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

[brad465]

Another vague and empty promise from Boris to file alongside "We'll send the virus packing in 12 weeks" and "We'll beat the virus by Christmas".

This time next year? If people are still social distancing this time next month it will alreayd have gone on for far too long!

He's just waffling, like he usually does, I would read nothing at all into such a statement.

I agree with these points, but it's surprising that as someone hooked on enthusiasm and trying to gain as much support as possible he would make this remark, however realistic it is, because this does not come across as a good thing (or at least it shouldn't, and many in his own party won't see it as a good thing for sure).

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Another vague and empty promise from Boris to file alongside "We'll send the virus packing in 12 weeks" and "We'll beat the virus by Christmas".

This time next year? If people are still social distancing this time next month it will already have gone on for far too long!

The first thought that came into my mind when i heard that was:

"This time next year... Lovely jubbly, Rishi..."

 

[Bantamzen]

This time next year....? Yeah whatever, its ending now that the weather is turning!

 

[Jamesrob637]

This time next year....? Yeah whatever, its ending now that the weather is turning!

Social distancing is kind of tolerable in summer when people can spill outdoors without getting cold and/or wet. Now we are in autumn which is showery everywhere and there follows winter which is cold and/or showery everywhere! Good weather even in the south east is now a memory until April.

 

[Class 33]

Just caught up with this after a few hours "switching off" from this Coronavirus madness.

"Social distancing to end by October 2021 promises Boris". What the....???!!! Another 12 months of this yet, on top of the 6 and a half months of this we've had already?! Seriously, how can the economy, people's livelihoods and their mental possibly manage another 12 MONTHS of this??? It is completely unsustainable. And this is once again yet another example of Boris saying something completely different to what he said a week or two before. Two weeks ago in his "address to the nation" he said these restrictions may last for another 6 months. Now he's saying it could take up to another 12 months!!!

 

[DB]

Just caught up with this after a few hours "switching off" from this Coronavirus madness.

"Social distancing to end by October 2021 promises Boris". What the....???!!! Another 12 months of this yet, on top of the 6 and a half months of this we've had already?! Seriously, how can the economy, people's livelihoods and their mental possibly manage another 12 MONTHS of this??? It is completely unsustainable. And this is once again yet another example of Boris saying something completely different to what he said a week or two before. Two weeks ago in his "address to the nation" he said these restrictions may last for another 6 months. Now he's saying it could take up to another 12 months!!!

He just makes it up as he goes along, and appears not to have a good enough memory to remember what he said last time!

 

[3rd rail land]

He just makes it up as he goes along, and appears not to have a good enough memory to remember what he said last time!

No excuse whatsoever. If his memory really is that bad he could just watch back his own address.

 

[C J Snarzell]

Just caught up with this after a few hours "switching off" from this Coronavirus madness.

"Social distancing to end by October 2021 promises Boris". What the....???!!! Another 12 months of this yet, on top of the 6 and a half months of this we've had already?! Seriously, how can the economy, people's livelihoods and their mental possibly manage another 12 MONTHS of this??? It is completely unsustainable. And this is once again yet another example of Boris saying something completely different to what he said a week or two before. Two weeks ago in his "address to the nation" he said these restrictions may last for another 6 months. Now he's saying it could take up to another 12 months!!!

I totally agree. I don't know if I'm reading too much into it, but his comments seem to imply social distancing and face coverings will be in force well into 2021, at least until the early party of the summer.

The implications of the further damage this will do to the economy next year are unbearable. Yet again, key events like the Grand National, Glastonbury, sporting fixtures will be shelved for a second year running, with seasonal attractions facing a second year of financial misery and even bankruptcy.

This is now complete madness when you look at how low the death rate is now. More people are dying of other things. I honestly believe that the virus itself will be on a natural decline within six months, as it cannot sustain high levels of infecting people for long.

CJ

 

[HSTEd]

So more than half the care home residents entering care homes in March would have died anyway by the end of the eternal lockdown.

Assuming he doesn't move the goalposts again.

 

[brad465]

The implications of the further damage this will do to the economy next year are unbearable. Yet again, key events like the Grand National, Glastonbury, sporting fixtures will be shelved for a second year running, with seasonal attractions facing a second year of financial misery and even bankruptcy.

This is now complete madness when you look at how low the death rate is now. More people are dying of other things. I honestly believe that the virus itself will be on a natural decline within six months, as it cannot sustain high levels of infecting people for long.

CJ

I agree there will be dire implications, but as I mentioned in my earlier post I believe something will give before we get anywhere near October 21, whether that's because the economic costs will ring loud before 2020 is out, which may in turn lead to a major backbench revolt that could see Johnson ousted if he doesn't change his strategy, and/or because the wider public start a mass disregarding of the rules.

Something that is also perhaps worth mentioning is the anti-lockdown party Laurence Fox is starting up, with Farage threatening to do similar. Given the latter in particular's success at garnering support from the Tories, a significant vote split could see them get forced into a change of Government strategy in the same way the party has moved towards positions of UKIP and the Brexit Party before. If social distancing and other restrictions are still in place in 2021, chances are at least one of them will have a registered party in place to initiate such actions.

 

[Class 33]

I totally agree. I don't know if I'm reading too much into it, but his comments seem to imply social distancing and face coverings will be in force well into 2021, at least until the early party of the summer.

The implications of the further damage this will do to the economy next year are unbearable. Yet again, key events like the Grand National, Glastonbury, sporting fixtures will be shelved for a second year running, with seasonal attractions facing a second year of financial misery and even bankruptcy.

This is now complete madness when you look at how low the death rate is now. More people are dying of other things. I honestly believe that the virus itself will be on a natural decline within six months, as it cannot sustain high levels of infecting people for long.

CJ

Boris seems to chop and change every week or two about when social distancing(and the other restrictions) could end. Knowing him next week he'll say "I'm confident in 18 months time all restrictions will be cut, and life will be back to near normality."!!!

If indeed he is serious though that he thinks social distancing, face coverings, etc could still continue for another year yet, then as you say the catastrophic damage this will do to the economy will be unbearable. Thousands more companies closing, millions more unemployed. The country will be a complete mess to say the least. And once again, the festival season will be a complete write-off again, along with major sporting events such as The Grand National, Tokyo Olympics, etc, etc. And the effect this will have on the nation's mental health. We've had to put up with this for 6 and a half LONG months now. Another 6 months to go with all this is dreadful enough as it is. Not sure I can take all this for yet another 6 months. But potentially another 12 MONTHS????? Many many people won't be able to take all this for that long a period, which would then be 18 MONTHS.

It is unfortunate that we're in the phase of this second spike of Coronavirus. But I too believe, that within 6 months the virus will be on a natural decline. Perhaps within 4 months with a bit of luck. And then these very restrictive and unpleasant restrictions should finally be scrapped once and for all. We just can not continue like this long term.

 

[Bantamzen]

Social distancing is kind of tolerable in summer when people can spill outdoors without getting cold and/or wet. Now we are in autumn which is showery everywhere and there follows winter which is cold and/or showery everywhere! Good weather even in the south east is now a memory until April.

This was very evident yesterday in Shipley, as the rain tipped down shoppers quickly abandoned the wide uncovered sections of the pavements in favour of all walking under the narrow covered areas next to the shops. And where some shops started to form queues, punters quickly opted to go elsewhere rather than risk ending up queuing in the rain.

 

[Whistler40145]

I'm sure Boris is just fumbling around and when something doesn't work, he thinks up an alternative solution that's even more crazy than the previous idea.

If he had no input into the situation and let the medical professionals full control of restrictions, would things be in a far better position?

 

[C J Snarzell]

This was very evident yesterday in Shipley, as the rain tipped down shoppers quickly abandoned the wide uncovered sections of the pavements in favour of all walking under the narrow covered areas next to the shops. And where some shops started to form queues, punters quickly opted to go elsewhere rather than risk ending up queuing in the rain.

I actually think the banks/building societies are deliberately continuing this charade to simply force people to bank on-line as most financial institutions are actively encouraging on-line banking.

The other reason is of course safety - letting several people wander into branches looking like Dick Turpin is not good security. I'm sure if they didn't enforce outdoor queuing some bright spark will have used the face mask enforcement as an ideal opportunity to pull off a robbery.

CJ

 

[Bantamzen]

I actually think the banks/building societies are deliberately continuing this charade to simply force people to bank on-line as most financial institutions are actively encouraging on-line banking.

The other reason is of course safety - letting several people wander into branches looking like Dick Turpin is not good security. I'm sure if they didn't enforce outdoor queuing some bright spark will have used the face mask enforcement as an ideal opportunity to pull off a robbery.

CJ

Many banks are way down this road with local branch closures. Security is always going to be an issue, but this is true of all the high street whilst people cover their faces.

However yesterday the store that seemed to have the biggest potential queues was Card Factory!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Oct 2020 ==

It seems that there is growing pushback on social distancing and other measures coming from the economic sector, and medical / scientific communities with this new petition making at least some of the newspapers today:

Great Barrington Declaration and Petition

As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection

gbdeclaration.org

As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

 

[Smidster]

Hate to say I told you so - there should be no surprise here.

Social Distancing will only end when one of a very small number of things happens:

- We have a Vaccine that has been deployed at scale
- We have a Treatment that is deemed effective enough to sufficiently neuter the Virus
- The characteristics of the Virus change so that it is no longer as dangerous

The mistake that Bozo makes is to try and put a timeline on it - We just don't know when any of those things might happen (Though none is likely in the next 6 months) so when he talks about "Turning the tide in 12 weeks" or talks of a "Normal Christmas" it gives people false hope. Unfortunately many in the Country, and on this forum, believe what he says and thought that it was likely.

Expectations management is so important and he has failed badly on that score.

 

[birchesgreen]

The problem with politicians these days (plus the media and much else) is that everything is geared at the next headline. He'll make these promises to grab the headline and the agenda for a day or so. They don't worry too much about the medium and long term.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Hate to say I told you so - there should be no surprise here.

Social Distancing will only end when one of a very small number of things happens:

- We have a Vaccine that has been deployed at scale
- We have a Treatment that is deemed effective enough to sufficiently neuter the Virus
- The characteristics of the Virus change so that it is no longer as dangerous

The mistake that Bozo makes is to try and put a timeline on it - We just don't know when any of those things might happen (Though none is likely in the next 6 months) so when he talks about "Turning the tide in 12 weeks" or talks of a "Normal Christmas" it gives people false hope. Unfortunately many in the Country, and on this forum, believe what he says and thought that it was likely.

Expectations management is so important and he has failed badly on that score.

I really can't agree more with this. The mantra of under promise and over deliver is the antithesis of what BoJo comes out with.

 

[trebor79]

Hate to say I told you so - there should be no surprise here.

Social Distancing will only end when one of a very small number of things happens:

- We have a Vaccine that has been deployed at scale
- We have a Treatment that is deemed effective enough to sufficiently neuter the Virus
- The characteristics of the Virus change so that it is no longer as dangerous

Or the government realise that the economic cost is unsustainable and unjustified compared to the additional public health harm from dropping the measures (bearing in mind that the measures are not wholly effective in achieving the stated outcome anyway)

The mistake that Bozo makes is to try and put a timeline on it - We just don't know when any of those things might happen (Though none is likely in the next 6 months) so when he talks about "Turning the tide in 12 weeks" or talks of a "Normal Christmas" it gives people false hope. Unfortunately many in the Country, and on this forum, believe what he says and thought that it was likely.

Expectations management is so important and he has failed badly on that score.

Absolutely. He keeps trying to evoke some kind of Churchillian wartime spirit. Aside from the fact it's inappropriate because we aren't at war and the government isn't asking people to lay down their lives for King and country, Churchill was at least brutally honest "I have nothing to offer other than blood, toile, tears and sweat".
Boris, with his "It'll all be over by Christmas" platitudes is evoking first world war comparisons for me. Quite appropriate in a way, the utter futility of that conflict and the utter futility of attempting to hold back an endemic virus.

 

[brad465]

Hate to say I told you so - there should be no surprise here.

Social Distancing will only end when one of a very small number of things happens:

- We have a Vaccine that has been deployed at scale
- We have a Treatment that is deemed effective enough to sufficiently neuter the Virus
- The characteristics of the Virus change so that it is no longer as dangerous

The mistake that Bozo makes is to try and put a timeline on it - We just don't know when any of those things might happen (Though none is likely in the next 6 months) so when he talks about "Turning the tide in 12 weeks" or talks of a "Normal Christmas" it gives people false hope. Unfortunately many in the Country, and on this forum, believe what he says and thought that it was likely.

Expectations management is so important and he has failed badly on that score.

The problem with politicians these days (plus the media and much else) is that everything is geared at the next headline. He'll make these promises to grab the headline and the agenda for a day or so. They don't worry too much about the medium and long term.

This goes a long way to explaining why there is increasing apathy over social distancing and other restrictions, people cannot mentally prepare for how long they have to make changes to their life if the end date keeps being pushed back.

Or the government realise that the economic cost is unsustainable and unjustified compared to the additional public health harm from dropping the measures (bearing in mind that the measures are not wholly effective in achieving the stated outcome anyway)

Absolutely. He keeps trying to evoke some kind of Churchillian wartime spirit. Aside from the fact it's inappropriate because we aren't at war and the government isn't asking people to lay down their lives for King and country, Churchill was at least brutally honest "I have nothing to offer other than blood, toile, tears and sweat".
Boris, with his "It'll all be over by Christmas" platitudes is evoking first world war comparisons for me. Quite appropriate in a way, the utter futility of that conflict and the utter futility of attempting to hold back an endemic virus.

I suspect if the Government realise this, it'll be in the next few months that they start to take it more seriously. However one theory for why they've continued with this costly path is that while they've realised their strategy is a big mistake, they've gone so far with it that to suddenly change would be a massive admittance they are wrong, so don't want the embarassment.
As others have pointed out one major area that Covid and the wars are not comparable is social contact: during the wars being social was allowed and often encouraged for morale, as well as being natural human behaviour. Trying to suppress that for this crisis cannot work for anywhere near as long as in wartime because this is not natural human behaviour.

 

[packermac]

Hate to say I told you so - there should be no surprise here.

Social Distancing will only end when one of a very small number of things happens:

- We have a Vaccine that has been deployed at scale
- We have a Treatment that is deemed effective enough to sufficiently neuter the Virus
- The characteristics of the Virus change so that it is no longer as dangerous

The mistake that Bozo makes is to try and put a timeline on it - We just don't know when any of those things might happen (Though none is likely in the next 6 months) so when he talks about "Turning the tide in 12 weeks" or talks of a "Normal Christmas" it gives people false hope. Unfortunately many in the Country, and on this forum, believe what he says and thought that it was likely.

Expectations management is so important and he has failed badly on that score.

I fully agree with your points but expectation management has the problem that people do not want to hear the truth in a society where answers are expected instantly for everything, someone is always to blame for an event and many people seem unprepared to give anything up.
There was for an example a comment last week by the Chancellor that Social Distancing will be with us well into next year, outrage from many, even some on here.
Tell people back in June that Xmas is dead is not a message they want to hear. But then at the start of both WW1 and WW2 it will be all over by Xmas was the message so what has changed.
High death rates, people dying at 65 or 70 (as was common even when I started work in 1970) are now unacceptable it seems. Before the virus there was barley a week where there was not some "life extension drug" followed by we have too many olds people for the care and health system. We can not have it both ways.
People seem to like false hope in the vague chance it might be achieved.
I personally have written off the next 5 years as being under some form of restrictions, luckily I am retired. If the worlds scientists come up with a solution before then great and will have got some months or years of normality back.

 

[MattA7]

I noticed a recent BBC live news article claiming that scientists around the world including top UK ones are returning society to normality for the young and healthy -I have pasted the article below (not sure why it won’t allow me to put it into a quote box)

People "who are at minimal risk of death" to Covid-19 should be allowed to return to normal life, an international group of infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists has said.

Nearly 6,000 scientists and health experts, including dozens from the UK, have joined a movement - known as the Great Barrington Declaration - warning of "grave concerns" around lockdown policies.

They say young and low-risk individuals should be allowed to work normally, and schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching.

They call for efforts to "to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk".

Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health, the declaration warns.

"Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage."

 

[brad465]

I noticed a recent BBC live news article claiming that scientists around the world including top UK ones are returning society to normality for the young and healthy -I have pasted the article below (not sure why it won’t allow me to put it into a quote box)

People "who are at minimal risk of death" to Covid-19 should be allowed to return to normal life, an international group of infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists has said.

Nearly 6,000 scientists and health experts, including dozens from the UK, have joined a movement - known as the Great Barrington Declaration - warning of "grave concerns" around lockdown policies.

They say young and low-risk individuals should be allowed to work normally, and schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching.

They call for efforts to "to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk".

Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health, the declaration warns.

"Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage."

There is now a full article for it here, the numbers involved in this does look promising, and now means there is a strong scientific backing anyone anti the current restrictions (but not conspiracy theorists) can use:

Coronavirus: Health experts join global anti-lockdown movement

Scientists warn of the "devastating" effect of Covid-19 policies, calling for a return to normal for healthy people.

www.bbc.co.uk

Thousands of scientists and health experts have joined a global movement warning of "grave concerns" about Covid-19 lockdown policies.

Nearly 6,000 experts, including dozens from the UK, say the approach is having a devastating impact on physical and mental health as well as society.

They are calling for protection to be focused on the vulnerable, while healthy people get on with their lives.

The declaration has prompted warnings by others in the scientific community.

Critics have pointed out:

• a more targeted approach could make it difficult to protect vulnerable people entirely
• the risk of long-term complications from coronavirus mean many others are also are at risk

But the movement - known as the Great Barrington Declaration - mirrors some of the warnings in a letter signed by a group of GPs in the UK.

Sixty-six GPs, including TV doctors Dr Phil Hammond and Dr Rosemary Leonard and a number of medics who have held senior roles at the British Medical Association, have written to the health secretary, saying there is insufficient emphasis on "non-Covid harms" in the decision-making.

 

[102 fan]

I'm sure Boris is just fumbling around and when something doesn't work, he thinks up an alternative solution that's even more crazy than the previous idea.

If he had no input into the situation and let the medical professionals full control of restrictions, would things be in a far better position?

The problem with that is;

One, they won't see their job disappearing and;

Secondly, they don't require re-election.

It's easy to impose ever more restrictions when they won't be financially required to pay for it from HM Treasury.

 

[DB]

THe critics seem to be struggling!

• a more targeted approach could make it difficult to protect vulnerable people entirely
• the risk of long-term complications from coronavirus mean many others are also are at risk

As regards the first, it's impossible anyway - I fail to see how targeted measures would be any less effective than the current mess.

And as regards the second, we seem to be back to doom-mongering again. If this is such a risk, where is the evidence? Nobody is doubting that some people take longer to fully recover than others, but where is the evidence for 'many' having 'long-term complications'?

 

[MattA7]

THe critics seem to be struggling!


As regards the first, it's impossible anyway - I fail to see how targeted measures would be any less effective than the current mess.

And as regards the second, we seem to be back to doom-mongering again. If this is such a risk, where is the evidence? Nobody is doubting that some people take longer to fully recover than others, but where is the evidence for 'many' having 'long-term complications'?

I guess one problem with releasing the “young and healthy” is that those who are older or have underlying health issues may see it as unfair if they are forced to remain restricted however others are not.

Although I’m all for returning back to normality especially with the effects the restrictions are having on my mental and physical health

 

[DB]

I guess one problem with releasing the “young and healthy” is that those who are older or have underlying health issues may see it as unfair if they are forced to remain restricted however others are not.

Basically, once there is a reasonable level of herd immunity they will be a lower risk. Continuing with the restrictions on everyone means that herd immunity takes longer, so they are at risk for longer.

 

[trebor79]

I guess one problem with releasing the “young and healthy” is that those who are older or have underlying health issues may see it as unfair if they are forced to remain restricted however others are not.

They wouldn't be forced to - they can make their own risk-based decision on what they want to do. Probably sensible to hunker down for a month or two whilst it passes through those not at risk. After that point, the risk from covid is no higher than for any other diseases that are dangerous for certain individuals.

 

[MikeWM]

Remember this thread from early May?

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/should-we-allow-the-novel-coronavirus-to-spread-in-a-controlled-way-in-the-healthy-population.204242/

If we'd done this then it would have been over by now.

Basically we've wasted five (actually seven) months, and destroyed or severely damaged the health and livelihoods of millions while doing so, while trying out incredibly restrictive and costly measures which clearly haven't helped much.

 

[43066]

They wouldn't be forced to - they can make their own risk-based decision on what they want to do. Probably sensible to hunker down for a month or two whilst it passes through those not at risk. After that point, the risk from covid is no higher than for any other diseases that are dangerous for certain individuals.

Indeed.

The argument against this approach really boils down to “it’s not fair for only one group to suffer, so everyone has to suffer”. Basically equality of misery!