-
ℹ️ Heads up...
This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.
Coronavirus
- Thread starter Jb85
- Start date
Alsty
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Shambhala
Sadly this is the new reality. We need to learn to live with Coronavirus because it's not going anywhere any time soon. We cannot all stay indoors for 18 months waiting for a vaccine. However that doesn't mean getting back to how things were before, but instead making compromises that allow most of normal life to resume while ensuring the virus can't get a stronghold.
Important factors are preventing it getting into exponential growth again (R>1) to ensure you have capacity and resources to deal with every sick person, and also protecting vulnerable groups who are at greater risk. Even with the best healthcare in the world, not everybody who catches it can be saved no matter what we do.
Important factors are preventing it getting into exponential growth again (R>1) to ensure you have capacity and resources to deal with every sick person, and also protecting vulnerable groups who are at greater risk. Even with the best healthcare in the world, not everybody who catches it can be saved no matter what we do.
delta79
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Nemesis, Air
I come back after a kip and sorting stuff out to find isolation madness has taken over.
I would love to get hold of gods development console for earth and do a antivirus scan to remove covid19. However that's not going to happen.
I understand why people want to get out, get back to their job.
I have been working the whole time. As work has vulnerable students, i have to keep the buildings working and render first aid as part of our commitment to these.
Sent from my SM-J600FN using Tapatalk
I would love to get hold of gods development console for earth and do a antivirus scan to remove covid19. However that's not going to happen.
I understand why people want to get out, get back to their job.
I have been working the whole time. As work has vulnerable students, i have to keep the buildings working and render first aid as part of our commitment to these.
Sent from my SM-J600FN using Tapatalk
Skyscraper
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Nemesis
That's why I said potentially.
BigT
TS Member
That's why I said potentially.
Don’t worry reading posts correctly is not a strong point on here.
Someone said a few pages back that what will be announced on Sunday is basically following the law, this is probably correct dressed up in such a way as to look like a softening.
I actually think the plan was always 12 weeks, just they knew they would have to treat us like children because otherwise the public would not agree to it.
Alsty
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Shambhala
The Coronavirus restrictions have to be reviewed by law at most every three weeks, but nothing stops them reviewing and changing at any point in between. The restrictions can, in theory, be extended for up to six months.
Rojo
TS Member
The Welsh lockdown has been officially extended for 3 weeks, with some "modest" changes. I work in Wrexham and live just over the border, we'll see this week but I suspect both sides will be as busy as each other when I venture out.
I'm going to my first (hopefully last) socially distant funeral this week. 20 people are allowed in the crematorium and the rest of us will be outside as they relay the service through speakers. Going to be grim/crazy to be honest.
Sad to read how some of you have struggled or the worries you guys have commented. Hope everyone is doing ok and if not, don't bottle it up, reach out! Arguing on a rollercoaster forum doesn't count as venting
Take some time out to do the things you can safely enjoy. I can't believe how much watching live football earlier relaxed me and improved my mood
I'm going to my first (hopefully last) socially distant funeral this week. 20 people are allowed in the crematorium and the rest of us will be outside as they relay the service through speakers. Going to be grim/crazy to be honest.
Sad to read how some of you have struggled or the worries you guys have commented. Hope everyone is doing ok and if not, don't bottle it up, reach out! Arguing on a rollercoaster forum doesn't count as venting
Take some time out to do the things you can safely enjoy. I can't believe how much watching live football earlier relaxed me and improved my mood
imanautie
TS Member
In theory the legislation could be renewed indefinitely...
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Alsty
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Shambhala
That's true, but legislation such as this which is made under the Public Health Act can only be for healthy emergencies, otherwise it risks being struck down in court.
imanautie
TS Member
True but government could argue the pandemic isn't over and they need more time.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
delta79
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Nemesis, Air
Well it started already. The A5 has seen more vehicles on it during the last two weeks. I bet the A386 to the north of oswestry has seen the same amount of vehicles.
Sent from my SM-J600FN using Tapatalk
bluesonichd
TS Member
nice article in the telegraph,
maybe now is the time to start asking questions, why
there is alot more research about now, some supporting the govs stance and some against it.
being told we must keep doing things because the science says so, if they backed that up with the evidence they are acting on, people wouldn't get as triggered about things
so much for living in democracy when even MP's are not allowed to debate the lockdown decisions, I can understand why at the start action need to be taken fast, maybe not fast enough, but now...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1588923132
maybe now is the time to start asking questions, why
there is alot more research about now, some supporting the govs stance and some against it.
being told we must keep doing things because the science says so, if they backed that up with the evidence they are acting on, people
wouldn't get as triggered about thingsso much for living in democracy when even MP's are not allowed to debate the lockdown decisions, I can understand why at the start action need to be taken fast, maybe not fast enough, but now...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1588923132
It's time to ask more questions about how we ended up here – and where we go now
It’s unfair to blame Professor Neil Ferguson. He never asked for such power over our lives: he was asked for his opinion and gave it. His charts showed that school closures, social distancing, washing hands: nothing would do enough to impact the spread of the virus. Only a full lockdown, ran his argument, would crush the Covid growth rate – and it would do so almost overnight. Why was the professor so sure? There was no real time to ask, or explain. Advisers advise, ministers decide and the Prime Minister decided to take the advice of this particular adviser.
But now, it’s perhaps time to ask more questions about how we ended up here. At the time, Prof Ferguson was using models – or educated guesswork. Now we have all too much data, with the heaviest death toll in Europe. Enough to ask: what has lockdown achieved? Which parts worked, and which did not? Some epidemiologists now argue that Britain’s outcome – more deaths than anyone else in Europe – has shown the world that lockdown failed. Where is the evidence to disprove this?
So far, Britain has been engaged in what might be called black-box democracy: huge decisions being taken, on advice which is largely kept secret. We’re typically told that a policy is “guided by the best scientific understanding” but there’s not much chance to scrutinise it. A committee of scientific advisers comes up with research and options, passed documents to No 10 where decisions are taken. The advice might be emphatic, or full of caveats. It could be brilliant, or contain glaring omissions. There’s no real way of anyone outside No 10 knowing.
This secrecy is understandable in a crisis, where urgency is needed and there’s no time for debate. But when the worst of an emergency passes - as it has now in Britain - there’s a case for a return to democratic norms. With so much no riding on scientific advice, a case for sharing more of the logic.
For example: what’s stopping the schools going back? Dominic Raab said recently that, if they did, it would trigger a second spike in the virus. Does he have research to this effect? The Foreign Secretary might very well be right, but other studies have shown school closures having a minimal impact on the spread of the virus. Has this changed? And would it really hurt to share the evidence with us?
Then, the NHS. How many hospital beds lie unoccupied? Many countries publish these figures regularly to explain the Covid response. People want to know if the healthcare system risks being overwhelmed - or dangerously underused. The UK figure is calculated every morning, but is not made public - but Westminster insiders can normally find it out. As of 8am yesterday, 39 per cent of NHS beds were empty – about four times above what’s normal for this time of year. Such figures ought to be made public, daily, and discussed. What’s happening to those who would otherwise be lying in them?
There is also concern in parliament about the quality of Professor Ferguson’s modelling and the extent to which the work of his group at Imperial College London is relied on. One of Imperial’s specialities is estimating the rate at which the virus grows - or the so-called R-number. On 30 March, it published this for several countries and said its figure for Sweden was high because it had rejected lockdown. Last week, Sweden published values for its R-number every day for the last few weeks. It bore almost no resemblance to Imperial’s calculations.
How accurate were Imperial’s calculations about Britain? This matters not because of recrimination – back then, guesswork was all anyone had. But it’s still unclear what evidence is being used to judge things now. A new University of East Anglia study surveys 30 European countries and finds, to the surprise of the authors, that stay-at-home orders might be the least effective tool. School closures emerge as the most effective.
The basic rationale for lockdown - better safe than sorry - was enough for me. Stay at home, avoid getting (or spreading) the lurgy: all simple enough. But a New York study has found that, contrary to expectations, key workers going into the city every day are no more likely to be hospitalised by the virus. Most of the new patients say they’ve been staying at home. “That surprised me,” said Andrew Cuomo, the state governor, who commissioned the study. He has also published the results of antibody tests showing that a fifth of the city’s residents had had the virus. In Britain, the results of such tests remain confidential.
If backbench MPs are frustrated at the lack of transparency, they should spare a thought for government ministers who feel just as much in the dark. Power currently rests in an inner core of ministers – Rishi Sunak, Michael Gove, Matt Hancock and the Prime Minister. The so-called ‘outer’ Cabinet members feel as if they are constantly playing sleuth, trying to find out what their departments need to know.
For example, the R-number - which No10 now says will decide the future of lockdown - is now calculated twice a week. But only rarely is it shared with ministers . A few weeks ago, when it came up in Cabinet, those not admitted to the inner core started texting each other (a perk of Zoom meetings) asking what on earth ‘the R’ was. It was an illustration of how tightly No10 has been holding even basic information.
On Sunday, the Prime Minister will describe his route out of lockdown. An odd day for such an announcement. Would it have been so much worse to make this statement in parliament on Monday? He could take questions from MPs, who have no end of questions. The country is still pretty firmly behind him, so publishing the scientific advice would not weaken his position. As he told his Cabinet yesterday, it would be reckless to risk a return of the virus. But there’s more he can do to help us understand that risk.
The battle against Covid is, fundamentally, a battle to understand. It’s a battle that will be more likely to won if more information is shared and more people are engaged in the struggle.
It’s unfair to blame Professor Neil Ferguson. He never asked for such power over our lives: he was asked for his opinion and gave it. His charts showed that school closures, social distancing, washing hands: nothing would do enough to impact the spread of the virus. Only a full lockdown, ran his argument, would crush the Covid growth rate – and it would do so almost overnight. Why was the professor so sure? There was no real time to ask, or explain. Advisers advise, ministers decide and the Prime Minister decided to take the advice of this particular adviser.
But now, it’s perhaps time to ask more questions about how we ended up here. At the time, Prof Ferguson was using models – or educated guesswork. Now we have all too much data, with the heaviest death toll in Europe. Enough to ask: what has lockdown achieved? Which parts worked, and which did not? Some epidemiologists now argue that Britain’s outcome – more deaths than anyone else in Europe – has shown the world that lockdown failed. Where is the evidence to disprove this?
So far, Britain has been engaged in what might be called black-box democracy: huge decisions being taken, on advice which is largely kept secret. We’re typically told that a policy is “guided by the best scientific understanding” but there’s not much chance to scrutinise it. A committee of scientific advisers comes up with research and options, passed documents to No 10 where decisions are taken. The advice might be emphatic, or full of caveats. It could be brilliant, or contain glaring omissions. There’s no real way of anyone outside No 10 knowing.
This secrecy is understandable in a crisis, where urgency is needed and there’s no time for debate. But when the worst of an emergency passes - as it has now in Britain - there’s a case for a return to democratic norms. With so much no riding on scientific advice, a case for sharing more of the logic.
For example: what’s stopping the schools going back? Dominic Raab said recently that, if they did, it would trigger a second spike in the virus. Does he have research to this effect? The Foreign Secretary might very well be right, but other studies have shown school closures having a minimal impact on the spread of the virus. Has this changed? And would it really hurt to share the evidence with us?
Then, the NHS. How many hospital beds lie unoccupied? Many countries publish these figures regularly to explain the Covid response. People want to know if the healthcare system risks being overwhelmed - or dangerously underused. The UK figure is calculated every morning, but is not made public - but Westminster insiders can normally find it out. As of 8am yesterday, 39 per cent of NHS beds were empty – about four times above what’s normal for this time of year. Such figures ought to be made public, daily, and discussed. What’s happening to those who would otherwise be lying in them?
There is also concern in parliament about the quality of Professor Ferguson’s modelling and the extent to which the work of his group at Imperial College London is relied on. One of Imperial’s specialities is estimating the rate at which the virus grows - or the so-called R-number. On 30 March, it published this for several countries and said its figure for Sweden was high because it had rejected lockdown. Last week, Sweden published values for its R-number every day for the last few weeks. It bore almost no resemblance to Imperial’s calculations.
How accurate were Imperial’s calculations about Britain? This matters not because of recrimination – back then, guesswork was all anyone had. But it’s still unclear what evidence is being used to judge things now. A new University of East Anglia study surveys 30 European countries and finds, to the surprise of the authors, that stay-at-home orders might be the least effective tool. School closures emerge as the most effective.
The basic rationale for lockdown - better safe than sorry - was enough for me. Stay at home, avoid getting (or spreading) the lurgy: all simple enough. But a New York study has found that, contrary to expectations, key workers going into the city every day are no more likely to be hospitalised by the virus. Most of the new patients say they’ve been staying at home. “That surprised me,” said Andrew Cuomo, the state governor, who commissioned the study. He has also published the results of antibody tests showing that a fifth of the city’s residents had had the virus. In Britain, the results of such tests remain confidential.
If backbench MPs are frustrated at the lack of transparency, they should spare a thought for government ministers who feel just as much in the dark. Power currently rests in an inner core of ministers – Rishi Sunak, Michael Gove, Matt Hancock and the Prime Minister. The so-called ‘outer’ Cabinet members feel as if they are constantly playing sleuth, trying to find out what their departments need to know.
For example, the R-number - which No10 now says will decide the future of lockdown - is now calculated twice a week. But only rarely is it shared with ministers . A few weeks ago, when it came up in Cabinet, those not admitted to the inner core started texting each other (a perk of Zoom meetings) asking what on earth ‘the R’ was. It was an illustration of how tightly No10 has been holding even basic information.
On Sunday, the Prime Minister will describe his route out of lockdown. An odd day for such an announcement. Would it have been so much worse to make this statement in parliament on Monday? He could take questions from MPs, who have no end of questions. The country is still pretty firmly behind him, so publishing the scientific advice would not weaken his position. As he told his Cabinet yesterday, it would be reckless to risk a return of the virus. But there’s more he can do to help us understand that risk.
The battle against Covid is, fundamentally, a battle to understand. It’s a battle that will be more likely to won if more information is shared and more people are engaged in the struggle.
bluesonichd
TS Member
least they got bexit done
also this from newsnight
Dame Deirdre Hine told the gov in 2009 be prepared for another pandemic
she also said in her report the gov should not rely on modelling at the start unless it included testing and contact tracing
will be interesting if we truly find out why they stopped contact tracing at the start
I thought by now we could all actually spell brexit.
Do you ever read back what you have posted?
They stopped contact tracing because the genie was completely out of the bottle.
The task simply became too large to be managed effectively.
Ten days contagious without symptoms.
Do you ever read back what you have posted?
They stopped contact tracing because the genie was completely out of the bottle.
The task simply became too large to be managed effectively.
Ten days contagious without symptoms.
Alsty
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Shambhala
@rob666 raises an interesting point going forwards. On the assumption social distancing will be required for the rest of the year, it'll be interesting to see how trains can operate and maintain a 2m distance between everyone.
My train journey would always be significantly over capacity by the time it arrived, with people standing all the way down the aisle and packed into the vestibules. How many trains would they need to run to fit all those people with 2m separation? I don't even think it'll be possible. The government will have to encourage staggered start/end times and the majority will need to keep working from home where possible for the foreseeable to make it viable.
My train journey would always be significantly over capacity by the time it arrived, with people standing all the way down the aisle and packed into the vestibules. How many trains would they need to run to fit all those people with 2m separation? I don't even think it'll be possible. The government will have to encourage staggered start/end times and the majority will need to keep working from home where possible for the foreseeable to make it viable.
But isn't that what we're going back to now with Test, Track and Trace? It would've been good if the UK kept that up, like Singapore did, but alas we didn't have anywhere near enough capacity to do it.
Islander
TS Member
Legoland Billund have now announced a reopening date of Monday 8th June, so that's more of the Merlin estate coming back online...
Particularly good news also as in Denmark there was debate surrounding the reopening of theme parks, with some argument as to them having to remain closed for much longer - article here.
I suspect there'll be guidelines along the lines of mandating the wearing of face-masks where a 2m separation cannot reasonably be accomplished, such as on public transport.
imanautie
TS Member
Apart from they haven't actually got it done yet....least they got bexit done
also this from newsnight
Dame Deirdre Hine told the gov in 2009 be prepared for another pandemic
she also said in her report the gov should not rely on modelling at the start unless it included testing and contact tracing
will be interesting if we truly find out why they stopped contact tracing at the start
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Skyscraper
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Nemesis
The thing with Covid-19 is that no one knows how serious it will be for them unless they get it. It's just not worth the risk. There's an increasing number of healthy young people who have sadly succumbed to it, and my neighbor across the road who is in her eighties came home last week having recovered from it. Yes the elderly and those with medical conditions are more at risk, but no way does that mean they should be sacrificed! Even just knowing that people have mentioned that fills me with horror. The elderly and those with medical conditions need help more than ever at this difficult time, and they deserve to be respected.