Restrictions

[krw]

The Roman Holiday did not happen.

The weekend in Liverpool went the same way.

The visit to Rye went awry as the hotel burnt down and the relocated
wedding was postponed.

The Ring of Kerry never became unavailable and the first stop in Wales
did not want to open on the relevant evening!

Port and wine in Portugal was cancelled just before it became possible
to go there and come back.

Is anyone aware of anything wrong with Cumbria? Emergency holiday being
booked in record time.

And now the next foreign jaunt to Austria is under threat.

Do any of these overseas places really have a worse virus problem than
we do? I find it hard to believe. But then apparently we cannot count
the number dying accurately; we spend inordinate amounts not marking
exam papers but still everyone gets the wrong grades; the only
Specsavers is in Barnard Castle (that still rankles).

Apparently Grant Shapps is grateful that Hancock is still in the
cabinet. Hancock in turn is grateful that Williamson is a minister
again after getting sacked for (not) leaking. Meanwhile Boris is in a
tent in Scotland.

And the local Chinese restaurants. We were taking the family out last
Friday (10 of us) for a meal. Both local Chinese were not opening until
Monday this week. So we booked an Indian meal instead. Then one of the
Chinese restaurants rang back to say that they would open on Friday if
there were 10 of us. Bit late by then.

I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties and
sixties which (whisper it quietly) killed more in a much smaller
population. And there was none of this nonsense.

Am I missing something?

[Nick Odell]

On Thu, 20 Aug 2020 23:51:42 +0100, krw <***@whitnet.uk> wrote:

<snip>>

Post by krw
Am I missing something?

I was just going to say:

First World Problems, mate. First World Problems

Then, in a delightful mental swerve I remembered a BBC Radio series of
the same name. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0004f67

And guess what? It is still available for listening to on-line.

Spot the The Archers connections....

Nick

[Vicky Ayech]

Post by krw
The Roman Holiday did not happen.
The weekend in Liverpool went the same way.
The visit to Rye went awry as the hotel burnt down and the relocated
wedding was postponed.
The Ring of Kerry never became unavailable and the first stop in Wales
did not want to open on the relevant evening!
Port and wine in Portugal was cancelled just before it became possible
to go there and come back.
Is anyone aware of anything wrong with Cumbria? Emergency holiday being
booked in record time.
And now the next foreign jaunt to Austria is under threat.
Do any of these overseas places really have a worse virus problem than
we do? I find it hard to believe. But then apparently we cannot count
the number dying accurately; we spend inordinate amounts not marking
exam papers but still everyone gets the wrong grades; the only
Specsavers is in Barnard Castle (that still rankles).
Apparently Grant Shapps is grateful that Hancock is still in the
cabinet. Hancock in turn is grateful that Williamson is a minister
again after getting sacked for (not) leaking. Meanwhile Boris is in a
tent in Scotland.
And the local Chinese restaurants. We were taking the family out last
Friday (10 of us) for a meal. Both local Chinese were not opening until
Monday this week. So we booked an Indian meal instead. Then one of the
Chinese restaurants rang back to say that they would open on Friday if
there were 10 of us. Bit late by then.
I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties and
sixties which (whisper it quietly) killed more in a much smaller
population. And there was none of this nonsense.
Am I missing something?

https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/18/bait-switch-how-theyve-changed-the-covid-conversation/

https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/05/5-ways-the-new-normal-is-getting-worse-and-worse/

Ok not quite on topic but sort of round it. And we have had flu
pandemics inthe last 50 years since the sixties and they killed lots
but we didn't have lockdowns.

[Peter]

Post by Vicky Ayech

Post by krw
The Roman Holiday did not happen.
The weekend in Liverpool went the same way.
The visit to Rye went awry as the hotel burnt down and the relocated
wedding was postponed.
The Ring of Kerry never became unavailable and the first stop in Wales
did not want to open on the relevant evening!
Port and wine in Portugal was cancelled just before it became possible
to go there and come back.
Is anyone aware of anything wrong with Cumbria? Emergency holiday being
booked in record time.
And now the next foreign jaunt to Austria is under threat.
Do any of these overseas places really have a worse virus problem than
we do? I find it hard to believe. But then apparently we cannot count
the number dying accurately; we spend inordinate amounts not marking
exam papers but still everyone gets the wrong grades; the only
Specsavers is in Barnard Castle (that still rankles).
Apparently Grant Shapps is grateful that Hancock is still in the
cabinet. Hancock in turn is grateful that Williamson is a minister
again after getting sacked for (not) leaking. Meanwhile Boris is in a
tent in Scotland.
And the local Chinese restaurants. We were taking the family out last
Friday (10 of us) for a meal. Both local Chinese were not opening until
Monday this week. So we booked an Indian meal instead. Then one of the
Chinese restaurants rang back to say that they would open on Friday if
there were 10 of us. Bit late by then.
I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties and
sixties which (whisper it quietly) killed more in a much smaller
population. And there was none of this nonsense.
Am I missing something?

https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/18/bait-switch-how-theyve-changed-the-covid-conversation/

I liked "In New Zealand, the patron saint of coronavirus Jacinda
Ardern..."

The problem is, the Government (and governments generally) don't know
what to do, and governments don't like admitting such things.

Post by Vicky Ayech
https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/05/5-ways-the-new-normal-is-getting-worse-and-worse/
Ok not quite on topic but sort of round it. And we have had flu
pandemics inthe last 50 years since the sixties and they killed lots
but we didn't have lockdowns.

[Chris McMillan]

Post by Vicky Ayech

Post by krw
The Roman Holiday did not happen.
The weekend in Liverpool went the same way.
The visit to Rye went awry as the hotel burnt down and the relocated
wedding was postponed.
The Ring of Kerry never became unavailable and the first stop in Wales
did not want to open on the relevant evening!
Port and wine in Portugal was cancelled just before it became possible
to go there and come back.
Is anyone aware of anything wrong with Cumbria? Emergency holiday being
booked in record time.
And now the next foreign jaunt to Austria is under threat.
Do any of these overseas places really have a worse virus problem than
we do? I find it hard to believe. But then apparently we cannot count
the number dying accurately; we spend inordinate amounts not marking
exam papers but still everyone gets the wrong grades; the only
Specsavers is in Barnard Castle (that still rankles).
Apparently Grant Shapps is grateful that Hancock is still in the
cabinet. Hancock in turn is grateful that Williamson is a minister
again after getting sacked for (not) leaking. Meanwhile Boris is in a
tent in Scotland.
And the local Chinese restaurants. We were taking the family out last
Friday (10 of us) for a meal. Both local Chinese were not opening until
Monday this week. So we booked an Indian meal instead. Then one of the
Chinese restaurants rang back to say that they would open on Friday if
there were 10 of us. Bit late by then.
I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties and
sixties which (whisper it quietly) killed more in a much smaller
population. And there was none of this nonsense.
Am I missing something?

https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/18/bait-switch-how-theyve-changed-the-covid-conversation/
https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/05/5-ways-the-new-normal-is-getting-worse-and-worse/
Ok not quite on topic but sort of round it. And we have had flu
pandemics inthe last 50 years since the sixties and they killed lots
but we didn't have lockdowns.

Oh yes we did!! Only it was called quarantine. It’s what happened every
time boarding school caught an infectious disease. It wasn’t so much in
the xmas and easter terms when we only saw our parents twice, ie every four
weeks, but summer when it was every two weeks. I do remember missing one
xmas party (chicken pox). We were probably just lucky we got home on the
right day, but certainly children did miss starts of terms.

And I once spent four days out of seven confined to a dim room aged 11,
with german measles, on holiday in Ft William. First and only holiday with
my dad after my mum died. Fortunately the landlady had some compassion so
dad could have a breath of air in the evening. Wasn’t allowed to stand
near anyone on the platform coming home.

Sincerely Chris

[Jenny M Benson]

Post by Vicky Ayech
https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/18/bait-switch-how-theyve-changed-the-covid-conversation/

From which I quote:

"New Zealand has had 1600 cases, total, in 5 months. They haven’t had a
reported death since May. But their country is on lockdown and their
democracy on hold."

Could it possibly be that they have so few (?) cases and no reported
deaths *because* they've been and are in lockdown?

[Dumrat]

Post by Vicky Ayech
https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/18/bait-switch-how-theyve-changed-the-covid-conversation/

"New Zealand has had 1600 cases, total, in 5 months. They haven’t had a reported death
since May. But their country is on lockdown and their democracy on hold."
Could it possibly be that they have so few (?) cases and no reported deaths *because*
they've been and are in lockdown?

Erzackerly, Jenny.

I am trying not to go off on a rant about this whole thing whereby people seem to think
that because some governments have reduced lockdown regulations purely for economic
reasons, but with little care for the health of the nation in the midst of a pandemic,
that coronavirus has simply disappeared from their country when they go out shopping or to
bars and restaurants. To lower the normally high tone of UMRA - WTAF is that about?

[Mike]

Post by Dumrat

Post by Vicky Ayech
https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/18/bait-switch-how-theyve-changed-the-covid-conversation/

"New Zealand has had 1600 cases, total, in 5 months. They haven’t had a reported death
since May. But their country is on lockdown and their democracy on hold."
Could it possibly be that they have so few (?) cases and no reported deaths *because*
they've been and are in lockdown?

Erzackerly, Jenny.
I am trying not to go off on a rant about this whole thing whereby people seem to think
that because some governments have reduced lockdown regulations purely for economic
reasons, but with little care for the health of the nation in the midst of a pandemic,
that coronavirus has simply disappeared from their country when they go out shopping or to
bars and restaurants. To lower the normally high tone of UMRA - WTAF is that about?

ISTMT the ones who are the most outraged about the loss of personal freedom
and object to any and all restrictions are often those who don’t wish to
follow the guidelines and seem to feel that there ‘right’ to travel hither
and thither at will is being denied them. Sorry, but were it not for
unrestricted and international travel, would it be likely that Covid-19
would have taken such a hold globally? (Excuse me while I get down from my
sanitized soap box.)

[BrritSki]

Post by Mike

Post by Dumrat

Post by Vicky Ayech
https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/18/bait-switch-how-theyve-changed-the-covid-conversation/

"New Zealand has had 1600 cases, total, in 5 months. They haven’t had a reported death
since May. But their country is on lockdown and their democracy on hold."
Could it possibly be that they have so few (?) cases and no reported deaths *because*
they've been and are in lockdown?

Erzackerly, Jenny.
I am trying not to go off on a rant about this whole thing whereby people seem to think
that because some governments have reduced lockdown regulations purely for economic
reasons, but with little care for the health of the nation in the midst of a pandemic,
that coronavirus has simply disappeared from their country when they go out shopping or to
bars and restaurants. To lower the normally high tone of UMRA - WTAF is that about?

ISTMT the ones who are the most outraged about the loss of personal freedom
and object to any and all restrictions are often those who don’t wish to
follow the guidelines and seem to feel that there ‘right’ to travel hither
and thither at will is being denied them. Sorry, but were it not for
unrestricted and international travel, would it be likely that Covid-19
would have taken such a hold globally? (Excuse me while I get down from my
sanitized soap box.)

So are you going to restrict travel in "normal" times Mike ? If so, how ?

I am not outraged at all by necessary restrictions and will follow
guidelines even where I think time will show they were OTT. There was no
problem doing that for our trip to Italy or our recent holidays in
Norfolk with AGCs. If they change the rules so that we have to
quarantine after our trip to a Greek island that has had 1 death so far
so be it, not really a problem for us - we did it at the start of the
pandemic.

But if there are longer term restrictions "for our own good" then
outrage may well ensue from this quarter...

PS as to this point "some governments have reduced lockdown regulations
purely for economic reasons, but with little care for the health of the
nation in the midst of a pandemic" it is all very well worrying about
the now, but the impacts for the future could well be much more serious,
grave even :/

[Dumrat]

PS  as to this point "some governments have reduced lockdown regulations purely for
economic reasons, but with little care for the health of the nation in the midst of a
pandemic" it is all very well worrying about the now, but the impacts for the future could
well be much more serious, grave even :/
As I typed my original post in response to Jenny, I made a bet with myself that if anyone

were to comment on my remark about economic reasons, it would be you, BrritSki -:D
I appreciate the difficulty of balancing the economic (and mental) health of a country
with the physical health of its population - I just wish the two alternatives weren't
"total lockdown living in abject terror of Coronavirus" and "no lockdown because
Coronavirus is gone" and that there were a middle way which worked. It is mostly the
mentality of those who decide they no longer want to take any precautions for their own or
others' health which gets to me. Sorry, I'm stopping now, my own personal situation is a
bugger at the moment and not looking likely to improve, thanks to those who think
Coronavirus has disappeared/is a conspiracy theory or they don't need to worry about it at
all because it won't get them or their families.

[BrritSki]

Post by Dumrat

PS  as to this point "some governments have reduced lockdown
regulations purely for economic reasons, but with little care for the
health of the nation in the midst of a pandemic" it is all very well
worrying about the now, but the impacts for the future could well be
much more serious, grave even :/
As I typed my original post in response to Jenny, I made a bet with myself that if anyone

were to comment on my remark about economic reasons, it would be you, BrritSki -:D
I appreciate the difficulty of balancing the economic (and mental)
health of a country with the physical health of its population - I just
wish the two alternatives weren't "total lockdown living in abject
terror of Coronavirus" and "no lockdown because Coronavirus is gone" and
that there were a middle way which worked. It is mostly the mentality of
those who decide they no longer want to take any precautions for their
own or others' health which gets to me. Sorry, I'm stopping now, my own
personal situation is a bugger at the moment and not looking likely to
improve, thanks to those who think Coronavirus has disappeared/is a
conspiracy theory or they don't need to worry about it at all because it
won't get them or their families.

Sorry to hear that your personal situation is not good Dumrat.

I don't think that CV has disappeared or that it was a hoax, or that the
measures taken were done with anything other than the best of intentions
in an almost total lack of information at the time.

In fact I think we ARE (in the UK for most of the population anyway)
taking a middle way that works. Yes it needs adjustment from time to
time e.g. as today with local lockdowns and there are some idiots who
flout sensible rules with raves or protests, but on the whole it is
working.

[Dumrat]

<snip me moaning>

I don't think that CV has disappeared or that it was a hoax, or that the measures taken
were done with anything other than the best of intentions in an almost total lack of
information at the time.

My comments about carelessness were not aimed at you at all, Roger, would never imagine
you wouldn't comply with Coronavirus regulations wherever you were.

In fact I think we ARE (in the UK for most of the population anyway) taking a middle way
that works. Yes it needs adjustment from time to time e.g. as today with local lockdowns
and there are some idiots who flout sensible rules with raves or protests, but on the
whole it is working.

I don't know about that at all. Except, look at local lockdowns, because - stupidity and
selfishness. But I'm not there, I'm just reading about it. We're about to go into lockdown
here again, I'm fairly sure, because people don't comprehend that allowing people to go
out and about generally in order to stimulate the economy, doesn't mean the same as not
wearing masks and keeping safe social distancing whilst stimulating the economy.

Desolate in the desert.

[BrritSki]

Post by Dumrat
<snip me moaning>

Post by BrritSki
I don't think that CV has disappeared or that it was a hoax, or that
the measures taken were done with anything other than the best of
intentions in an almost total lack of information at the time.

Indeed, and I didn't take the personally for avoidance of doubt :)

Post by Dumrat
My comments about carelessness were not aimed at you at all, Roger,
would never imagine you wouldn't comply with Coronavirus regulations
wherever you were.

Post by BrritSki
In fact I think we ARE (in the UK for most of the population anyway)
taking a middle way that works. Yes it needs adjustment from time to
time e.g. as today with local lockdowns and there are some idiots who
flout sensible rules with raves or protests, but on the whole it is
working.

I don't know about that at all. Except, look at local lockdowns, because
- stupidity and selfishness. But I'm not there, I'm just reading about
it. We're about to go into lockdown here again, I'm fairly sure, because
people don't comprehend that allowing people to go out and about
generally in order to stimulate the economy, doesn't mean the same as
not wearing masks and keeping safe social distancing whilst stimulating
the economy.
Desolate in the desert.

But in the UK it is not necessarily stupidity and selfishness that have
cause the local lockdown, although that may be the case in some situations.

I don't think that we will have another full lockdown in the UK whatever
happens. It's just too expensive - not just economically or in terms of
mental health but in general health and also in education.

I read somewhere recently an estimate that for every 2 COVID deaths the
lockdown caused 3 deaths by other causes. For instance the news today
about cancer sufferers:
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/saturday-interview-karol-sikora-zr3qxsn6f?shareToken=d0680a6e9e5e996d6c544b4c734ba08a>

[BrritSki]

Post by Dumrat
<snip me moaning>

Post by BrritSki
I don't think that CV has disappeared or that it was a hoax, or that
the measures taken were done with anything other than the best of
intentions in an almost total lack of information at the time.

Indeed, and I didn't take the personally for avoidance of doubt  :)

Ooops, this response should be...

Post by Dumrat
My comments about carelessness were not aimed at you at all, Roger,
would never imagine you wouldn't comply with Coronavirus regulations
wherever you were.

... here !

[Vicky Ayech]

On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 18:03:31 +0100, BrritSki

Post by BrritSki

Post by Dumrat
<snip me moaning>

Post by BrritSki
I don't think that CV has disappeared or that it was a hoax, or that
the measures taken were done with anything other than the best of
intentions in an almost total lack of information at the time.

Indeed, and I didn't take the personally for avoidance of doubt  :)

Ooops, this response should be...

Post by Dumrat
My comments about carelessness were not aimed at you at all, Roger,
would never imagine you wouldn't comply with Coronavirus regulations
wherever you were.

... here !

https://www.gransnet.com/forums/coronavirus/1283562-Your-opinion-on-reporting-of-the-pandemic?utm_source=newsletter_gransnetdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=22/08/2020&utm_term=%22AIBU+to+find+this+aggravating+and+rude%3F%22

"for the eight week running the UK deaths have been below the five
year average."

[Sam Plusnet]

Post by Vicky Ayech
"for the eight week running the UK deaths have been below the five
year average."

Bring back a proper amount of death!

P.S. If you loosen restrictions and cases do rise, the increased death
rate kicks in some time later - so we need to be careful how we handle
the numbers.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

Post by Sam Plusnet

Post by Vicky Ayech
"for the eight week running the UK deaths have been below the five
year average."

Bring back a proper amount of death!
P.S. If you loosen restrictions and cases do rise, the increased death
rate kicks in some time later - so we need to be careful how we handle
the numbers.

Yes, about 4-5 weeks. This is the problem - both a large proportion of
the public, and lots of the politicians, don't have the patience to wait
to see whether something has had an effect or not - so make the next
change too soon, with the result that when there _are_ changes, it's
difficult - if not impossible - to determine which change caused what.

[Mike]

Post by Sam Plusnet

Post by Vicky Ayech
"for the eight week running the UK deaths have been below the five
year average."

Bring back a proper amount of death!

That could be fatal!

[krw]

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, about 4-5 weeks.

Which of course proves that the lockdown had no impact on the max number
of deaths as the dates of the two are too close together.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

Post by krw

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, about 4-5 weeks.

Which of course proves that the lockdown had no impact on the max
number of deaths as the dates of the two are too close together.

Peak deaths (looking at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deaths) looks to
have been about 10 April; when was lockdown?

[Anne B]

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by krw

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, about 4-5 weeks.

Which of course proves that the lockdown had no impact on the max
number of deaths as the dates of the two are too close together.

Peak deaths (looking at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deaths) looks to
have been about 10 April; when was lockdown?

24 March, but it was announced about a week before then. So it was about
3 weeks before peak deaths.

Anne B

[John Ashby]

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by krw

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, about 4-5 weeks.

Which of course proves that the lockdown had no impact on the max
number of deaths as the dates of the two are too close together.

Peak deaths (looking at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deaths) looks to
have been about 10 April; when was lockdown?

March 23rd IIRC, though measures were being taken before (e.g.school
closures). Your 4-5 weeks is probably too long, quarantine suggests <2
weeks to show infection, I don't have a good feel for time from
developing symptoms to death.

john

[Jim Easterbrook]

Post by John Ashby

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by krw

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, about 4-5 weeks.

Which of course proves that the lockdown had no impact on the max
number of deaths as the dates of the two are too close together.

Peak deaths (looking at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deaths) looks
to have been about 10 April; when was lockdown?

March 23rd IIRC, though measures were being taken before (e.g.school
closures). Your 4-5 weeks is probably too long, quarantine suggests <2
weeks to show infection, I don't have a good feel for time from
developing symptoms to death.

It can be several months. Which is why the new measure "28 days from
first symptoms" is wrong. If someone gets Covid, struggles with it for
months, then finally succumbs, that's surely a Covid death, even if the
coup de grace was heart failure or similar.

[John Ashby]

Post by Jim Easterbrook

Post by John Ashby

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by krw

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, about 4-5 weeks.

Which of course proves that the lockdown had no impact on the max
number of deaths as the dates of the two are too close together.

Peak deaths (looking at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deaths) looks
to have been about 10 April; when was lockdown?

March 23rd IIRC, though measures were being taken before (e.g.school
closures). Your 4-5 weeks is probably too long, quarantine suggests <2
weeks to show infection, I don't have a good feel for time from
developing symptoms to death.

It can be several months. Which is why the new measure "28 days from
first symptoms" is wrong. If someone gets Covid, struggles with it for
months, then finally succumbs, that's surely a Covid death, even if the
coup de grace was heart failure or similar.

Which takes us back to the ONS figure which relies on COVID being
mentioned on the death certificate. In your hypothetical principal cause
of death would be heart failure with a secondary of complications of
COVID-19.

john

[Mike]

Post by Jim Easterbrook

Post by John Ashby

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by krw

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, about 4-5 weeks.

Which of course proves that the lockdown had no impact on the max
number of deaths as the dates of the two are too close together.

Peak deaths (looking at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deaths) looks
to have been about 10 April; when was lockdown?

March 23rd IIRC, though measures were being taken before (e.g.school
closures). Your 4-5 weeks is probably too long, quarantine suggests <2
weeks to show infection, I don't have a good feel for time from
developing symptoms to death.

It can be several months. Which is why the new measure "28 days from
first symptoms" is wrong. If someone gets Covid, struggles with it for
months, then finally succumbs, that's surely a Covid death, even if the
coup de grace was heart failure or similar.

‘coup de grace’? Nah.... ours is far too wet to even think of getting the
mower out of the shed!

[Vicky Ayech]

On 24 Aug 2020 19:53:04 GMT, Jim Easterbrook

Post by Jim Easterbrook

Post by John Ashby

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by krw

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, about 4-5 weeks.

Which of course proves that the lockdown had no impact on the max
number of deaths as the dates of the two are too close together.

Peak deaths (looking at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deaths) looks
to have been about 10 April; when was lockdown?

March 23rd IIRC, though measures were being taken before (e.g.school
closures). Your 4-5 weeks is probably too long, quarantine suggests <2
weeks to show infection, I don't have a good feel for time from
developing symptoms to death.

It can be several months. Which is why the new measure "28 days from
first symptoms" is wrong. If someone gets Covid, struggles with it for
months, then finally succumbs, that's surely a Covid death, even if the
coup de grace was heart failure or similar.

Dr Jenny Harries, England's deputy chief medical officer, told Sky
News on Monday the risk of catching seasonal flu or being involved in
a road accident is "higher" for children going to school than
contracting coronavirus.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-pm-warns-pupils-life-chances-will-suffer-if-they-dont-go-back-to-school-12055251

[Mike]

Post by Vicky Ayech
On 24 Aug 2020 19:53:04 GMT, Jim Easterbrook

Post by Jim Easterbrook

Post by John Ashby

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by krw

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, about 4-5 weeks.

Which of course proves that the lockdown had no impact on the max
number of deaths as the dates of the two are too close together.

Peak deaths (looking at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deaths) looks
to have been about 10 April; when was lockdown?

March 23rd IIRC, though measures were being taken before (e.g.school
closures). Your 4-5 weeks is probably too long, quarantine suggests <2
weeks to show infection, I don't have a good feel for time from
developing symptoms to death.

It can be several months. Which is why the new measure "28 days from
first symptoms" is wrong. If someone gets Covid, struggles with it for
months, then finally succumbs, that's surely a Covid death, even if the
coup de grace was heart failure or similar.

Dr Jenny Harries, England's deputy chief medical officer, told Sky
News on Monday the risk of catching seasonal flu or being involved in
a road accident is "higher" for children going to school than
contracting coronavirus.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-pm-warns-pupils-life-chances-will-suffer-if-they-dont-go-back-to-school-12055251

So one might lower the risk by keeping children at home rather than expose
them to increased risk of a road accident going to school - err.... would
they be at increased risk of contracting other nasties (including Covid-19)
whilst at home I wonder???

[Sam Plusnet]

Post by Vicky Ayech
On 24 Aug 2020 19:53:04 GMT, Jim Easterbrook

Post by Jim Easterbrook

Post by John Ashby

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by krw

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, about 4-5 weeks.

Which of course proves that the lockdown had no impact on the max
number of deaths as the dates of the two are too close together.

Peak deaths (looking at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deaths) looks
to have been about 10 April; when was lockdown?

March 23rd IIRC, though measures were being taken before (e.g.school
closures). Your 4-5 weeks is probably too long, quarantine suggests <2
weeks to show infection, I don't have a good feel for time from
developing symptoms to death.

It can be several months. Which is why the new measure "28 days from
first symptoms" is wrong. If someone gets Covid, struggles with it for
months, then finally succumbs, that's surely a Covid death, even if the
coup de grace was heart failure or similar.

Dr Jenny Harries, England's deputy chief medical officer, told Sky
News on Monday the risk of catching seasonal flu or being involved in
a road accident is "higher" for children going to school than
contracting coronavirus.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-pm-warns-pupils-life-chances-will-suffer-if-they-dont-go-back-to-school-12055251

You have to read that carefully.

Their personal risk of "Harm" may be greater - since children who do
contract C-19 are _much_ less likely to suffer serious illness[1] as a
result.

They do however become an active vector, able to pass that infection on
to someone else (or to lots of someone elses) who are far more at risk.

[1] Since that risk is not zero (some children do suffer badly from
C-19) Parents will have to decide if they feel their child will be one
of the lucky ones.

[krw]

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by krw

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Yes, about 4-5 weeks.

Which of course proves that the lockdown had no impact on the max
number of deaths as the dates of the two are too close together.

Peak deaths (looking at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deaths) looks to
have been about 10 April; when was lockdown?

23 march

[krw]

Post by Sam Plusnet

Post by Vicky Ayech
"for the eight week running the UK deaths have been below the five
year average."

Bring back a proper amount of death!
P.S.  If you loosen restrictions and cases do rise, the increased death
rate kicks in some time later - so we need to be careful how we handle
the numbers.

It is interesting now that we are testing nearly 200k a day that the
number of new cases is going up and the number entering hospital is such
a small proportion (although I accept the inevitable time lag between
the two).

[Peter]

Post by Dumrat
<snip me moaning>

Post by BrritSki
I don't think that CV has disappeared or that it was a hoax, or that
the measures taken were done with anything other than the best of
intentions in an almost total lack of information at the time.

Indeed, and I didn't take the personally for avoidance of doubt  :)

Post by Dumrat
My comments about carelessness were not aimed at you at all, Roger,
would never imagine you wouldn't comply with Coronavirus regulations
wherever you were.

Post by BrritSki
In fact I think we ARE (in the UK for most of the population anyway)
taking a middle way that works. Yes it needs adjustment from time to
time e.g. as today with local lockdowns and there are some idiots who
flout sensible rules with raves or protests, but on the whole it is
working.

I don't know about that at all. Except, look at local lockdowns,
because - stupidity and selfishness. But I'm not there, I'm just
reading about it. We're about to go into lockdown here again, I'm
fairly sure, because people don't comprehend that allowing people to
go out and about generally in order to stimulate the economy, doesn't
mean the same as not wearing masks and keeping safe social distancing
whilst stimulating the economy.
Desolate in the desert.

But in the UK it is not necessarily stupidity and selfishness that have
cause the local lockdown, although that may be the case in some situations.
I don't think that we will have another full lockdown in the UK whatever
happens. It's just too expensive - not just economically or in terms of
mental health but in general health and also in education.
I read somewhere recently an estimate that for every 2 COVID deaths the
lockdown caused 3 deaths by other causes. For instance the news today
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/saturday-interview-karol-sikora-zr3qxsn6f?shareToken=d0680a6e9e5e996d6c544b4c734ba08a>

I wonder if any lives were saved, for example because of fewer road
accidents.

[John Ashby]

Post by Peter

Post by Dumrat
<snip me moaning>

Post by BrritSki
I don't think that CV has disappeared or that it was a hoax, or that
the measures taken were done with anything other than the best of
intentions in an almost total lack of information at the time.

Indeed, and I didn't take the personally for avoidance of doubt  :)

Post by Dumrat
My comments about carelessness were not aimed at you at all, Roger,
would never imagine you wouldn't comply with Coronavirus regulations
wherever you were.

Post by BrritSki
In fact I think we ARE (in the UK for most of the population anyway)
taking a middle way that works. Yes it needs adjustment from time to
time e.g. as today with local lockdowns and there are some idiots
who flout sensible rules with raves or protests, but on the whole it
is working.

I don't know about that at all. Except, look at local lockdowns,
because - stupidity and selfishness. But I'm not there, I'm just
reading about it. We're about to go into lockdown here again, I'm
fairly sure, because people don't comprehend that allowing people to
go out and about generally in order to stimulate the economy, doesn't
mean the same as not wearing masks and keeping safe social distancing
whilst stimulating the economy.
Desolate in the desert.

But in the UK it is not necessarily stupidity and selfishness that
have cause the local lockdown, although that may be the case in some
situations.
I don't think that we will have another full lockdown in the UK
whatever happens. It's just too expensive - not just economically or
in terms of mental health but in general health and also in education.
I read somewhere recently an estimate that for every 2 COVID deaths
the lockdown caused 3 deaths by other causes. For instance the news
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/saturday-interview-karol-sikora-zr3qxsn6f?shareToken=d0680a6e9e5e996d6c544b4c734ba08a>

I wonder if any lives were saved, for example because of fewer road
accidents.

Also fewer fights in pubs and clubs.

john

[krw]

Post by Peter
I wonder if any lives were saved, for example because of fewer road
accidents.

If you die of a road accident having tested positive for the virus you
still died of the virus.

[Mike]

Post by krw

Post by Peter
I wonder if any lives were saved, for example because of fewer road
accidents.

If you die of a road accident having tested positive for the virus you
still died of the virus.

What’s the last thing that goes through the mind of a fly when it meets the
windscreen of a car traveling at 70 mph?

[steveski]

Post by Mike

Post by krw

Post by Peter
I wonder if any lives were saved, for example because of fewer road
accidents.

If you die of a road accident having tested positive for the virus you
still died of the virus.

What’s the last thing that goes through the mind of a fly when it meets
the windscreen of a car traveling at 70 mph?

Its bum.

[Mike]

Post by steveski

Post by Mike

Post by krw

Post by Peter
I wonder if any lives were saved, for example because of fewer road
accidents.

If you die of a road accident having tested positive for the virus you
still died of the virus.

What’s the last thing that goes through the mind of a fly when it meets
the windscreen of a car traveling at 70 mph?

Its bum.

Have this bar of virtual chocolate!

[steveski]

Post by Mike

Post by steveski

Post by Mike

Post by krw

Post by Peter
I wonder if any lives were saved, for example because of fewer road
accidents.

If you die of a road accident having tested positive for the virus
you still died of the virus.

What’s the last thing that goes through the mind of a fly when it
meets the windscreen of a car traveling at 70 mph?

Its bum.

Have this bar of virtual chocolate!

Thank you, Mike :-)

[Steve Hague]

Post by Mike

Post by krw

Post by Peter
I wonder if any lives were saved, for example because of fewer road
accidents.

If you die of a road accident having tested positive for the virus you
still died of the virus.

What’s the last thing that goes through the mind of a fly when it meets the
windscreen of a car traveling at 70 mph?

I wish I was a walk.

[John Ashby]

Post by krw

Post by Peter
I wonder if any lives were saved, for example because of fewer road
accidents.

If you die of a road accident having tested positive for the virus you
still died of the virus.

That's why the Office of National Statistics figures are a better
indicator than the daily figures. But even with the daily figures the
thing to look at is less the absolute values but the trends (especially
trends in the 7-day moving average).

john

[Anne B]

Post by krw

Post by Peter
I wonder if any lives were saved, for example because of fewer road
accidents.

If you die of a road accident having tested positive for the virus you
still died of the virus.

Actually no, the careful phrase they use is 'died **with** the virus',
which is, as you point out, a slightly different matter.

Anne B

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 at 18:01:52, BrritSki <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
[]

Post by BrritSki
I don't think that we will have another full lockdown in the UK
whatever happens. It's just too expensive - not just economically or in
terms of mental health but in general health and also in education.

Agreed, unless it's clear that it's rising out of control, as it looked
as if it was in March.

Post by BrritSki
I read somewhere recently an estimate that for every 2 COVID deaths the
lockdown caused 3 deaths by other causes. For instance the news today
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/saturday-interview-karol-sikora-zr3q
xsn6f?shareToken=d0680a6e9e5e996d6c544b4c734ba08a>

The thing that _nobody_ can tell - because you can't count what isn't
there - is how many deaths it _prevented_. The elephant-powder question.

[Penny]

On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 11:05:49 +0100, BrritSki <***@gmail.com>
scrawled in the dust...

Post by BrritSki
In fact I think we ARE (in the UK for most of the population anyway)
taking a middle way that works. Yes it needs adjustment from time to
time e.g. as today with local lockdowns and there are some idiots who
flout sensible rules with raves or protests, but on the whole it is
working.

Um, in what way is it working?
However you count and measure things (and many of the stats reported by the
government have been demonstrated to be flat lies), the figures are not
good in the UK.

[BrritSki]

Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...

Post by BrritSki
In fact I think we ARE (in the UK for most of the population anyway)
taking a middle way that works. Yes it needs adjustment from time to
time e.g. as today with local lockdowns and there are some idiots who
flout sensible rules with raves or protests, but on the whole it is
working.

Um, in what way is it working?
However you count and measure things (and many of the stats reported by the
government have been demonstrated to be flat lies), the figures are not
good in the UK.

We certainly didn't do well at the start, but our infection and death
rates now are on a par with Germany and Italy and much better than Spain
and France.

That to me means it is working.

[Mike]

Post by BrritSki

Post by Mike

Post by Dumrat

Post by Vicky Ayech
https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/18/bait-switch-how-theyve-changed-the-covid-conversation/

"New Zealand has had 1600 cases, total, in 5 months. They haven’t had a reported death
since May. But their country is on lockdown and their democracy on hold."
Could it possibly be that they have so few (?) cases and no reported deaths *because*
they've been and are in lockdown?

Erzackerly, Jenny.
I am trying not to go off on a rant about this whole thing whereby people seem to think
that because some governments have reduced lockdown regulations purely for economic
reasons, but with little care for the health of the nation in the midst of a pandemic,
that coronavirus has simply disappeared from their country when they go
out shopping or to
bars and restaurants. To lower the normally high
tone of UMRA - WTAF is that about?

ISTMT the ones who are the most outraged about the loss of personal freedom
and object to any and all restrictions are often those who don’t wish to
follow the guidelines and seem to feel that there ‘right’ to travel hither
and thither at will is being denied them. Sorry, but were it not for
unrestricted and international travel, would it be likely that Covid-19
would have taken such a hold globally? (Excuse me while I get down from my
sanitized soap box.)

So are you going to restrict travel in "normal" times Mike ? If so, how ?
I am not outraged at all by necessary restrictions and will follow
guidelines even where I think time will show they were OTT. There was no
problem doing that for our trip to Italy or our recent holidays in
Norfolk with AGCs. If they change the rules so that we have to
quarantine after our trip to a Greek island that has had 1 death so far
so be it, not really a problem for us - we did it at the start of the
pandemic.
But if there are longer term restrictions "for our own good" then
outrage may well ensue from this quarter...
PS as to this point "some governments have reduced lockdown regulations
purely for economic reasons, but with little care for the health of the
nation in the midst of a pandemic" it is all very well worrying about
the now, but the impacts for the future could well be much more serious,
grave even :/

I too have travelled beyond the UK., I have flown; to and from Düsseldorf
in the early 90’s and stayed with friends who had stayed with us when we
hosted a youth orchestra from there, which Reading is twinned with.
Therefore, I too have contributed in some small way to such risks. ‘Normal’
times may not return in some years as I understand it and I don’t think
policies in this regard are likely to be in my hands. No doubt my feelings
are also biased slightly as I live under a very busy flight path and
adjacent to very busy roads too. At one time, there was a restriction on
currency that could be taken on holiday - this may have restricted
holidaying but didn’t actually stop it though - I dare say ‘inducements’ to
travel less would not be greeted with open arms but, pollution in the
atmosphere plus noise pollution in the air and on the roads would surely be
of benefit to all.

[Mike]

Post by Mike

Post by BrritSki

Post by Mike

Post by Dumrat

Post by Vicky Ayech
https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/18/bait-switch-how-theyve-changed-the-covid-conversation/

"New Zealand has had 1600 cases, total, in 5 months. They haven’t had a reported death
since May. But their country is on lockdown and their democracy on hold."
Could it possibly be that they have so few (?) cases and no reported deaths *because*
they've been and are in lockdown?

Erzackerly, Jenny.
I am trying not to go off on a rant about this whole thing whereby people seem to think
that because some governments have reduced lockdown regulations purely for economic
reasons, but with little care for the health of the nation in the midst of a pandemic,
that coronavirus has simply disappeared from their country when they go
out shopping or to
bars and restaurants. To lower the normally high
tone of UMRA - WTAF is that about?

ISTMT the ones who are the most outraged about the loss of personal freedom
and object to any and all restrictions are often those who don’t wish to
follow the guidelines and seem to feel that there ‘right’ to travel hither
and thither at will is being denied them. Sorry, but were it not for
unrestricted and international travel, would it be likely that Covid-19
would have taken such a hold globally? (Excuse me while I get down from my
sanitized soap box.)

So are you going to restrict travel in "normal" times Mike ? If so, how ?
I am not outraged at all by necessary restrictions and will follow
guidelines even where I think time will show they were OTT. There was no
problem doing that for our trip to Italy or our recent holidays in
Norfolk with AGCs. If they change the rules so that we have to
quarantine after our trip to a Greek island that has had 1 death so far
so be it, not really a problem for us - we did it at the start of the
pandemic.
But if there are longer term restrictions "for our own good" then
outrage may well ensue from this quarter...
PS as to this point "some governments have reduced lockdown regulations
purely for economic reasons, but with little care for the health of the
nation in the midst of a pandemic" it is all very well worrying about
the now, but the impacts for the future could well be much more serious,
grave even :/

I too have travelled beyond the UK., I have flown; to and from Düsseldorf
in the early 90’s and stayed with friends who had stayed with us when we
hosted a youth orchestra from there, which Reading is twinned with.
Therefore, I too have contributed in some small way to such risks. ‘Normal’
times may not return in some years as I understand it and I don’t think
policies in this regard are likely to be in my hands. No doubt my feelings
are also biased slightly as I live under a very busy flight path and
adjacent to very busy roads too. At one time, there was a restriction on
currency that could be taken on holiday - this may have restricted
holidaying but didn’t actually stop it though - I dare say ‘inducements’ to
travel less would not be greeted with open arms but, pollution in the
atmosphere plus noise pollution in the air and on the roads would surely be
of benefit to all.

I mean ‘a reduction in pollution’ of course!

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 at 09:25:03, Vicky Ayech <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
[]

Post by Vicky Ayech
https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/18/bait-switch-how-theyve-changed-the-c
ovid-conversation/
https://off-guardian.org/2020/08/05/5-ways-the-new-normal-is-getting-wor
se-and-worse/
Ok not quite on topic but sort of round it. And we have had flu
pandemics inthe last 50 years since the sixties and they killed lots
but we didn't have lockdowns.

Both those articles make me rather angry.

The first one, while it does have some valid points about how various
organisations/governments/whatever are taking advantage to pursue their
freedom-limiting and power-grabbing agendas, does whatever the opposite
of scaremongering is over the virus. However virulent or otherwise it
is, it _is_ real - so when someone starts to talk about whether they
"believe in the virus", I tend to give them as much credence as someone
who talks about whether they believe in gravity.

The second one is just bad science and journalism; infuriating because
it's time-consuming to refute the examples given.

What is this "off-guardian" anyway?

[Tony Smith Gloucestershire]

Post by krw
The Roman Holiday did not happen.
The weekend in Liverpool went the same way.
The visit to Rye went awry as the hotel burnt down and the relocated
wedding was postponed.
The Ring of Kerry never became unavailable and the first stop in Wales
did not want to open on the relevant evening!
Port and wine in Portugal was cancelled just before it became possible
to go there and come back.
Is anyone aware of anything wrong with Cumbria? Emergency holiday being
booked in record time.
And now the next foreign jaunt to Austria is under threat.

Similar story here, but we have just booked for Orkney in August 2021

BTW, the Ring of Kerry is appalling in the rain. I got as far as the Gallarus Oratory (which is waterproof) and turned back.

[krw]

On 21/8/20 12:13, Tony Smith Gloucestershire wrote; my response is lower

Post by Tony Smith Gloucestershire

Post by krw
The Roman Holiday did not happen.
The weekend in Liverpool went the same way.
The visit to Rye went awry as the hotel burnt down and the relocated
wedding was postponed.
The Ring of Kerry never became unavailable and the first stop in Wales
did not want to open on the relevant evening!
Port and wine in Portugal was cancelled just before it became possible
to go there and come back.
Is anyone aware of anything wrong with Cumbria? Emergency holiday being
booked in record time.
And now the next foreign jaunt to Austria is under threat.

Similar story here, but we have just booked for Orkney in August 2021
BTW, the Ring of Kerry is appalling in the rain. I got as far as the Gallarus Oratory (which is waterproof) and turned back.

Current plans are

IoM (ha ha) end October

Liverpool in November / December

Austria / Italy (ha ha) December / January

Rome March

Bourdeaux river cruise March / April

Newbiggin on Sea May or June

Ireland September

Portugal September / October

Anyone taking bets on how many will actually happen?

[Chris McMillan]

Post by krw
On 21/8/20 12:13, Tony Smith Gloucestershire wrote; my response is lower

Post by Tony Smith Gloucestershire

Post by krw
The Roman Holiday did not happen.
The weekend in Liverpool went the same way.
The visit to Rye went awry as the hotel burnt down and the relocated
wedding was postponed.
The Ring of Kerry never became unavailable and the first stop in Wales
did not want to open on the relevant evening!
Port and wine in Portugal was cancelled just before it became possible
to go there and come back.
Is anyone aware of anything wrong with Cumbria? Emergency holiday being
booked in record time.
And now the next foreign jaunt to Austria is under threat.

Similar story here, but we have just booked for Orkney in August 2021
BTW, the Ring of Kerry is appalling in the rain. I got as far as the
Gallarus Oratory (which is waterproof) and turned back.

Current plans are
IoM (ha ha) end October
Liverpool in November / December
Austria / Italy (ha ha) December / January
Rome March
Bourdeaux river cruise March / April
Newbiggin on Sea May or June
Ireland September
Portugal September / October
Anyone taking bets on how many will actually happen?

Some of us don’t expect to be leaving Woodley or Earley to go further than
Reading town centre and the RBH (post bank hol) until vaccinations are on
offer as we’ve no access to a car.
My railcard will have run out long before it sees a train again.

We’re the have nots.

Sincerely Chris

[Tony Smith Gloucestershire]

Post by Tony Smith Gloucestershire
BTW, the Ring of Kerry is appalling in the rain. I got as far as the Gallarus Oratory (which is waterproof) and turned back.

Not that the Gallarus Oratory is on the Ring of Kerry, but had the weather been decent I would have seen them both that day.

[Chris McMillan]

Post by krw
The Roman Holiday did not happen.
The weekend in Liverpool went the same way.
The visit to Rye went awry as the hotel burnt down and the relocated
wedding was postponed.
The Ring of Kerry never became unavailable and the first stop in Wales
did not want to open on the relevant evening!
Port and wine in Portugal was cancelled just before it became possible
to go there and come back.
Is anyone aware of anything wrong with Cumbria? Emergency holiday being
booked in record time.
And now the next foreign jaunt to Austria is under threat.
Do any of these overseas places really have a worse virus problem than
we do? I find it hard to believe. But then apparently we cannot count
the number dying accurately; we spend inordinate amounts not marking
exam papers but still everyone gets the wrong grades; the only
Specsavers is in Barnard Castle (that still rankles).
Apparently Grant Shapps is grateful that Hancock is still in the
cabinet. Hancock in turn is grateful that Williamson is a minister
again after getting sacked for (not) leaking. Meanwhile Boris is in a
tent in Scotland.
And the local Chinese restaurants. We were taking the family out last
Friday (10 of us) for a meal. Both local Chinese were not opening until
Monday this week. So we booked an Indian meal instead. Then one of the
Chinese restaurants rang back to say that they would open on Friday if
there were 10 of us. Bit late by then.
I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties and
sixties which (whisper it quietly) killed more in a much smaller
population. And there was none of this nonsense.
Am I missing something?

Cumbria? Too many people behaving badly and not going prepared for
climbing the fells thus stretching the volunteer rescuers reserves. A piece
we heard last week which was someone shadowing a rescuer for a short
stretch and then a round up if how many rescues were done in that one day.
Ally’s our Cumbrian umrat.

Sincerely Chris

[krw]

Post by Chris McMillan
Too many people behaving badly and not going prepared for
climbing the fells

I have no intention of climbing any fells. Merely eating in the nice
collection of restaurants which I am sure are in need of customers.

[Dumrat]

On 21/08/2020 02:51, krw wrote:
<snip litany of lost hols>
We're trying to move countries in the middle of this pandemic. Well nigh impossible, it
seems. Our future's horrendously uncertain.

I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties and sixties which
(whisper it quietly) killed more in a much smaller population.  And there was none of this
nonsense.
Am I missing something?

The fact that there is far more international travel nowadays, so the virus can spread
worldwide far more quickly? Or is that too obvious?

[John Ashby]

Post by Dumrat
<snip litany of lost hols>
We're trying to move countries in the middle of this pandemic. Well nigh
impossible, it seems. Our future's horrendously uncertain.

Post by krw
I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties and
sixties which (whisper it quietly) killed more in a much smaller
population.  And there was none of this nonsense.
Am I missing something?

The fact that there is far more international travel nowadays, so the
virus can spread worldwide far more quickly? Or is that too obvious?

Also that if fewer people are dying this time round that may be due to
the actions taken that you refer to as "nonsense".

john

[Dumrat]

Post by Dumrat
<snip litany of lost hols>
We're trying to move countries in the middle of this pandemic. Well nigh impossible, it
seems. Our future's horrendously uncertain.

I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties and sixties which
(whisper it quietly) killed more in a much smaller population.  And there was none of
this nonsense.
Am I missing something?

The fact that there is far more international travel nowadays, so the virus can spread
worldwide far more quickly? Or is that too obvious?

Also that if fewer people are dying this time round that may be due to the actions taken
that you refer to as "nonsense".

Good point, well made, John.

[krw]

Post by John Ashby

Post by Dumrat
<snip litany of lost hols>
We're trying to move countries in the middle of this pandemic. Well
nigh impossible, it seems. Our future's horrendously uncertain.

Post by krw
I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties and
sixties which (whisper it quietly) killed more in a much smaller
population.  And there was none of this nonsense.
Am I missing something?

The fact that there is far more international travel nowadays, so the
virus can spread worldwide far more quickly? Or is that too obvious?

Also that if fewer people are dying this time round that may be due to
the actions taken that you refer to as "nonsense".
john

Sadly cannot agree. The government were incompetent and got led up the
garden path and over the cliff edge. £2tr of debt is just unbelievable.

[John Ashby]

Post by John Ashby

Post by Dumrat
<snip litany of lost hols>
We're trying to move countries in the middle of this pandemic. Well
nigh impossible, it seems. Our future's horrendously uncertain.

Post by krw
I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties
and sixties which (whisper it quietly) killed more in a much smaller
population.  And there was none of this nonsense.
Am I missing something?

The fact that there is far more international travel nowadays, so the
virus can spread worldwide far more quickly? Or is that too obvious?

Also that if fewer people are dying this time round that may be due to
the actions taken that you refer to as "nonsense".
john

Sadly cannot agree.  The government were incompetent and got led up the
garden path and over the cliff edge.  £2tr of debt is just unbelievable.

I think we can agree on incompetence, also on being (un)prepared for the
wrong pandemic (which is why countries with recent experience of
coronaviruse epidemics such as SARS and MERS generally fared better).
They dithered and went late, but when they did introduce strong measures
they did turn the tide. To see the effect of not introducing lockdowns,
strict distancing, masks, etc. look at the case rates in various US states.

The debt (if it can be said to really exist, which is moot) may be a
problem in the medium future, but not incurring it would/might have
produced a much larger immediate problem in the economy through illness,
death, unemployment, bankruptcy and so forth.

john

[Peter]

Post by John Ashby

Post by John Ashby

Post by Dumrat
<snip litany of lost hols>
We're trying to move countries in the middle of this pandemic. Well
nigh impossible, it seems. Our future's horrendously uncertain.

Post by krw
I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties
and sixties which (whisper it quietly) killed more in a much
smaller population.  And there was none of this nonsense.
Am I missing something?

The fact that there is far more international travel nowadays, so
the virus can spread worldwide far more quickly? Or is that too
obvious?

Also that if fewer people are dying this time round that may be due
to the actions taken that you refer to as "nonsense".
john

Sadly cannot agree.  The government were incompetent and got led up
the garden path and over the cliff edge.  £2tr of debt is just
unbelievable.

I think we can agree on incompetence, also on being (un)prepared for the
wrong pandemic (which is why countries with recent experience of
coronaviruse epidemics such as SARS and MERS generally fared better).

Which reminds me... there is yet no vaccine for SARS and there is yet no
vaccine for MERS and there is yet no vaccine for the common cold. So
maybe there won't be a vaccine for CoVid-19.

If one is produced and it comes from Russia, we won't see it. The
Russians will give it away (as a PR exercise) but the UK Government will
be too proud to accept the offer.

Post by John Ashby
They dithered and went late, but when they did introduce strong measures
they did turn the tide. To see the effect of not introducing lockdowns,
strict distancing, masks, etc. look at the case rates in various US states.
The debt (if it can be said to really exist, which is moot) may be a
problem in the medium future, but not incurring it would/might have
produced a much larger immediate problem in the economy through illness,
death, unemployment, bankruptcy and so forth.
john

[Sam Plusnet]

Post by John Ashby

Post by John Ashby

Post by Dumrat
<snip litany of lost hols>
We're trying to move countries in the middle of this pandemic. Well
nigh impossible, it seems. Our future's horrendously uncertain.

Post by krw
I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties
and sixties which (whisper it quietly) killed more in a much
smaller population.  And there was none of this nonsense.
Am I missing something?

The fact that there is far more international travel nowadays, so
the virus can spread worldwide far more quickly? Or is that too
obvious?

Also that if fewer people are dying this time round that may be due
to the actions taken that you refer to as "nonsense".
john

Sadly cannot agree.  The government were incompetent and got led up
the garden path and over the cliff edge.  £2tr of debt is just
unbelievable.

I think we can agree on incompetence, also on being (un)prepared for the
wrong pandemic (which is why countries with recent experience of
coronaviruse epidemics such as SARS and MERS generally fared better).
They dithered and went late, but when they did introduce strong measures
they did turn the tide. To see the effect of not introducing lockdowns,
strict distancing, masks, etc. look at the case rates in various US states.
The debt (if it can be said to really exist, which is moot) may be a
problem in the medium future, but not incurring it would/might have
produced a much larger immediate problem in the economy through illness,
death, unemployment, bankruptcy and so forth.

Sweden invites comparison with Norway and Denmark in that the former
kept its economy open and rather hoped it would go away, whilst Norway &
Denmark introduced strict measures at an early stage.
It seems that (per capita) Sweden has many more cases whilst its economy
has done little better than its neighbours.

[BrritSki]

Post by Sam Plusnet
Sweden invites comparison with Norway and Denmark in that the former
kept its economy open and rather hoped it would go away, whilst Norway &
Denmark introduced strict measures at an early stage.
It seems that (per capita) Sweden has many more cases whilst its economy
has done little better than its neighbours.

Nobody can make a judgement about who did well and vice versa until the
pandemic is over which is at best months away. We are seeing increases
in rates of infections in many countries that have been doing well such
as Germany.

Sweden has some factors that made their experience worse such as letting
it in to their care homes much as we did. AIUI their GDP contraction was
close to half what Denmark's was. Denmark also eased their lockdown much
earlier than we did. Schools went back there in Apris I believe.

[Steve Hague]

Post by krw
I hate to say it but I lived through flu epidemics in the fifties and
sixties which (whisper it quietly) killed more in a much smaller
population.  And there was none of this nonsense.
Am I missing something?

You're probably missing quite a lot. But there again, so am I.
Steve