paulaf

I'm annoyed a lockdown was decided upon using dodgy data it seems the scientists are running the country now and we were lied to, if I was an MP I'd ask for another vote using accurate data or at least end it earlier.

ahmetdouas

This is not about politics, this is about facts.

We need to Lockdown because cases rising exponentially? Really, doesn't look like that in the statistics.
Deaths could hit 4000? Really? We are at around 400 and that's with cases stabilising now for weeks and not going up, never ever went much above 1000 during the 1st wave which was much worse than the second wave. The whole world is 9000 today, so the UK is going to be responsible alone for half the COVID deaths in the world?
50,000 cases possibly by the October? We are hardly breaching 20,000 mid November and apparently we are 'in the middle of the second wave'.

Do I need to say more, pretty much every media source pro and anti COVID has said that the statistics used by the Govt are a joke, they even got rebuffed by the Head of the Statistics Agency who is a civil servant and technically should be on their side and working with them on the statistics, not against them!

etc. etc.

What makes me most upset is Patrick Vallance is a shareholder of 600,000 GBP of GSK shares, a pharma giant. He can own what he likes, but not in such a position as the Chief Scientific Officer, does the government not have an ethics committee for potential conflict of interest?
When Hank Paulson became US Treasury Secretary after working at Goldman for so many years, he was forced to sell all his shares before joining the govt to not have a conflict of interest, clearly HMG has not done this in this case.
The whole thing reeks of having a specific agenda, there is too much at stake here for political games and personal agenda.

Is COVID prevalent in the UK? Absolutely. Is it growing exponentially? Absolutely not.
Do we need to take some care of our population to protect them from COVID? Absolutely. Do we need a national lockdown? Absolutely not.

Can the NHS be overwhelmed in some areas in the winter? The question is when does the NHS not get overwhelmed at some point during the winter, this happens yearly, its a matter of managing resources!

Is this opinion or fact? Look at the streets today, you would hardly think there is a lockdown in central London where I walked. People are voting with their feet and are increasingly sceptical of the government, this is a fact, it was the famous SAGE themselves in their docs that said if there is a second lockdown public confidence in the government will fall considerably, and that is exactly what is happening now. The more people ignore the restrictions, the less credibility the restrictions have.

13901

Well, it does. Below the cases, and even further below an exponential.




Don't forget half the North - including England's second biggest city - has been under lockdown for weeks.

I'm no friend of Patrick Vallance, I honestly despise Boris, I find that Cummings' contempt for the rest of us to be just intolerable and my French side screams "Mai 1789" every time I see Rees-Mogg... but how does exactly Vallance having shares in GSK benefit him with a lockdown? It might - if true, by the way - be for the vaccine, but how about the lockdown? Is GSK selling "lockdown pills"?

How?
All we need to do is wear a mask and distance socially and we haven't been capable of doing that as it's been more than proved. People don't wear masks on trains, on buses, on planes, in shops... Even you made a point in saying that you were travelling without a mask on planes... Countries like Taiwan have invested in track & trace (which, of course, Boris has botched) and by having great compliance in mask-wearing. We have failed at both and this is the outcome.

Scots_Al

STOP THE COUNT of cases!

Radiation Station

Great comment. This thread was starting to resemble the Daily Mail comments section.

The NHS does not get overwhelmed every winter, it experiences winter pressures which it is prepared for and used to. The covid pandemic is an unprecedented strain on the NHS. Parts of the North of England are already almost at capacity with the current level of cases - there is a genuine risk that people will not be able to access care if the trend continues.

I also find it quite galling that certain members of this forum consider several hundred deaths a day to be an acceptable outcome (presumably as long as it’s not their Mum) and don’t seem to appreciate that it will likely become four figures without significant intervention. Errors in certain data models don’t mean that the general principle is untrue - cases and deaths are rising, hospitals are filling up.

I get it - it’s annoying to have to wear a piece of cloth over your face and not see your friends and family for a while. But the fact is, people have not been complying with simple, basic measures. Part of the responsibility lies with the government and its shambolic attempts at leadership and messaging. But there is undoubtedly an element of people being selfish, and I suspect it’s largely because they haven’t felt the impact on themselves or their families. It’s all very well to talk about a few hundred deaths as not too much of a big deal, but those deaths were likely preventable, and were a pretty big deal to the people who lost a loved one.

I think people should stop this libertarian orgy and do their level best to comply with the measures suggested. It’s quite extraordinary to think that members of the public reckon they are capable of analysing the data and forecasting outcomes more effectively than the consensus opinion of some of the most eminent scientists and data analysts in the UK. Sure, there are some dissenting opinions, but the overwhelming scientific consensus supports social distancing , mask wearing - and lockdowns as a last resort, when other measures fail. If you think you know better, I’m afraid that’s likely just another example of the Dunning-Kruger effect...

flyertalker28120

Sure, it's not nice.

But isn't England's death toll the even sadder thing to see? Deaths doubling roughly once every two weeks, daily deaths now close to 500 daily for the UK. In that sense, I also see something positive in the restraint as society does something to protect the vulnerable.

Just my 2c as an outsider. I don't live in the UK (albeit, I got relatives there).

corporate-wage-slave

This isn't going to go on forever, Lockdown 2.0 is a bit of nuisance, but even if there wasn't a lockdown things will be difficult until around Easter next year. Thereafter there is are realistic hopes we can cautiously slip free of these bounds.

The death rate per day is currently averaging at about 360. This means every day about 120 people are alive simply due to the improvements in therapeutic pathways, in turn due to impoved knowledge about the virus. The Recovery trials are looking at other improvements, from asprin to monoclonal treatment, and so we can anticipate further improvements. There is a strong argument for delaying infection, it will save lives. Moreover people should also not overlook how dibilitating Long Covid is. Around 5% of those testing positive get at least some form of that, and 10% of that 5% get a long and severe version - these are unofficial figures, more to give an order of magnitude. I know someone who is in his late 20s and is so crippled by it that he only sleep in his own bed one or two days a week, he can't face the 30 minute struggle to get up a flight of stairs. Yet he is down as having mild covid. He used to spend a lot of his spare time playing football and in the gym, he has no underlying conditions apart from mild asthma.

The sacrifices we are being called on to make are not huge, but the benefit is for everyone in the longer term.

flyertalker28120

@cws: The daily average of 360 is based on the downward-skewed statistics which don't include the deaths which mention covid on the death certificate but occurred outside the hospital if I understand correctly. (Not on the separate ONS statistics which factor them in.)

I therefore think my previous statement of 'daily deaths in the UK close to 500 daily' isn't grossly exaggerated. In any case, the UK is bound to have exponential growth of deaths for a little longer. If it's not 500 now it will be there soon enough. (Which, of course, is very sad given how predictable this was.)

13901

I have a family friend who's 37, healthy, a former pro athlete. He got Covid in March and was admitted to the Royal Middlesex. In the room of the Covid ward he was with there were two other patients, aged 31 and 49, both healthy. They died the day after my friend's admission to hospital. Our friend survived but still has heart anomalies.

All this to say it's NOT just flu, it's NOT just targeting the elderly and the infirm and we MUST take measures against it. I agree, some measures are idiotic (I've been getting cabin fever for a week as I self isolate after a 24hr visit to Italy where I was tested on arrival...negative); and I agree, the Tories have collected tits up after tits up... but ignoring this thing isn't going to make it go away.

corporate-wage-slave

There are shades of grey here and the 500 figure will be relevant to sudden deaths outside a healthcare setting, whereas the 360 also includes people who committed suicide, for example. Then there are those with multiple co-morbidities, were Covid will hasten a death by perhaps a fairly short period of time, they are more in the 500 figure. The 360 isn't too far removed from the Excess death figure. So both figures are correct, it's in the 300-500 range, let's say. Anyway that wasn't my point, which was that even slowing down the disease by a few weeks has a benefit.

stut

I think these threads need a little time out. We're veering well into OMNI territory here. While this forum tends to work well with a good mix of destination advice and chat, this seems (understandably, given the nature of what we're all going through at the moment) to have ventured somewhat off course

Going to close, and review the content. I will reopen the thread, and advance apologies if any of your posts are deleted as part of a clean-up.

Thanks for your understanding,
stut
Moderator
​​​​UK & Ireland

stut

OK, that took a little longer than expected - apologies.

I've deleted a number of posts where the discussion has drifted wildly off-topic, as well as some posts referencing these. Please do understand if your post has been deleted as part of this.

As always with the destination forums, the discussion here is more focused on the practical aspects of travel in the UK & Ireland, with additional discussion around the issue. Anything to goes towards the politics or science behind Covid-19 and government responses is covered elsewhere, whether in OMNI, OMNI/PR or the Coronavirus forum: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/coronavirus-travel-773/ And, of course, please keep the discussion polite and constructive.

So, reopening thread, and thanks for all the helpful discussion so far.

stut
Moderator
UK & Ireland

lhrsfo

Wandering around my part of London this morning leads me to believe what I suspected all along - Lockdown 2.0 is not nearly as stringent as its predecessor, and people are taking it much less seriously. Nearly all the restaurants have some form of takeaway activity going on, and I would estimate that over half the shops are open - food shops, postal services, ironmongers, diy shops, health supplement shops obviously but also there do seem to be several clothing stores that are open because (taking a leaf out of M&S' book) they have a shelf of food for sale. Also, traffic levels, both in terms of walking and driving, are increasing this week to near normal. Finally, and this is anecdotal, many people seem to be back in the office a few days a week.

Having said that, people don't appear to be behaving stupidly - I've seen no instances of not wearing masks in stores and few instances of (mostly elderly) people not wearing them properly.

It will be interesting to see what it does to the infection rate as it won't be quite so devastating to public health and the economy as the first lockdown.

stut

It's interesting how heavily it varies, regionally. In my little town, about 1/3 of people wore a mask before it was made mandatory (myself included - I have many reasons to be extra cautious). Ever since mask wearing came in, it's been in the high 90% range - you very rarely see any adult without when in the shops, and an increasing number wear them in the street, too (I suspect as it's simply more convenient if you're going shop to shop).

Town has been fairly quiet, but people still pop in to have a takeaway coffee, use the greengrocers, etc. Was in M&S yesterday, and it was eerily quiet - about 3 customers in total, and an awful lot of "salmonella corner" stickers (so it was a very cheap visit!) Lots more bikes on the road. Cars are increasing in number, but the rush hour is very different. I know virtually nobody who's gone into the office where they could work from home - pretty much since March - so the commuter rush has been largely displaced by an extended school run rush, though, at least up until the recent bad weather, there were millions of kids on bikes, even up along the bridleways to the villages.

All the local shops and restaurants are doing some form of click & collect or delivery, with some producers (lots of suppliers to London restaurants round here) selling direct to the public too. The difference in quality is often eye-opening. The national chains, not so much. The posties and Amazon folks are rushed off their feet. Despite this, I can think of at least 3 new, locally-owned shops, and a similar number of café/bar places that have recently opened.

lhrsfo

It really does seem to be very regional. My London friends (and my age group, sadly, is at the higher end of the scale!) in London have dialled back considerably on the fear factor and have also noticed that it's not particularly bad in London at the moment - there's a feeling that London was only put in Tier 2 to make the North less unhappy. But my rural friends are still in the terrified frame of mind (although I notice that their rule observance has slipped rather). I'm just getting the impression here that people have decided that they have to get on with what's left of their lives, keep earning money and try to keep safe, whereas I don't get that sense amongst my rural friends, who see life as being on hold.