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

[island]

Boris has just announced (live on TV) that collection of details for test & trace will be made mandatory from Monday in England. Giving false details will be an offence.

Whether this makes it to an SI of course remains to be seen.

 

[DB]

Boris has just announced (live on TV) that collection of details for test & trace will be made mandatory from Monday in England. Giving false details will be an offence.

Whether this makes it to an SI of course remains to be seen.

No doubt PC Plod will put a lot of time into tracing all those people called Mickey Mouse and Dominic Cummings...

 

[takno]

Yeah, totally practical. We just need to ramp up from 250K max a day.....

Seriously what planet are they from, and what is the colour of the sky?

The quick antigen tests are a couple of orders of magnitude easier to scale up. It's theoretically possible to scale them up to 60 million a day, although a test every couple of weeks would be more credible than daily. Fortnightly testing of everyone might not even be massively more expensive to do than the current 250k PCR tests a day. Obviously it's still a massive, disproportionate and pretty much pointless intrusion into daily lives, but frankly if if keeps that Hancock idiot busy then it might do us all some good.

 

[big_rig]

I don't think we are much closer to getting an answer to 'how long will social distancing go on for' after today's press conference. Whether these mass tests work or not to be determined at some point by around the end of the year seems to be as good of a guess as any, and if they don't I guess the next point is whether or not any of these vaccines work at some stage next year. Easter then?

This is of course in the absence of the Government identifying a level of cases they are relatively ok with and leaving it at that. If they have it seems like it is at a level lower than currently.

 

[MikeWM]

I mean it's not great but it's far better than face coverings everywhere, dystopian local restrictions, and social distancing which is isolating people and ruining their mental health.

It strikes me that the Government is now treating us in the rather classic and predicatable way in an abusive relationship that the abuser treats their victim. The abuser takes 'normal' things away from the victim, and then they only allow them to return in a limited controlled way, and only if they follow the 'rules' set out by the abuser, which may well involve losing other 'normal' things instead. If you don't follow the 'rules' then they are taken away again. (Then there is the forced isolation from family and friends, the shaming, the psychological aspect of imposing non-sensical and often contradicting rules, the continual indoctrination that the things being done are 'for your own good' - the more I think about this the more accurate it seems...)

To me this is not an either/or. Both are awful. One may or may not be marginally better than the other, but we need to reject both.

 

[Bantamzen]

The quick antigen tests are a couple of orders of magnitude easier to scale up. It's theoretically possible to scale them up to 60 million a day, although a test every couple of weeks would be more credible than daily. Fortnightly testing of everyone might not even be massively more expensive to do than the current 250k PCR tests a day. Obviously it's still a massive, disproportionate and pretty much pointless intrusion into daily lives, but frankly if if keeps that Hancock idiot busy then it might do us all some good.

And how long before the activists demand weekly, then daily testing?

No, no, and thrice no. Such regular testing would only be the thin edge of the wedge. Once given, that power will never be surrendered, only expanded.

 

[takno]

And how long before the activists demand weekly, then daily testing?

No, no, and thrice no. Such regular testing would only be the thin edge of the wedge. Once given, that power will never be surrendered, only expanded.

Having read back on what was said in the press conference I've now come to the conclusion that this is just the latest thing to come of out the public misinformation brains trust, because they've realised that all the talk about vaccinations is starting to wear pretty thin. It's really just a case of anything will do to keep up the pretence that the solution is just around the corner and we just need one more big push.

 

[david1212]

I don't think we are much closer to getting an answer to 'how long will social distancing go on for' after today's press conference. Whether these mass tests work or not to be determined at some point by around the end of the year seems to be as good of a guess as any, and if they don't I guess the next point is whether or not any of these vaccines work at some stage next year. Easter then?

This is of course in the absence of the Government identifying a level of cases they are relatively ok with and leaving it at that. If they have it seems like it is at a level lower than currently.

IMO there are simply too many unknowns to make commitments very far ahead. Rather there are continually updated plans for various scenarios.

If overall the daily number of new cases had stayed around even 1500 and there were only a few areas with more than 20 cases per 100,000 I don't think there would have been any national change, just a continuation of harsher local restrictions where the level was significantly higher.

Maybe I will be proved wrong but I just can not see even weekly testing of every body happening.

 

[DB]

Rather there are continually updated plans for various scenarios.

I think it's rather generous to describe the government's approach as having anything resembling 'plans' - it appears to be more a series of knee-jerk reactions according to what they think the view on social media is!

 

[Yew]

I think it's rather generous to describe the government's approach as having anything resembling 'plans' - it appears to be more a series of knee-jerk reactions according to what they think the view on social media is!

The view on the latest measures seems remarkably negative, I wonder if we'll see a change of direction.

 

[NorthOxonian]

The view on the latest measures seems remarkably negative, I wonder if we'll see a change of direction.

The weird thing is, every view I've seen (both from forums like this and all of my personal friends of every persuasion) is extremely negative. Yet YouGov have released a poll showing massively overwhelming support. They can massage data a bit, but it's very hard to do so to such a huge extent - what's going on there?

 

[david1212]

I think it's rather generous to describe the government's approach as having anything resembling 'plans' - it appears to be more a series of knee-jerk reactions according to what they think the view on social media is!

I was being polite ....

 

[Yew]

The weird thing is, every view I've seen (both from forums like this and all of my personal friends of every persuasion) is extremely negative. Yet YouGov have released a poll showing massively overwhelming support. They can massage data a bit, but it's very hard to do so to such a huge extent - what's going on there?

A delay, a poll from a few days ago?

 

[bramling]

The weird thing is, every view I've seen (both from forums like this and all of my personal friends of every persuasion) is extremely negative. Yet YouGov have released a poll showing massively overwhelming support. They can massage data a bit, but it's very hard to do so to such a huge extent - what's going on there?

Even BBC have your say is overwhelmingly negative.

However ... my local Facebook site seems to be dribbling with excitement. Some of them on there seem to love the idea of even the mention of return to full lockdown.

 

[david1212]

The weird thing is, every view I've seen (both from forums like this and all of my personal friends of every persuasion) is extremely negative. Yet YouGov have released a poll showing massively overwhelming support. They can massage data a bit, but it's very hard to do so to such a huge extent - what's going on there?

The results of any poll / survey depend on the question(s) asked, exactly how they are worded, if multiple choice answers the options to choose from and who you ask.

To be abstract if asked
' Do you want ham or cheese sandwiches for tea ? ' the answer would be ham
but widened out to
' Do you want sandwiches or pizza for tea ? ' the answer would be pizza.

Our council had a survey about a plan. It covered various aspects / options for the plan but did not include the crucial question ' Overall do you approve of this plan ' with the response optons of yes or no.

 

[NorthOxonian]

A delay, a poll from a few days ago?

No, this is a poll from today.

For social gatherings being limited, they have support at 77% and opposition at 17%, and for a strict curfew (not allowed to leave home between 10pm and 5am), they have support at 62% and opposition at 31%.

 

[bramling]

No, this is a poll from today.

For social gatherings being limited, they have support at 77% and opposition at 17%, and for a strict curfew (not allowed to leave home between 10pm and 5am), they have support at 62% and opposition at 31%.

So that’s 62% of people happy not to be able to take any kind of holiday? Or am I misinterpreting? Sounds far-fetched to me.

 

[NorthOxonian]

So that’s 62% of people happy not to be able to take any kind of holiday? Or am I misinterpreting? Sounds far-fetched to me.

Presumably they'd be allowed to, but they'd have to stay in their accommodation at that time.

Still lunacy, but sadly I think it's inevitable at this point.

 

[Huntergreed]

No, this is a poll from today.

For social gatherings being limited, they have support at 77% and opposition at 17%, and for a strict curfew (not allowed to leave home between 10pm and 5am), they have support at 62% and opposition at 31%.

A curfew? What would that achieve, it’s hardly like the virus is nocturnal (and surely this will cause a rise in indoor gatherings, and create issues for night shift workers etc). That seems very far-fetched and is far stricter than even full lockdown, I truly hope it doesn’t come to that.

 

[bramling]

Presumably they'd be allowed to, but they'd have to stay in their accommodation at that time.

Still lunacy, but sadly I think it's inevitable at this point.

So it was okay to have every man and his dog on Bournemouth beach or cramming restaurants in mixed household groups enjoying a tenner off, but I can’t go for a walk round a deserted field at 2200. Boris can take than one and piffle on it!

Presumably it would be okay to go for a late-night walk to test one’s eyesight?

 

[Scrotnig]

Where has talk of curfews come from? Nobody in authority has even mentioned it as far as I know.

The nearest has been the 'takeaways must close at 10pm' thing in Bolton, but that's not a curfew, it's just an instruction to close certain businesses at that time.

 

[DB]

Where has talk of curfews come from? Nobody in authority has even mentioned it as far as I know.

The nearest has been the 'takeaways must close at 10pm' thing in Bolton, but that's not a curfew, it's just an instruction to close certain businesses at that time.

Yes, all the mentions I've seen is of businesses being forced to close between 10 and 5 in Bolton (and potentially elsewhere in future) - this is not a curfew as it's normally understood.

 

[bramling]

Yes, all the mentions I've seen is of businesses being forced to close between 10 and 5 in Bolton (and potentially elsewhere in future) - this is not a curfew as it's normally understood.

It was definitely mentioned on one of the news channels this evening, though I’m not sure where it’s come from.

 

[DB]

It was definitely mentioned on one of the news channels this evening, though I’m not sure where it’s come from.

Could be just the usual media dramatising?

I can see absolutely nothing which would be gained by an actual 10-5 curfew - and even more so now that winter is coming. Surely even this government wouldn't do something so futile and illogical?

 

[takno]

The weird thing is, every view I've seen (both from forums like this and all of my personal friends of every persuasion) is extremely negative. Yet YouGov have released a poll showing massively overwhelming support. They can massage data a bit, but it's very hard to do so to such a huge extent - what's going on there?

It's yougov. They are absolutely the least respectable accredited polling org. I would never suggest that they make it up as they go along, but they are always more interested in a headline than accuracy, and judging by the Scottish referendum polling they think absolutely nothing of completely changing whatever they want to call their methodology with no notice whatsoever

 

[Skimpot flyer]

No, this is a poll from today.

For social gatherings being limited, they have support at 77% and opposition at 17%, and for a strict curfew (not allowed to leave home between 10pm and 5am), they have support at 62% and opposition at 31%.

If they want their 6pm Amazon order to be delivered next day, they’ll be disappointed. With no night shift in any Royal Mail office, late shifts finishing two hours early, and early shifts starting two hours late (to allow for travel to/from home), the backlog of parcels will become mountainous in less than 3 working days...

 

[Scrotnig]

If they want their 6pm Amazon order to be delivered next day, they’ll be disappointed. With no night shift in any Royal Mail office, late shifts finishing two hours early, and early shifts starting two hours late (to allow for travel to/from home), the backlog of parcels will become mountainous in less than 3 working days...

There would no doubt be exemptions for being at work.

 

[DB]

Yougov poll on curfews:

Would you support or oppose the introduction of a curfew (a time each day after which people are not allowed to leave their homes) between 10pm and 5am to help prevent a second wave of COVID-19? | Daily Question

Would you support or oppose the introduction of a curfew (a time each day after which people are not allowed to leave their homes) between 10pm and 5am to help prevent a second wave of COVID-19?

yougov.co.uk

Just shows how stupid people are. How on earth does the proposal in the question ' introduction of a curfew (a time each day after which people are not allowed to leave their homes) between 10pm and 5am to help prevent a second wave of COVID-19?' even make any logical sense? There will be far fewer people out and about in that period during the winter anyway - and if venues were shut there would be nowhere for them to go. How could it conceivably 'help prevent a second wave', when most contact between people will occur during the daytime anyway?

 

[bramling]

Could be just the usual media dramatising?

I can see absolutely nothing which would be gained by an actual 10-5 curfew - and even more so now that winter is coming. Surely even this government wouldn't do something so futile and illogical?

It wouldn’t work anyway. Come 2200 everyone would just go indoors, which is worse, and unless there’s going to be Covid marshals going round knocking on doors and seeing who’s where...

 

[Ian Cunningham]

For how long?

We can't maintain zombie businesses on the basis that they might be permitted to reopen at some point next year or the year after.

They are only "zombie businesses" as they have been forcibly closed by government order and are either still closed by law or so heavily restricted by government covid guidelines and rules that they are temporarily unviable.
It would be grossly unfair to the business owners and staff if they were driven out of business directly due to government action.

Another important factor is that it's not just individual businesses that are at risk of failing but entire sectors of the economy - this is much harder to recover from (if recovery is possible) and much more damaging to the overall economy
In normal times if a company failed then other companies in the sector would have picked up the pieces and bough up the remains of the company or re-hired some of the staff. At the moment this isn't happening in some sectors as all the companies are fighting for their own survival. For example two of the UK's biggest Audio Visual production companies have recently failed and there is no sign of rescue for either