of "I'm using my best judgment" - as a parent, or as someone with older or vulnerable relatives who need support, or just as someone living alone and who starts to find it stifling. Personally I liked the simplicity of the 6-person rule, I just think the simplicity arrived too late to become a routine. Worst still there's a big chunk of the country where different rules were already in play, and it just sounds like another irrelevance.
I now think we're at the point where too many people are looking for loopholes, or they're resigned to extra restrictions and are making hay while the sun shines. I also worry that as the rules intensify (and so do the fines etc) we'll actually see people becoming more hesitant about answering the contact tracer's questions, or even to get tested, which won't help anyone. I know people are demanding restrictions but you only have to look at the restrictions that are already in place to know that compliance with rules matters, and for that people have to find the rules easy to follow over months.
Only way out of this mess is a proven vaccine/herd immunity or extensive testing&tracing but the later is only really a workable solution long-term in smaller countries imo.
My ex-boss has caught Covid at the beginning of the week, anyone who had a close contact with him at the office were traced and told to self-isolate and in the meantime they will get tested as well. I was in the office only once during past two weeks and even thought we work on the same floor I was not deemed at high risk due to not coming close, however, I’ll be keeping it tight in terms of my social activity for the next week just in case. Good thing our office currently operates on around 30% of capacity with everyone mostly working from their homes.
However, our test&trace system has been pretty successful so far though. In our case Lockdown has ended in early May. Night clubs/bars/festivals were open throughout the whole summer (still are) as well.
My ex-boss has caught Covid at the beginning of the week, anyone who had a close contact with him at the office were traced and told to self-isolate and in the meantime they will get tested as well. I was in the office only once during past two weeks and even thought we work on the same floor I was not deemed at high risk due to not coming close, however, I’ll be keeping it tight in terms of my social activity for the next week just in case. Good thing our office currently operates on around 30% of capacity with everyone mostly working from their homes.
However, our test&trace system has been pretty successful so far though. In our case Lockdown has ended in early May. Night clubs/bars/festivals were open throughout the whole summer (still are) as well.
Last edited:
Don't be so ignorant. If the parents had told school they would have to take time off work to care for their child, don't you know!!
Lockdown for our borough from 6 tomorrow.
I know a fair few people who aren't going to take this lockdown remotely seriously, citing that the first one didn't work so this one isn't going to either, so why bother even taking part. As you can imagine most of these people were on Facebook.
I’ve been in since last week, it’s not anywhere near as bad as last time though.
My concern is that I have a funeral to attend very imminently, but I believe I will be allowed to attend as one of the exemptions seems to be visiting family on compassionate grounds (at least that’s what my local councils website says). Providing that it takes place and I am allowed to attend in terms of numbers.
It's because it doesn't really achieve anything. You just move your meetings elsewhere if you want to remain within the law, or just carry on as usual if you don't. The numbers of people (well, men, mainly) who don't bother wearing masks on public transport and in shops around Manchester shows that there is a large percentage of the public that will continue to do as they please, so these measures are very often ignored.
For people who do comply with all the rules, the flaws in the extra measures in Manchester are obvious. Especially when you're being told to get back in the office, so you can spend your days with a dozen or so people you don't care for or even trust to follow the rules, but you can't have your mum come and sit in your back garden. You can do that in a public park, on a bench where dozens of other people have sat, and you can 'bump into eachother' in a pub.
You can't travel in a car with a close friend you know has been working from home, nowhere with others, but you can cram onto a tram with dozens of strangers who are still coughing, and eating with no masks on. And your workplace can insist that you have to come in, so you have no choice but to use the trams and potentially pass on a virus you've caught on there to the people you work with.
There needs to be something else done that actually addresses the circumstances where the virus is spreading, and I don't believe that it is largely in peoples back yards.
Ah. More entitled patriots, eh?
National lockdown then to be announced tomorrow night?
Not much chance, but they'll probably ban us from visiting each other's houses.
They can't go full lockdown again for anymore than a couple of weeks without wiping out about 20% of people's jobs and breaking the economy well beyond it's straining limits, and a couple of weeks of "short" lockdown (or whatever it's being called) won't do anything except push the peak further into flu/cold season.
They need a strategy that will last 6 months or so...well they needed that in the first instance but we have better treatments, better understanding of how the virus spreads, better testing, etc. now so we aren't stabbing in the dark. So I'm guessing targetted restrictions based on where and how the virus tends to spread more, which we know is primarily within households.
I still haven't seen anything suggested about targetted restrictions. i.e. effectively identifying the groups more at risk and taking them out of the firing line. It seems like common sense to me given the massive difference in the danger the virus poses based on something as simple as age. Will seem a bit daft if two 20 year old friends can't meet each other in a house for example, but a 60+ year old can still go sit in a room with their work colleagues. I get it's not quite that simple, but at the same time, it kind of is.
It could well be the only way to make some people listen. I have just been out and every pub was jam packed with tourists sat like sardines outside in the sun. The message is not getting across.
Like you say, it’s really not that simple. A lot of people don’t realise how the amount of virus in the community is still relatively low despite the rise in cases. If we take our feet off the brakes for young people and let community transmission get as high (and almost certainly much higher) than it did in the first quarter of the year then it’s just not possible to shield old people. They’ll pick it up in the shops, off carers, from relatives, at GP visits, on the buses, basically whenever they leave their house.
Which brings us on to the ethics of a public health strategy where anyone above a certain age can’t leave their house, under any circumstances, for an indefinite period of time. Without any face to face contact with their kids/grandkids. For what could be the next several years. And that would be a despicable way to treat the people in society who already have a much higher incidence of physical and mental health challenges, as well as a much shorter window to enjoy “normal” life when this shit show is over.
What do we think the measures will be then? Enforced WFH where possible? No mixing with different households? Presumably schools to stay open for now
Work from home if you can but go to work if you are able.
Interesting Twitter thread on one of “covidiots got to illegal rave” stories so beloved of click bait media. A bit of a plot twist in the end though.
If the 2nd peak is pushing into January by a short October 'proper' lockdown, then that would be a result for the Economy in ensuring that all the Xmas money was spent and taxes collected, and will help many businesses last longer.
Also buys the shitheads in Government another month or so to plan/fix testing and possibly.
Another problem here with the Government, is their constant briefings and TV time, they threaten xyz, and in the end, the measures introduced are weak, and can't be monitored, which means they can't be built on as nobody is following them in the first place.
Will the support bubble for lone occupants remain?
Erm sorry what? 
Difficult to see what they will bring in
If they try to bring in work from home again then they must surely extend the furlough otherwise lots of people who just went back to work are getting p45's at the end of the month
Schools - I think they will try to keep them open but the odds of 1 child bubble not testing positive (provided tests are available) over the course of a term must be pretty high so most parents are going to have to take time off for that as well
the "rule of 6" does not seem to have had much of an effect - most retail / food and drink places must be close to the wire financially already.
with Halloween, bonfire night Xmas and new year on the horizon I hope that any announcement takes those into consideration because too much chopping and changing at it will be completely unenforceable - though I suspect we are almost at that point already
Erm sorry what?
These sort of fine granular rules do not work in my opinion. It only leads to confusion, even if well intended.
Erm sorry what?
to be honest it makes some sense- one of the biggest issues parents had was childcare and schools being shut - if grandparents are allowed to create a bubble with family for childcare reasons it will help many (though many will like myself find grandparents a bit too far away for that to help but for others it will make things a lot more manageable)
Is there any data on how many have actually returned to the office?
Our office is open again but is currently only used by those who live in the city centre and don't have to use public transport etc. Everyone else is continuing to work from home and it'll likely stay that way right through the winter.
think there is data as to how many less are on furlough - but not much data as to how many of those are in the office full time / part time
I believe there is several million in retail and leisure who have been unfurloughed - suspect if there is another lockdown many employers will issue notice at the end of september and use the last month of furlough (60% support for wages) to have people serve their notice
It comes to something when i'm actually surprised and extremely grateful that the briefing today was lucid and understandable given what we've had to put up with previously from our PM. How anyone can say that man is a good speaker is just baffling. Anyway, it looks like it could be a rough few months ahead.
Looks like they’ve remembered that the COVID alert level exists and have upgraded it to level 4.
Was no need to change the "work from home if possible" guidance. That was totally unnecessary and will have certainly contributed a proportion of the increased cases. At the very least they should go back to that.
would be nice to see it backed up with some tax breaks for buying staff laptops, paying for their internet, home printers and proper workstations etc as Im sure we are storing up a lot of longer term health problems with people working off kitchen tables and sofas.
What do you expect when Boris has been encouraging people to go back to the office? Transmission is much more indoors than outside a pub!
What do you mean by this? If people are working from home then they don’t need to be furloughed
All of that is entirely right though .. you've got the police going after Joe bloggs walking his dog, whilst employees are going to work with symptoms because they can't afford to self isolate and not get paidThis again? Seriously? Never in billion years is it manslaughter. As in never ever ever would it be manslaughter. Unless you’ve been diagnosed with covid and you walk up to a 90 year old cancer sufferer and spit in their face. Anything else and it’s never ever going to be manslaughter.
Youve got @rcoobc saying people with Covid who infect others should be done for manslaughter but then moaning that police were over zealous in confronting people over breaking lockdown rules
Make ya mind up....
I blame the government for acting too slow for the first lockdown, but whatever has happened since is down the fckery of the public, but will still complain.
Covid is actually not going to be most memorable aspect of 2020 for me, it will be people's lack of self accountability wide on display...
Covid is actually not going to be most memorable aspect of 2020 for me, it will be people's lack of self accountability wide on display...
No mixing households in Northern Ireland from 6pm tomorrow.
So im not allowed to see my mum or dad, or my brother, yet i can go to the pub, gym, work, use public transport.
So im not allowed to see my mum or dad, or my brother, yet i can go to the pub, gym, work, use public transport.
We've had one player at your rugby club test postive and a load of guys that went and got tested all came back negative but still have to isolate for 14 days.
Can anyone explain this? If your negative why do you still isolate
Can anyone explain this? If your negative why do you still isolate
You can get false negative results. This means that if you had a disease, a test for the disease returns a negative (and incorrect) result which indicates that you do not. Having said that, you can also get false positive results, where you do not have the disease but the test returns a positive result which indicates incorrectly that you do have it.
I do not know what the statistics are for the tests, but obviously ideally you want to reduce the number of false negatives and false positives to as small as possible. It is not possible in practice to make the tests 100% accurate.
I presume in this situation, a conservative decision was made that since someone tested positive, you should all isolate regardless.
If you’re a direct recent contact of a positive case you can’t risk a negative result being false, so have to err on the side of caution. When you’re testing people without symptoms it’s much easier to miss a case (might only start shedding virus a few days later)