• 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

Coronavirus - The Poll

  • Total voters
    97
Better late than never :rolleyes:

EXhZDx2XsAMn4So
 
bluesonichd said:
Better late than never :rolleyes:

EXhZDx2XsAMn4So
Click to expand...
Tbh better not at all. This should have been in place months ago and then being reviewed now not the other way around. The only thing this will do is cause further job losses and damage to an industry that looks like it may not survive the crisis.

Other countries are using covid quick tests before and after flying. A 14 day quarantine is totally unnecessary when the transmission of the virus in the UK is higher than the majority of countries people will be arriving from
 
It’s in MSM so I don’t fully trust it but they also say it’s self isolation for two weeks so they will be trusting people that fly in to follow the rule
:rolleyes:
 
Whilst it should of been in place from January it will be essential to put the 14 day quarantine in soon to stop the virus coming back in from anywhere outside of Europe, Australia or NZ.
There is now next to zero transmission in the community according to the CMA, it’s nearly all in care homes and hospitals.

I don’t like the way is being done though, it should be every arrival outside of the the places above taken to a camp directly, this self isolation rubbish doesn’t work, nobody enforcing it.
That how China are doing it, try and get into there right now.
 
BigT said:
Whilst it should of been in place from January it will be essential to put the 14 day quarantine in soon to stop the virus coming back in from anywhere outside of Europe, Australia or NZ.
There is now next to zero transmission in the community according to the CMA, it’s nearly all in care homes and hospitals.

I don’t like the way is being done though, it should be every arrival outside of the the places above taken to a camp directly, this self isolation rubbish doesn’t work, nobody enforcing it.
That how China are doing it, try and get into there right now.
Click to expand...

Imho this also further screws over key workers and those who can't work from home- those who can can just say inside for two weeks while working and still have holidays

I hope they allow those key workers coming back to be tested for covid instead of having to self quarantine
 
The 24 day self quarantine is a joke. Sorry but some people will just stick to fingers up to that, and it can't be enforced anyway. I recall a Chinese tourist at the start of the lockdowns bragging that she had traveled to Paris for a city break and taken tablets to lower her temperature and get through the checks. Was only because people saw her posts on social media she got caught.

You are dealing with some very ignorant self centered people in the world who will not abide by the rules! It won't work.

The hospital where I work are now able to give someone their test results within 60 minutes. It's getting quicker all the time. Air travel should wait until there is a quick test which can give an instant result (like finger prick kits for other viruses currently available) so people can be screened when they arrive or depart.

Yeah it will cause queues but that's the only way to screen people.

As for a vaccine..... I think this year we will see good treatments rather than vaccines which will allow us to get back to some sort of normal. Every week we are hearing about promising developments, and today is no different..

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-h...early-promise-in-covid-19-trial-idUKKBN22K2ZG
 
BigT said:
Just been to Homebase for a toilet valve and 90% of those in the queue were over 70, there really is no hope......:banghead:
Click to expand...

I had to go correct shopping this morningv from clock and collect and I would say the majority of people going in to the supermarket with trolleys and on the roads were the elderly.
 
wait until Monday, homebase will be empty as they are all at the garden centres :D

If they do open garden centres, they will they have to change the rules on essential travel?
will that mean they have to partially revoke the covid laws that are in place.

no point in saying places can open if you are not allowed to travel to them
 
Craig said:
Just to make something clear before people jump on imanautie based on what he is saying. There's been some justified concerns about how the app will work by many in recent weeks due to the centralised way that the app is run. There's a graphic on the BBC article that explains this:

_112180954_apps_contact_tracingv4_640-nc-2x-nc.png


By releasing the source code, this allows those who are skilled to study it and independently identify/allay any privacy issues - as has been reported from initial checks mentioned in the BBC article. In addition, releasing the source code allows potential security vulnerabilities to be spotted. If any are picked up, they can be disclosed responsibly (e.g. not publicly) to the developer to allow them to be fixed before they are utilised by others for malicious purposes.

Thanks to the way that hacking is reported in the media, it's often seen as a negative thing. There's a far greater number of people in the tech community who identify issues and disclose them responsibly to the developer rather than utilise their findings for their own gain. The vast majority of larger developers already actively encourage and reward those who discover and report vulnerabilities in their code, so it's very much not a new thing.
Click to expand...
^this

Im somewhat experienced in dealing with large companies having handled responsibly reporting flaws to 2 companies who are Europe's largest in Their field.

I'm interested in not only the deanoyminization issues potentially there but also ability to forge reports.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
 
why do they never release the evidence of the science that the are apparently following.
no one can see it.
they just keep saying flatten the curve, stop a second spike, we just have to accept they know best. even the other gov ministers cant see the evidence of why these decisions are being made
people (me) wouldn't get as triggered if everything wasn't such a big secret

we are not all stupid citizens, we can think for ourselves and make informed choices



Dr John Lee @ spectator.co.uk
Ten reasons to end the lockdown now
8 May 2020, 6:30pm


Writing in this magazine a month ago, I applauded the government’s stated aim of trying to follow the science in dealing with Covid. Such promises are easier made than kept. Following science means understanding science. It means engaging with rival interpretations of the limited data in order to tease out what is most important in what we don’t know. Instead, the government in the UK (and many other places) seems uninterested in alternative viewpoints. The chosen narrative – that lockdown has saved countless lives – has been doggedly followed by all spokespeople. No doubt is allowed. We have been seeing the groupthink response to a perceived external threat that Jonathan Haidt describes so lucidly in his excellent book on human moral thinking, The Righteous Mind.

It has now become a matter of faith that lockdown is vital. Not only is it believed to be causally responsible for 'flattening the curve', but it is feared that releasing it too soon may cause a second spike in cases and 'economic disaster' (presumably due to further huge numbers of deaths). On what evidence is this made?

Even if one could understand why lockdown was imposed, it very rapidly became apparent that it had not been thought through. Not in terms of the wider effects on society (which have yet to be counted) and not even in terms of the ways that the virus itself might behave. But at the start, there was hardly any evidence. Everyone was guessing. Now we have a world of evidence, from around the globe, and the case for starting to reverse lockdown is compelling. Here are ten reasons why I believe that it is wrong to continue with lockdown and why we should start to reverse it immediately and rapidly.

1. You cannot understand the significance of this virus simply by looking at the raw death figures
Lockdown was enacted on a prediction of 500,000 deaths in the UK, rapidly reduced to 250,000 and then to 20,000. As I write the UK death toll is 30,150. Broadcast media has relentlessly focussed on the number of deaths and emotional stories surrounding victims. While every death is sad, the significance of a death toll can only be understood by looking at the big picture. This pandemic is unique in the way it has been observed and measured. This means that we are testing and counting a far greater proportion of Covid cases than have ever previously been counted for other respiratory infections such as influenza. This is true even though many Covid cases in care homes were not initially included in the numbers. We don’t really know how many people die of flu each year, because the surveillance relies mainly on surrogate measures rather than actual testing, but the estimated number for 2014/15, the highest of recent years, was 28,330. So yes, Covid is a nasty new disease. But even if you assume 40,000 Covid deaths, its death toll is in the same ballpark as diseases we live with, not something so extraordinary as to justify the lockdown reaction.

And because it is new, this is likely to be as bad as it gets (see 9 below). The majority of cases are asymptomatic. The most common symptoms are not fever, cough, headache and respiratory symptoms; they are no symptoms at all. The typical case does not suffer respiratory fibrosis; the disease leaves no mark. Somewhere around 99.9 per cent of those who catch the disease recover. Of those unlucky enough to die, over 90 per cent have pre-existing conditions and were anyway approaching the end of their lives. To say this is not being uncaring: it is simply a fact of life that older people are more likely to die in any event, and especially more likely to die from new types of infection.

2. The policy response to the virus has been driven by modelling of Covid – not other factors
explained in my last magazine piece, an evolutionary view suggests that the virus is likely to change quickly, with less virulent forms becoming dominant. Lockdown could potentially slow this beneficial tendency. On this view, asymptomatic people spreading the virus is a good thing because it means that the disease becomes milder more quickly. This could already be contributing to the flattening of the deaths curves that we are seeing. In this case, the sooner we lift lockdown, the better. It also implies that the peak in illnesses we have seen this time is likely to be as bad as it gets. In future, the virus will come into equilibrium with the population as wider immunity combines with predominantly milder forms of the virus to cause a lower overall death rate that nevertheless fluctuates from year to year, much like flu.

10. People can be trusted to behave sensibly
Six weeks of lockdown have clearly demonstrated that the British people are grown-ups and can be trusted with making sensible decisions about their health. All they ask is to be presented with a true picture including a realistic assessment of what we don’t know. Following science, I am afraid, means living with uncertainty. Our politics doesn’t generally like associating with uncertainty but in this case, I would have thought that most people would be delighted to see the government acknowledging the changing landscape around Covid and the effects of lockdown. It is already quite obvious that Covid is far from the existential threat that was initially feared and that lockdown, in itself, is a major harm on many more axes than Covid. The government's continuing elaboration of the consequences of its incomplete initial narrative just puts it in the position of piling further harms on top of those that already exist. The state cannot control what it doesn’t understand. In such a scenario, the only reasonable solution is to inform people of the risks and let them, sensibly, calmly, and individually, make their own decisions.

It turns out that 'following the science' on Covid is not at all easy or even really possible. One thing has become clear: Covid is not, in fact, an extraordinarily lethal pathogen, just a nasty one, similar to many others. So it makes no sense whatsoever to follow the science on Covid to the exclusion of everything else. The government should rapidly lift the lockdown to a condition similar to that of Sweden’s.

The first step is often the hardest. It will be much easier to plot a course back to normality from there. And despite the fears that we continue to harbour over this virus, our new normal should look very much like our old, perhaps with the addition of some social responsibility in the face of respiratory illness. It is the only way for us to live in the world.
 
There's plenty of reading out there. I literally just Googled "flatten the curve evidence" and found this.

"
So, does flattening the curve work?
It did in 1918, when a strain of influenza known as the Spanish flu caused a global pandemic. To see how it played out, we can look at two U.S. cities — Philadelphia and St. Louis — Drew Harris, a population health researcher at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia, told NPR.org.

In Philadelphia, city officials ignored warnings from infectious disease experts that the flu was already spreading in the community. The city instead moved forward with a massive parade that gathered hundreds of thousands of people together, Harris said.

"Within 48, 72 hours, thousands of people around the Philadelphia region started to die," Harris said. Ultimately, about 16,000 people from the city died in six months.

In St. Louis, meanwhile, city officials quickly implemented social isolation strategies. The government closed schools, limited travel and encouraged personal hygiene and social distancing. As a result, the city saw just 2,000 deaths — one-eighth of the casualties in Philadelphia.

The city, now known for its towering Gateway Arch, had successfully flattened the curve. "
 
bluesonichd said:
why do they never release the evidence of the science that the are apparently following.
no one can see it.
they just keep saying flatten the curve, stop a second spike, we just have to accept they know best. even the other gov ministers cant see the evidence of why these decisions are being made
people (me) wouldn't get as triggered if everything wasn't such a big secret

we are not all stupid citizens, we can think for ourselves and make informed choices



Dr John Lee @ spectator.co.uk
Ten reasons to end the lockdown now
8 May 2020, 6:30pm


Writing in this magazine a month ago, I applauded the government’s stated aim of trying to follow the science in dealing with Covid. Such promises are easier made than kept. Following science means understanding science. It means engaging with rival interpretations of the limited data in order to tease out what is most important in what we don’t know. Instead, the government in the UK (and many other places) seems uninterested in alternative viewpoints. The chosen narrative – that lockdown has saved countless lives – has been doggedly followed by all spokespeople. No doubt is allowed. We have been seeing the groupthink response to a perceived external threat that Jonathan Haidt describes so lucidly in his excellent book on human moral thinking, The Righteous Mind.

It has now become a matter of faith that lockdown is vital. Not only is it believed to be causally responsible for 'flattening the curve', but it is feared that releasing it too soon may cause a second spike in cases and 'economic disaster' (presumably due to further huge numbers of deaths). On what evidence is this made?

Even if one could understand why lockdown was imposed, it very rapidly became apparent that it had not been thought through. Not in terms of the wider effects on society (which have yet to be counted) and not even in terms of the ways that the virus itself might behave. But at the start, there was hardly any evidence. Everyone was guessing. Now we have a world of evidence, from around the globe, and the case for starting to reverse lockdown is compelling. Here are ten reasons why I believe that it is wrong to continue with lockdown and why we should start to reverse it immediately and rapidly.

1. You cannot understand the significance of this virus simply by looking at the raw death figures
Lockdown was enacted on a prediction of 500,000 deaths in the UK, rapidly reduced to 250,000 and then to 20,000. As I write the UK death toll is 30,150. Broadcast media has relentlessly focussed on the number of deaths and emotional stories surrounding victims. While every death is sad, the significance of a death toll can only be understood by looking at the big picture. This pandemic is unique in the way it has been observed and measured. This means that we are testing and counting a far greater proportion of Covid cases than have ever previously been counted for other respiratory infections such as influenza. This is true even though many Covid cases in care homes were not initially included in the numbers. We don’t really know how many people die of flu each year, because the surveillance relies mainly on surrogate measures rather than actual testing, but the estimated number for 2014/15, the highest of recent years, was 28,330. So yes, Covid is a nasty new disease. But even if you assume 40,000 Covid deaths, its death toll is in the same ballpark as diseases we live with, not something so extraordinary as to justify the lockdown reaction.

And because it is new, this is likely to be as bad as it gets (see 9 below). The majority of cases are asymptomatic. The most common symptoms are not fever, cough, headache and respiratory symptoms; they are no symptoms at all. The typical case does not suffer respiratory fibrosis; the disease leaves no mark. Somewhere around 99.9 per cent of those who catch the disease recover. Of those unlucky enough to die, over 90 per cent have pre-existing conditions and were anyway approaching the end of their lives. To say this is not being uncaring: it is simply a fact of life that older people are more likely to die in any event, and especially more likely to die from new types of infection.

2. The policy response to the virus has been driven by modelling of Covid – not other factors
explained in my last magazine piece, an evolutionary view suggests that the virus is likely to change quickly, with less virulent forms becoming dominant. Lockdown could potentially slow this beneficial tendency. On this view, asymptomatic people spreading the virus is a good thing because it means that the disease becomes milder more quickly. This could already be contributing to the flattening of the deaths curves that we are seeing. In this case, the sooner we lift lockdown, the better. It also implies that the peak in illnesses we have seen this time is likely to be as bad as it gets. In future, the virus will come into equilibrium with the population as wider immunity combines with predominantly milder forms of the virus to cause a lower overall death rate that nevertheless fluctuates from year to year, much like flu.

10. People can be trusted to behave sensibly
Six weeks of lockdown have clearly demonstrated that the British people are grown-ups and can be trusted with making sensible decisions about their health. All they ask is to be presented with a true picture including a realistic assessment of what we don’t know. Following science, I am afraid, means living with uncertainty. Our politics doesn’t generally like associating with uncertainty but in this case, I would have thought that most people would be delighted to see the government acknowledging the changing landscape around Covid and the effects of lockdown. It is already quite obvious that Covid is far from the existential threat that was initially feared and that lockdown, in itself, is a major harm on many more axes than Covid. The government's continuing elaboration of the consequences of its incomplete initial narrative just puts it in the position of piling further harms on top of those that already exist. The state cannot control what it doesn’t understand. In such a scenario, the only reasonable solution is to inform people of the risks and let them, sensibly, calmly, and individually, make their own decisions.

It turns out that 'following the science' on Covid is not at all easy or even really possible. One thing has become clear: Covid is not, in fact, an extraordinarily lethal pathogen, just a nasty one, similar to many others. So it makes no sense whatsoever to follow the science on Covid to the exclusion of everything else. The government should rapidly lift the lockdown to a condition similar to that of Sweden’s.

The first step is often the hardest. It will be much easier to plot a course back to normality from there. And despite the fears that we continue to harbour over this virus, our new normal should look very much like our old, perhaps with the addition of some social responsibility in the face of respiratory illness. It is the only way for us to live in the world.
Click to expand...
You might be sensible but the population as a whole doesn't work on individual people, it's what works for the masses.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top