How much longer will social distancing go on for in the UK?

[Huntergreed]

I truly don’t understand the public anymore. I would’ve genuinely thought that people would hate living this restricted life like I do and would do anything to get back to normal as quickly as possible. Instead we have the most vocal proportion of the public crying out for these restrictions to be extended for longer and longer and for normal life to practically never return. Where exactly did we go wrong?

Social distancing is, in my view, going in November (I imagine this will be when the mask mandation is lifted too). 9 months is long enough, if we haven’t got on top of this virus by then, we never will, and quite frankly if we don’t drop it then, we’re going to make economic recovery nearly impossible by destroying the Christmas season.

 

[AdamWW]

I truly don’t understand the public anymore. I would’ve genuinely thought that people would hate living this restricted life like I do and would do anything to get back to normal as quickly as possible. Instead we have the most vocal proportion of the public crying out for these restrictions to be extended for longer and longer and for normal life to practically never return. Where exactly did we go wrong?

Social distancing is, in my view, going in November (I imagine this will be when the mask mandation is lifted too). 9 months is long enough, if we haven’t got on top of this virus by then, we never will, and quite frankly if we don’t drop it then, we’re going to make economic recovery nearly impossible by destroying the Christmas season.

Questionable.

Only true, surely, if after November:
- We don't come up with a really good treatment for it (the news yesterday was encouraging - I think the first trial albeit small showing a treatment that made more than a small amount of difference)
- We don't get an effective vaccine
- We don't get better at understanding how it spreads and where we do and don't need to take precautions
- We don't improve contact tracing
- Numbers don't continue to slowly drop to the point where there is very little around and all we have to do is watch out for and jump on new outbreaks

I'm not saying we should continue as we are until any or all of these happens, but that's not the same as saying that it we couldn't beat it by hanging in longer.

Maybe the people you don't understand genuinely would love to go back to normal but would rather continue with restrictions than risk exponential growth building up again, overwhelming the NHS and doing a lot of damage both to people and the economy? You might think that the risk is small or non existent, or that it's a risk worth taking to get the economy going, but I don't think it's a puzzle that some people take an opposing view.

What is really annoying me is having public transport hugely affected by having everything built round strict observance of the social distancing rules even though in general people are now paying them very little attention, indoors and out.

 

[Huntergreed]

Questionable.

Only true, surely, if after November:
- We don't come up with a really good treatment for it (the news yesterday was encouraging - I think the first trial albeit small showing a treatment that made more than a small amount of difference)
- We don't get an effective vaccine
- We don't get better at understanding how it spreads and where we do and don't need to take precautions
- We don't improve contact tracing
- Numbers don't continue to slowly drop to the point where there is very little around and all we have to do is watch out for and jump on new outbreaks

I'm not saying we should continue as we are until any or all of these happens, but that's not the same as saying that it we couldn't beat it by hanging in longer.

Maybe the people you don't understand genuinely would love to go back to normal but would rather continue with restrictions than risk exponential growth building up again, overwhelming the NHS and doing a lot of damage both to people and the economy? You might think that the risk is small or non existent, or that it's a risk worth taking to get the economy going, but I don't think it's a puzzle that some people take an opposing view.

What is really annoying me is having public transport hugely affected by having everything built round strict observance of the social distancing rules even though in general people are now paying them very little attention, indoors and out.

It entirely depends on what the end goal is. Sturgeon and Drakeford have their eyes set on getting the daily deaths down to 0 and eliminating the virus, whilst England seems to be clueless as to their end goal.

Without closing the international borders completely to people (temporarily), elimination in a nation like this is impossible, and it's obvious these measures can't go on forever with the economic damage they are causing.

I still stand by my belief that the reason why the NHS was almost overwhelmed (but was it?) was due to the lack of steps took to protect those in care homes and to protect those shielding quickly enough, not because of a lack of social distancing in the general population which, admittedly causing a higher number of cases, wouldn't have resulted in the number of hospitalisations and deaths that we have had.

 

[Yew]

Handkerchief (or crook of elbow) would do

Indeed, I struggle to see how a loose-fitting piece of fabric is more effective than tightly clamped into the elbow! And that's before we even consider the unlikeliness of the actual situation that's posed.

 

[Yew]

Maybe the people you don't understand genuinely would love to go back to normal but would rather continue with restrictions than risk exponential growth building up again, overwhelming the NHS and doing a lot of damage both to people and the economy?

The suggestion that the NHS will be overwhelmed is clearly just nonsensical fear-mongering, given the serology reports, and the new research around T-cell responses, we're probably within spitting distance of herd immunity as it is. Even if we're further away, we've had plenty of time to build up stocks of PPE, Ventilators, and to put actual measures in place to protect care homes.

 

[MikeWM]

I truly don’t understand the public anymore. I would’ve genuinely thought that people would hate living this restricted life like I do and would do anything to get back to normal as quickly as possible. Instead we have the most vocal proportion of the public crying out for these restrictions to be extended for longer and longer and for normal life to practically never return. Where exactly did we go wrong?

I suppose it has to be said that for many people the 'old normal' wasn't much fun either. Though I'd have hoped that most would agree it was a lot better than this!

It is disturbing just how many people seem to like being told exactly what to do, down to the smallest detail, and snitching and shaming others who aren't doing exactly what they think they should be doing. I did think we'd do rather better at resisting that than we have; this hasn't done much for my faith in society.

 

[AdamWW]

I suppose it has to be said that for many people the 'old normal' wasn't much fun either. Though I'd have hoped that most would agree it was a lot better than this!

It is disturbing just how many people seem to like being told exactly what to do, down to the smallest detail, and snitching and shaming others who aren't doing exactly what they think they should be doing. I did think we'd do rather better at resisting that than we have; this hasn't done much for my faith in society.

I find it disturbing just how many people seem to think that someone following rules that they believe are there for everyone's benefit must be motivated by a desire to be told what to do.

And you must be able to appreciate that some people might be a bit frustrated if they are making sacrifices to follow laws/guidance and then watch other people ignoring them.

 

[carlberry]

I did think we'd do rather better at resisting that than we have; this hasn't done much for my faith in society.

The whole point of society is that individuals have to accept compromises that benefit the whole of society, even if they find them irritating. If the UK, or England, was majorly out of step with other countries that were coping well then there would be grounds to question our approach whereas, in fact, we're spent most of the time playing catch up.

 

[farleigh]

The whole point of society is that individuals have to accept compromises that benefit the whole of society, even if they find them irritating. If the UK, or England, was majorly out of step with other countries that were coping well then there would be grounds to question our approach whereas, in fact, we're spent most of the time playing catch up.

What is the benefit to the whole of society?

 

[Huntergreed]

What is the benefit to the whole of society?

I would argue the vast, vast majority of people would rather run the minimal risk of catching the coronavirus than facing many months, if not years, of these prolonged restrictions.

 

[farleigh]

I would argue the vast, vast majority of people would rather run the minimal risk of catching the coronavirus than facing many months, if not years, of these prolonged restrictions.

I think you are right but many people are not feeling the financial pinch just yet. It will be interesting to see how many people remain virtuous in their sacrifices once it starts to really hits their pockets.

 

[AdamWW]

I would argue the vast, vast majority of people would rather run the minimal risk of catching the coronavirus than facing many months, if not years, of these prolonged restrictions.

If we drop the restrictions, how does the risk of someone catching it stay minimal?

 

[PR1Berske]

The number of cases is still too high for restrictions to be fully lifted. The general public are staying away from the high street precisely because the risk remains too high, and online shopping so easy.

November? I think January.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The number of cases is still too high for restrictions to be fully lifted. The general public are staying away from the high street precisely because the risk remains too high, and online shopping so easy.

November? I think January.

As soon as it becomes clear that a vaccine will work, I expect it will be "when 80% of the population has either been vaccinated or proven to have antibodies".

It appears the same refuseniks are now building resistance to taking a vaccine, so I fear this could be many years.

 

[MikeWM]

I find it disturbing just how many people seem to think that someone following rules that they believe are there for everyone's benefit must be motivated by a desire to be told what to do.

People blindly following rules, without working out for themselves if they *are* for everyone's benefit, is the cause of many terrible tragedies in history.

And you must be able to appreciate that some people might be a bit frustrated if they are making sacrifices to follow laws/guidance and then watch other people ignoring them.

Some people may; I prefer not to judge. I don't know the circumstances of other people (and don't want to know). Unless they are directly impacting on my quality of life [1] I tend not to care.


[1] I don't count spreading or not spreading a virus as part of that; that's a natural process.

 

[Bletchleyite]

[1] I don't count spreading or not spreading a virus as part of that; that's a natural process.

I do. I get quite angry when I am given a cold by some inconsiderate snivelling wreck spreading it all over the train when what they should be doing is staying at home because they know they have an unpleasant infectious disease (albeit not a deadly one).

 

[MikeWM]

I do. I get quite angry when I am given a cold by some inconsiderate snivelling wreck spreading it all over the train when what they should be doing is staying at home because they know they have an unpleasant infectious disease (albeit not a deadly one).

But it may have given you protection from a nastier virus later Many actions have unintended consequences.

 

[philosopher]

I suppose it has to be said that for many people the 'old normal' wasn't much fun either. Though I'd have hoped that most would agree it was a lot better than this!

I think for a lot of people, this situation is no worse and perhaps even better than the ‘old normal’. For example take a couple in their late fifties whose kids have left home, have along commute and do not visits pubs or restaurants much. For them working from home means they save loads of time and money, they can still visit their kids and the pub / restaurant restrictions do not bother them much as they rarely use them anyway.

 

[bramling]

I do. I get quite angry when I am given a cold by some inconsiderate snivelling wreck spreading it all over the train when what they should be doing is staying at home because they know they have an unpleasant infectious disease (albeit not a deadly one).

You may think that, however when they’re in a disciplinary interview for having breached an attendance policy and given a letter stating “your attendance must improve”, it’s easy to see why people will go to work with a cold. Like it or not winter colds are old of those facts of life we all have to get on with.

 

[takno]

If we drop the restrictions, how does the risk of someone catching it stay minimal?

I think the point was more that even if they do catch it their risk is minimal.

Elimination might look good on paper, but it's just going to fall apart as soon as we realise that we can't afford to lockdown for another 4 months over winter. At that point we'd have been better off starting earlier on approaches to minimise the harm. We're wasting the summer on some elimination fantasy, when more effective shielding, more realistic messaging to stop scaring people to death, and more spending on equipment and training to deal with this winter's influx are desperately required instead.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You may think that, however when they’re in a disciplinary interview for having breached an attendance policy and given a letter stating “your attendance must improve”, it’s easy to see why people will go to work with a cold. Like it or not winter colds are old of those facts of life we all have to get on with.

Yes, those attendance policies stink. It is not to the company's benefit to have half the workforce working ineffectively due to a snotty cold. Better than the one person first to be infected stayed at home for the duration.

 

[AdamWW]

People blindly following rules, without working out for themselves if they *are* for everyone's benefit, is the cause of many terrible tragedies in history.

You've lost me completely now. You're the one that seems to think people are obeying social distancing because they like being told what to do, not me.

The number of cases is still too high for restrictions to be fully lifted. The general public are staying away from the high street precisely because the risk remains too high, and online shopping so easy.

I'm sure some people are staying away, but plenty aren't.

Though in town on Monday at lunchtime there weren't as many families as I'd expect to see now the school holidays have started. (Then again the children mostly weren't at school before anyway....)

 

[Scrotnig]

You may think that, however when they’re in a disciplinary interview for having breached an attendance policy and given a letter stating “your attendance must improve”, it’s easy to see why people will go to work with a cold. Like it or not winter colds are old of those facts of life we all have to get on with.

And that is what has to change and hopefully now has. No HR department is going to tell people to come in if they have cold symptoms.

 

[AdamWW]

And that is what has to change and hopefully now has. No HR department is going to tell people to come in if they have cold symptoms.

So long as they don't have a high temperature, cough or loss of taste/smell, should they change their previous policy?

 

[Scrotnig]

So long as they don't have a high temperature, cough or loss of taste/smell, should they change their previous policy?

Well current guidance is that if you cold / flu symptoms you should self isolate. Any HR department going against that and putting in writing that staff need to still come in, would be very brave.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Well current guidance is that if you cold / flu symptoms you should self isolate. Any HR department going against that and putting in writing that staff need to still come in, would be very brave.

This is where we need a much more enhanced and streamlined testing system, because in a few months time we'll have masses of workforces on the sick for 14 days because an employee is self isolating due to experiencing cold/flu symptoms.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is where we need a much more enhanced and streamlined testing system, because in a few months time we'll have masses of workforces on the sick for 14 days because an employee is self isolating due to experiencing cold/flu symptoms.

What's not streamlined about it? I thought I had symptoms last Friday, so I booked a test for 2 hours later at my local testing location (appointments were available immediately), went there, it was carried out and I was back home within half an hour. I received the result as a text message (negative) before I even woke up the next day. How quick would you *like* it?

 

[AdamWW]

What's not streamlined about it? I thought I had symptoms last Friday, so I booked a test for 2 hours later at my local testing location (appointments were available immediately), went there, it was carried out and I was back home within half an hour. I received the result as a text message (negative) before I even woke up the next day. How quick would you *like* it?

Because it's not working like that for everyone, particularly those who can't drive to a testing station?

 

[carlberry]

And that is what has to change and hopefully now has. No HR department is going to tell people to come in if they have cold symptoms.

The kind of companies that make people come in dont usually have HR departments. This was believed to be the cause of a lot of the recent Leicester flare up.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Because it's not working like that for everyone, particularly those who can't drive to a testing station?

Kits by post were available as well. I almost chose one, but then realised that might mean a couple more days of isolation. But even with that it would have been a maximum of about 4 days of isolation, possibly only three.

Testing sites for arrival on foot or bicycle are available now too. But you should only choose these if you can walk or cycle to them, as you must not use public transport or a taxi if you have symptoms.

I'm not clear how this can really be improved until the development of home test cassettes.