I think the army on the streets was the important bit.
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.
I think the army on the streets was the important bit.
I’m not sure I follow the last point but if the question is why did they follow a strategy that required another lockdown, I think the simple answer is because they accepted multiple lockdowns were necessary from early strategising. That was the scientific advice in April. The advice was based on the acceptance that adherence to social distancing and hygiene would fluctuate and economic and social considerations would dictate the need to reopen aspects of society to maintain long term adherence to restrictions on civil liberties and protect some level of economic health. Eradication was impossible based on the degree of community spread and suppression was beyond the public will. This is part of mitigation.
That is the reason Germany had two lockdowns too. Not because they wanted to but because despite their best efforts, it was a necessary evil to contain a virus that spreads so easily under conditions that our society and economy is designed around, particularly in certain weather and in certain cultural conventions. It is a normal part of the mitigation strategy outlined from the very beginning. But yes it is politically unpalatable and it is very arguable that people prefer the optimistic messaging that “if we do so and so, we will be able to get through this without more severe restrictions on civil liberties”, rather than the brutal realism that “all evidence points to the fact we will not be able to do so and so, which means more severe restrictions on civil liberties are inevitable”.
The fact is after that surge and during that lockdown they kept schools open. They saw what you saw. They looked at it in more detail than any of us have. If you believe they made the wrong evaluation, I’m cool with that. I was never arguing against it. I was simply arguing against the notion that they couldn’t see what the man on the street could see. They could see it and they would deal with it differently. Just like many of the teachers would deal with it differently to you.
I don't see what the problem is to have the army enforce an all nighttime curfew on New Years Eve.
Last edited:
It’s a bit extreme
UK’s COVID-19 predicament in general and specifically right now is also very extreme too.
Boris’s refusal to take extreme actions is what has gotten the country into being one of the worst nations on the planet.
it won’t happen because too many think it’s too extreme but nations who did implement such strict measures are enjoying much more freedom right now than we are.
Tbh I don't live in UK and I can't give specific answers to your questions. But as I've always said in this thread, there's no "one model fits all" solution to this pandemic due to different socioeconomic backgrounds. A successful strategy in one country could result in a total disaster in another. The only thing that I can confidently criticize is the reluctancy of countries to issue a travelling ban and/or close borders against China at the first place, which leads to the irreversible widespread of the virus worldwide. (The way these countries are reacting to the new strain makes it look even more ridiculous.) After that point, all efforts are only meant to limit the damage. It's a huge ask and you can't really blame governments failing to do so.
That said, I still have friends studying in the UK and I follow this thread quite closely. To me, the most disappointing fact is that UK failed to provide sufficient testing capability for symptomatic individuals back then. I have no idea about NHS or the reason behind (lack of kits? lack of technologists?), but it seems a pretty simple problem to tackle. As for other policies and measures, I wouldn't go too hard on them. I'm sure they come up with them last minute and there are flaws in them definitely, especially with the surprise of the new strain. Many of them rely on citizens' self discipline, but (no offence) I still don't understand why is it so difficult for westerners to wear a mask properly (from my observation on TV and local society)......
According to the WHO, its one and only mission is to "promote health, keep the world safe, and serve the vulnerable". Yet it still fails to achieve, and one of the most successful regions combating the pandemic (Taiwan) is banned from the WHO. What an irony. Trump might be wrong in many things but you can't really blame him for withdrawing from this corrupted organization.
If they government aren't prepared to lock down very hard in the first place I think lurching to a military enforced state of emergency might be a bit too drastic and just isn't going to happen.
It would be easy to say they should have locked down properly in the first place (and I think they should and that there is plenty of time for blame later, hopefully at the next election) but the most important ting now is how do the UK (and many other places) cope through winter and the roll-out of the vaccines. I don't have the information or knowledge to know the precise best course but I'm thinking after the woeful efforts of the government and confused messaging that you need a simple and clearly articulated plan that has a finite end.
I'm thinking full hard lock-down, close borders and compulsory police guarded quarantine for British people returning from overseas. Shut schools for all but essential workers and kids with particular needs (as some have mentioned in this thread), close pubs, restaurants etc for all but takeout food and everyone who can works from home again. Masks and stay at home orders except for very limited reasons and with the rules identical for everyone. Infection is so bad everywhere in the UK trying to differentiate is pointless.
Start between Christmas and new year. Set clear conditions on what will allow reduced restrictions e.g. infection and/or vaccination rates by the end of Jan. Reach them and restrictions reduce slightly. Then have limits for end of Feb etc. And you have to back this with the appropriate social help and the associated government spending. Promise and deliver large extra spending in education so that parents have some confidence that their kids will catch up and support those unemployed due to the pandemic. Online learning with parental assistance is fine for a while and particularly for kids in higher socioeconomic groupings but it isn't sustainable on its own for years but we can do another few months. Then vaccinate vaccinate vaccinate.
The aim is a short hard lock-down where everyone is actually "in it together" but with hope and a plan rather than yo yo incompetence and confusion. By the end of March summer and mass vaccination will at least be in sight (assuming the Oxford vaccine gets approval) and you can then keep relaxing regulations month by month and by the time the cold weather returns maybe, just maybe, sufficient people will have been vaccinated so lock-down doesn't have to occur again in winter. The problem is that leadership is required and the UK has Boris et al.
Yeah he’s a cnut but if he’d have done this he’d have been an even bigger cnut.
A lot of people who were in London when we went into that immediate shutdown don’t live in London and had responsibilities and their actual homes outside London. A shit load of people would have been going back to their homes outside London due to the Christmas break. Telling these people completely out of the blue that they are not allowed to leave London would have been completely unacceptable.
I work with one person who cares for his elderly living alone mother in Cambridge and he lives in Peterborough, there’s no way he could have remained in London. He had to get out asap and he literally left work as soon as he saw the news flash on the screen and I don’t blame him and the many others who were in similar situations and so had to rush to leave.
What should have happened was an actual well thought out plan with dates and clear instructions on a pre Christmas lockdown and then we wouldn’t have gotten a big rush.
you’re right we needed a properly thought out plan ... and all my suggestions are off the top of my head and without much thought. Perhaps @Wibble list is a lot better. But none of it will happen under Boris.
My point is I see no point in making rules and laws that are not enforced, like we’ve done since the very beginning. And right now, I don’t trust the entire U.K. public with self governance.
The Covidiots may be a minority but that’s enough to keep this virus at pandemic levels. They need to be forced to live by the law.
They acted - they just acted too soft and thought that keeping open shops and schools and only cutting some things like restaurants and theatres would be enough. But it was not and the numbers did not go down - that is why the lockdown from last week on until January 10th includes schools as well as all non-essential shops. You are not supposed to leave your house after 9 p.m. despite for important reasons and Xmas is restricted to one household + max. 4 close family members from other households (kids below 14 aren't counted).
The two next nursing homes in my vicinity - one in my village, the other one in the village next to mine - had a Corona outbreak in December with more than 50% of the old people and a lot of the staff members infected. The one here had 13 deaths until some days ago (or 80 old persons, I do not have new data) - the one in the neighbour town 7.
Some media sources running with ‘some areas’ of the England but some saying ‘National lockdown’
I guess we’ll see later.
I guess we’ll see later.
Christ. I think some of you lot have lost the plot.
Jenrick doing the media rounds this morning. They are definitely planning something, but obviously we know that.
Bunch of idiots. I don't doubt they need to do something but I'm not having this has suddenly appeared two days before Christmas. Their planning and foresight throughout has been ridiculous and now everyone faces an even tougher end to this year and start to the next.
My money is on a full lockdown from boxing day.
I think that would be the best idea personally. I also think it’s the smart move here. I also think that’s why they won’t do it
Fauci was on Radio 4 earlier saying he has no doubt that the Oxford vaccine will be approved in the next week in the UK. He said the data looks stronger than ever. Also heard some virologist agreeing with Tony Blair’s plan for vaccinations as the second dose only increases efficacy by 4%.
I think that would be the best idea personally. I also think it’s the smart move here. I also think that’s why they won’t do it
I think they will. Or put everyone on tier 4 which is basically that anyway. I've been fine about lockdowns so far but really don't want to head back into this. I've never been out of 3 so the only bit of solace since the last lockdown has been having the gym open and been able to visit non essential retail a couple of times. Stripping that away again will kill me off.
I can't help but feel this could have been avoided had they not placed London and the South in 2 and allowed things like football events to resume in such places.
I read this and I didn't find anything in the article that was particularly new or thought provoking with the exception of the seriously flawed idea, in my view, of using up all the vaccine we have in one go, rather than holding vaccine back for second doses. We know for a fact that the first dose followed by the second dose, 7 days later, has an average 95% efficacy. With just one dose the efficacy rate averages drops to around 52%. This would expose the most vulnerable to a considerable delay in getting an excellent level of protection in exchange for more people getting a far lower level of protection. There is an argument that this is, at least, as good as the efficacy of the flu vaccine but we all know the dangers when drawing comparisons between seasonal flu and this virus. This virus is far and away more hazardous and far more infectious than seasonal flu.
Slightly off topic but when he was in office Blair didn't exactly have the best track record when it comes to following expert advice. The same man deliberately misrepresented intelligence information on " weapons of mass destruction" to obtain Parliamentary approval for the Iraq war. I tend to agree with one of the replies to this article that Blair should stick to what he's good at, giving after dinner speeches for large amounts of cash.
Last edited:
So by that logic going into my work place means I’m going to kill someone then? Or am I only going to kill someone when it’s my own free time? I’m confused? Does covid take time off 8-4 on weekdays?
Going to work is necessary.
I keep reading your comments and all I can think is you are a massive WUM, thats the only logical conclusion possible.
Going to work is necessary so that you can pay your taxes and keep the country steady. Why are you so concerned about yourself? Why don't you have some compassion to how your tax money is spent and wasted?
God. Youre so selfish!!!!
Not really. I have a laptop & a home internet connection..
I’m done with this thread anyway. This place feels like such a bubble at times. Basically everyone just needs to stay at home at all times until the government allows them to go out, except to work of course, that’s fine. Gotcha.
You’re the exact reason a common sense approach doesn’t work as you don’t seem to have any.
I mean, this reads ironically but I would agree that taxes are needed to keep a country steady.
Can't run a country on 0% taxes. Can't run a country on 100% taxess
Everything else for negotiation and optiimsation
Wow.
I worry a bit about these kinds of comments from Blair. Speed first, health effects second is not a reassuring message for many people. It may be the most pragmatic choice but it sends a signal that will alienate people. A lot of his comments suggested he had inside knowledge but then he said this:
That would be great if it was a sterilising vaccine but it doesn’t have great sterilising effects, as far as I know. And presumably changing the dosing schedule would reduce those effects too. And given how little experimentation was done on the scheduling, whatever data we have that suggests we could do things differently will not be particularly robust. It isn’t necessarily wrong but we can’t know enough to know it’s right.
If AstraZeneca is pushed through under political pressure with insufficient evidence justifying it and a radical strategy underpinning its distribution I might reject this vaccine. As Fauci said a month ago, if you have a 90% efficacy one what do you do with the 70%? If you add on top of that a rushed approval due to an unexpected surge and poor vaccine procurement planning then there are enough legitimate barriers to accepting it, IMO. So let’s hope the data looks a lot better and they have explanations for the original outcomes.
And if people refuse to disperse? Open fire?
Calm down Winston
Because we actually need them more than they need us. Despite what they have shouted for five years.
Peston is that kind of daft cnut that doesn’t read to the end of everything, so thinks you need to point it out for important things.
I think it's fair to expect another full national lockdown. I just don't understand why it can't be imposed now rather than wait 2 weeks for it to get worse.
Robert Jenrick made it sound as if there won't be a lockdown at boxing day. Judging by his bbc comments that is
He said there are no immediate plans to widen curbs, but that covid cases are rising.
He said there are no immediate plans to widen curbs, but that covid cases are rising.
That’s how it sounds to meCalm down Winston
I know everyone in this thread thinks I’m some sort of tinfoil hat wearing “scamdemic” type, but I’m actually not. I know it’s very real & ive followed the rules. I just don’t see how we are doing anything other than going around in circles when I’ve been in my office & I see how there’s next to no social distancing, my friends have said similar, my girlfriend works in Morrison’s, she’s said similar, I walk past metrolinks every day & they are hammered. We had media encouraged mass gatherings for protests over the summer, that was fine too. It just seems odd to me that all of that is completely fine but how dare you go to see your friends for a drink.
That’s how it sounds to me
I know everyone in this thread thinks I’m some sort of tinfoil hat wearing “scamdemic” type, but I’m actually not. I know it’s very real & ive followed the rules. I just don’t see how we are doing anything other than going around in circles when I’ve been in my office & I see how there’s next to no social distancing, my friends have said similar, my girlfriend works in Morrison’s, she’s said similar, I walk past metrolinks every day & they are hammered. We had media encouraged mass gatherings for protests over the summer, that was fine too. It just seems odd to me that all of that is completely fine but how dare you go to see your friends for a drink.
The point is that without your job and other jobs the economy would crash and we’d be in a complete wasteland. Same with transport. Unfortunately we need that.
However, if everyone is cavalier with other rules like household mixing, the numbers will spread even more.
Netherlands have done the sensible thing and hopefully many other countries follow suite
Travel is now allowed to them as long as you provide a negative PCR test and quarantine.
This should be the rules globally for general travel, it's utterly baffling it isn't
Travel is now allowed to them as long as you provide a negative PCR test and quarantine.
This should be the rules globally for general travel, it's utterly baffling it isn't