Lockdown in England from Thursday 5 November until Wednesday 2 December

[kristiang85]

I think it's four coronaviruses in general circulation endemically already.

This one will just be added to them.

 

[ainsworth74]

As this is Covid 19 it implies we have already had 18 other types of Covid infections before and we are still here having learned to either live or combat those earlier examples.

Erm, the name comes from it being a novel coronavirus found in 2019. The virus is officially known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) because it's related SARS from 2003 and is therefore the second time we've come across something like this.

Naming the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and the virus that causes it

An explanation of the official names for the corona virus disease (COVID-2019) and the virus that causes it.

www.who.int

 

[DustyBin]

Totally negative comments. We would never have achieved anything with pessimists like you.
We have to tackle and beat this epidemic otherwise we have no future.
You seem to have given up already. RIP

I'd argue they're totally realistic comments! As for being a pessimist, if that's what recognising the dire situation we are in economically, socially and politically makes me then so be it. Or do you think things aren't really that bad?

May I ask, what is it you think we've achived so far? We went into lockdown in March and we're going back into lockdown on Thursday. In the meantime we've wrecked the economy, disrupted education and totally disregarded people with non-Covid related illnesses. The response has been an abject failure, and yet you appear to be calling for more of the same?

What we need is to ackowledge that the virus is here to stay and that over 99% of infected people survive, many without even showing symptoms. But the government appears to be being led by the nose by it's scientific advisors with no sign of changing direction.

I'm all for positive thinking, and I've far from 'given up' as you put it, but I don't see any sign of a miraculous turnaround, presumably you do?

 

[LAX54]

I see RYANAIR have said with regrsd to this 'lockdown' that if the flight goes as booked, there will be NO REFUND, regardless of Governemnt ruling to the Public about travel, however you will be able to rebook for a later date 'Free'

 

[cuccir]

Here's my 'optimist' view of what can happen with this lockdown and after:

We see R - which was already dropping - back down to ~1 at end of the month. Tier system back in place for December, crucially allowing economic benefits of retail season and well-being/social benefits of Christmas period to play out. We then have a what is effectively a compensatory lockdown in January; if there's any sense, we delay the return to schools by two weeks at the start of January and make-up in part by scrapping Februrary half-term. So you have a two week 'intense' lockdown starting January 4th (no travel, no schools, key workers only) then something similar to 'the May/November rules' (which are very similar) for the rest of January.

After that, by February, (1) the first vaccinations are being rolled out to vulnerable + key workers; and (2) improved rapid antigen testing allows for a better version of track and trace. We keep regional tiers in place until vaccinations are able to reach whatever percentage of the population is needed, which probably sees us through the spring to June/July. At that point 'tier 0' is added with no or very limited restrictions for the whole country, allowing for any spikes in areas of low-vacciantion reach to be dealt with during the 2021/22 winter season. All covid-19 restrictions then removed from law in spring 2022, with covid-19 effectively then like flu: an annual updated vaccination which is rolled out by the NHS to the vulnerable, available at a cost to others who need/want it.

 

[_toommm_]

Gov.uk has the guidance, but not the detailed regulations. I’ve similar questions about work scheduled over the next month, and expect to see developments over the next week as the firms involved work out their positions.

Home appointments and services are still allowed. I can’t post the guidance as it’s internal to the company I work for, but they say they’ve consulted and it’s still allowed.

 

[brad465]

Totally negative comments. We would never have achieved anything with pessimists like you.
We have to tackle and beat this epidemic otherwise we have no future.
You seem to have given up already. RIP

I would argue if we come out of all us, but find mass unemployment, large swathes of previously viable industry, especially hospitality and arts are gone, then we have lost, even if the virus hasn't infected the majority of the population.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Basically we are sacrificing the economy and the future of all the children we want to keep at school to protect the over 80's its as simple as that. Hancock worked this out (well the experts did) back in April so that is why they were shielded yet this time he has driven headlong into the wall as though he never knew this group was the highest risk. This was all entirely avoidable by being very clear with that community of people, who lets face face it have in the majority had the best pensions and retirement of any generation, which the rest of us have paid for. So they should have had it explained to them that this is the issue and they need to protect themselves from it and if they chose not to they need to understand that the NHS may not be able to be there for all of them this time.

Yes its an awful choice for any govt and especially one we the elderly are generally tory supporters but you have to mange the risks as best you can as the virus knows no boundaries.

Shielding was pretty effective first time around and yes its hard but many elderly people are already semi hermitic anyhow it comes with the age and are alot more resilient than there being given credit for. Also there is vast amount of people that are prepared to help be it on food delivery or making phone calls and if they want to see the grandkids so be it but they and those that bring them together need to be aware of the risks and consequences so they can make an informed decision.

Furthermore care homes are another car crash in this with 100's of outbreaks every week and almost nothing done to support that sector which still relies heavily on zero hour poorly paid staff jumping from one care home to another. This should have been addressed across the summer and a few billion sent here would have avoided this being another big source of hospitalisations. This lockdown, which will will cost 15-20B alone in furlough and other grants let alone the long term economic damage, could have potentially been avoided.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Nov 2020 ==

Here's my 'optimist' view of what can happen with this lockdown and after:

We see R - which was already dropping - back down to ~1 at end of the month. Tier system back in place for December, crucially allowing economic benefits of retail season and well-being/social benefits of Christmas period to play out. We then have a what is effectively a compensatory lockdown in January; if there's any sense, we delay the return to schools by two weeks at the start of January and make-up in part by scrapping Februrary half-term. So you have a two week 'intense' lockdown starting January 4th (no travel, no schools, key workers only) then something similar to 'the May/November rules' (which are very similar) for the rest of January.

Witty isn't interested in the R currently, albeit it is a leading indicator, its hospitalisations is where there concern is and because they've allowed those that are vulnerable to become too exposed its growth rate has the potential to be significant. Yesterday 1442 hospitalisations occurred across UK (actually data is for 29th oct always -2 days) but unfortunately they don't give discharges only deaths but you can infer from the patients in hospital numbers that its growing at around a nett 400-450/day currently and this is why they forecast exhaustion of capacity in 5-6 weeks time. Given it 80+ year olds most likely to be hospitailised it stands to reasons they should have been shielded as per first lockdown but they weren't. So we have to watch admissions and nett numbers in hospitals to see how Witty will be briefing the cabinet on whether 2/12 is the end date or not.

 

[trebor79]

As this is Covid 19 it implies we have already had 18 other types of Covid infections before

Thanks for writing this, it's allowed me to decide to pay no attention whatsoever to whatever else you may write on this topic.

Here's my 'optimist' view of what can happen with this lockdown and after:

We see R - which was already dropping - back down to ~1 at end of the month. Tier system back in place for December, crucially allowing economic benefits of retail season and well-being/social benefits of Christmas period to play out. We then have a what is effectively a compensatory lockdown in January; if there's any sense, we delay the return to schools by two weeks at the start of January and make-up in part by scrapping Februrary half-term. So you have a two week 'intense' lockdown starting January 4th (no travel, no schools, key workers only) then something similar to 'the May/November rules' (which are very similar) for the rest of January.

I think a lockdown straight after Christmas, especially an "opened up" Christmas would be a bad move. People would just continue to meet up, drink, have parties etc.

 

[Class 33]

We just can't keep going in and out of national lockdowns for potentially years to come, every time the cases and R rate starts going up again! There will be nothing left of this country if we continue like this! It's bad enough that from Thursday we're near enough resetting back to the full national lockdown of 23rd March again, and the further catastrophic damage this will do to this country.

 

[DB]

We just can't keep going in and out of national lockdowns for potentially years to come, every time the cases and R rate starts going up again! There will be nothing left of this country if we continue like this! It's bad enough that from Thursday we're near enough resetting back to the full national lockdown of 23rd March again, and the further catastrophic damage this will do to this country.

It won't be like March, simply because compliance will be far lower - a large number of people just won't be prepared to sit at home this time round.

 

[C J Snarzell]

I'm of the view of what cuccir said - we will get another lockdown in January.

The forthcoming lockdown will run until early December, perhaps the second week (not the 2nd). Boris will have to open the economy for Christmas - he has to really to save businesses.

Because infection rates haven't been pushed down enough during November's lockdown and there will be a surge of new cases in December because of Christmas & New Year activities, a third lockdown will be needed at the start of 2021.

I do think it will be a somewhat difficult Winter with pushing & pulling to fight infection but keep the economy afloat as best as possible.

My guess is we probably won't see 'normality' until maybe March 2021 when we reach the first anniversary of all of this misery.

CJ

 

[bramling]

It won't be like March, simply because compliance will be far lower - a large number of people just won't be prepared to sit at home this time round.

Which will likely make it less effective. Naturally people won’t be able to visit shops and hospitality as they will be closed, and the colder weather (it seems there’s going to be a few nice days at the end of this week but then downhill again) means parks and beaches won’t be so attractive, plus in any event kids will still be at school. There will however be plenty of scope for socialising in other people’s houses, which now seems to be regarded as one of the biggest actual issues.

I can well see things kicking off again, as a Christmas frenzy is all but inevitable - assuming BJ does reopen at the beginning of December then that leaves three weeks for everyone to do all their pre Christmas preparations, so watch out for packed shops, public transport and the like. Then all the usual Christmas socialising, which pretty much guarantees a “terrifying spike” come January.

 

[C J Snarzell]

Which will likely make it less effective. Naturally people won’t be able to visit shops and hospitality as they will be closed, and the colder weather (it seems there’s going to be a few nice days at the end of this week but then downhill again) means parks and beaches won’t be so attractive, plus in any event kids will still be at school. There will however be plenty of scope for socialising in other people’s houses, which now seems to be regarded as one of the biggest actual issues.

I can well see things kicking off again, as a Christmas frenzy is all but inevitable - assuming BJ does reopen at the beginning of December then that leaves three weeks for everyone to do all their pre Christmas preparations, so watch out for packed shops, public transport and the like. Then all the usual Christmas socialising, which pretty much guarantees a “terrifying spike” come January.

The danger is with the New Year 'spike' is that because January and February are regarded as 'dull' non eventful months, they are likely to imposed a proper prolonged lockdown that is likely to run close to Easter.

Alot of businesses have a dip in their trade anyway at the start of the year (any year that is), so I'm assuming the government's attitude is that they won't suffer too much. For example, hotels in tourist locations don't get many bookings until the Spring.

CJ

 

[packermac]

Basically we are sacrificing the economy and the future of all the children we want to keep at school to protect the over 80's its as simple as that. Hancock worked this out (well the experts did) back in April so that is why they were shielded yet this time he has driven headlong into the wall as though he never knew this group was the highest risk. This was all entirely avoidable by being very clear with that community of people, who lets face face it have in the majority had the best pensions and retirement of any generation, which the rest of us have paid for. So they should have had it explained to them that this is the issue and they need to protect themselves from it and if they chose not to they need to understand that the NHS may not be able to be there for all of them this time.

Yes its an awful choice for any govt and especially one we the elderly are generally tory supporters but you have to mange the risks as best you can as the virus knows no boundaries.

Shielding was pretty effective first time around and yes its hard but many elderly people are already semi hermitic anyhow it comes with the age and are alot more resilient than there being given credit for. Also there is vast amount of people that are prepared to help be it on food delivery or making phone calls and if they want to see the grandkids so be it but they and those that bring them together need to be aware of the risks and consequences so they can make an informed decision.

Furthermore care homes are another car crash in this with 100's of outbreaks every week and almost nothing done to support that sector which still relies heavily on zero hour poorly paid staff jumping from one care home to another. This should have been addressed across the summer and a few billion sent here would have avoided this being another big source of hospitalisations. This lockdown, which will will cost 15-20B alone in furlough and other grants let alone the long term economic damage, could have potentially been avoided.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Nov 2020 ==


Witty isn't interested in the R currently, albeit it is a leading indicator, its hospitalisations is where there concern is and because they've allowed those that are vulnerable to become too exposed its growth rate has the potential to be significant. Yesterday 1442 hospitalisations occurred across UK (actually data is for 29th oct always -2 days) but unfortunately they don't give discharges only deaths but you can infer from the patients in hospital numbers that its growing at around a nett 400-450/day currently and this is why they forecast exhaustion of capacity in 5-6 weeks time. Given it 80+ year olds most likely to be hospitailised it stands to reasons they should have been shielded as per first lockdown but they weren't. So we have to watch admissions and nett numbers in hospitals to see how Witty will be briefing the cabinet on whether 2/12 is the end date or not.

I thank you then for your many years of contributions then to my state pension (which 4 years after entitlement I have still not taken up yet). I will also ignore the 51 years of income tax I have paid, the 40 years of company pension contributions, which in turn has reduced the value of my state pension, all the extra AVC's that reduced my take home pay. Obviously that all counts for nought as it is all down to "what the rest of us have paid for" not me protecting our retirement. Many retirees have final salary company pensions, which I accept are no longer available to the young.
So how are you going to convince the families of the elderly you want shielding not to see them? I seem to remember outcry that care homes could not be visited, grandparents could not see their grandchildren. Care home or not many shielders, if they do it properly will not be able to be seen. Do not see the masses buying that one. Then there is all the free childcare this older generation seems to provide, who will be picking that up whilst the young work?
You can argue doctors play god every day to a point, but it is only battlefield doctors, or events like earthquakes where regular doctors stick coloured toe tags on to decide who lives and dies. I cannot see the public buying that, and what political party to do think will argue for that then. Even the "poster girl" of many on her Professor Gupta could only answer that question on Saturday afternoon with "we should have invested more in the NHS in the past". Perfectly valid but useless in the midst of a pandemic.

 

[philosopher]

Thanks for writing this, it's allowed me to decide to pay no attention whatsoever to whatever else you may write on this topic.

I think a lockdown straight after Christmas, especially an "opened up" Christmas would be a bad move. People would just continue to meet up, drink, have parties etc.

This is what I think is the issue with the lockdown strategy. Either you extend the November lockdown until cases are low enough that it buys enough time until a vaccine is rolled out. This would likely result in Christmas being under lockdown so probably would not go down very well with the public and may well decimate high street retail. Or you open up on the 2nd December, have a big spike in cases from Christmas socialising and then have another lockdown in January.

Both approaches are dependent on a successful vaccine or treatment being rolled out in the new year. If there is no vaccine, then you have to keep locking down every two, three or four months.

 

[trebor79]

Both approaches are dependent on a successful vaccine or treatment being rolled out in the new year. If there is no vaccine, then you have to keep locking down every two, three or four months.

No, that would be lunacy. At that point even the most frightened would have to accept it needs to be allowed to run its course.

 

[DB]

that it buys enough time until a vaccine is rolled out.

And this is the problem with the government "strategy" - there is no timescale for a vaccine, and no guarantee that one will appear (or if it does how effective it will be). They are trashing the economy based on a series of unknowns.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Nov 2020 ==

No, that would be lunacy. At that point even the most frightened would have to accept it needs to be allowed to run its course.

And the end result would be the same - it would just take longer and cause more collateral damage.

 

[trebor79]

And this is the problem with the government "strategy" - there is no timescale for a vaccine, and no guarantee that one will appear (or if it does how effective it will be). They are trashing the economy based on a series of unknowns.

I've already wagered a bet of dinner at the Ritz with one of my friends. He's dead certain a vaccine will be rolled out for general use in the spring. I'm dead certain it won't happen before 2022.

 

[DustyBin]

I've already wagered a bet of dinner at the Ritz with one of my friends. He's dead certain a vaccine will be rolled out for general use in the spring. I'm dead certain it won't happen before 2022.

Out of interest, what will happen to the millions of vaccine shots already produced and (I believe) paid for? Even if they are finally approved for use, do they have a shelf life? It seemed odd to me at the time to be producing an unapproved vaccine in such quanities....

 

[island]

Yes, my mother and I (with 2 other family members) take it in turns/alternate so that we are not all present with granny at the same time. My mother goes up one day and stays overnight (as it's too much for her to travel for 1 day) and thus, is one household. My wife, myself and our daughter go up another time and thus, we are a second household.

What you have described isn’t allowed. An extended household is fixed in size at two households total, not “any number of households as long as only two meet at any one time”. Each household can only be a member of one extended household. Households cannot flip back and forth between one extended household and another.

Additionally, from Thursday it may not be permissible to stay away from home overnight.

 

[trebor79]

Out of interest, what will happen to the millions of vaccine shots already produced and (I believe) paid for? Even if they are finally approved for use, do they have a shelf life? It seemed odd to me at the time to be producing an unapproved vaccine in such quanities....

They've apparently been ordered, not sure if that means they've been paid for. Given this government's communications "ordered" could mean anything from "paid for and in production now" to a conversation over dinner with a potential vaccine supplier.
I seem to recall some stories in the media that the problems are more around producing enough vials, and sorting out the distribution. Producing the actual vaccine, after it's been developed, is the realatively easy part.

What you have described isn’t allowed. An extended household is fixed in size at two households total, not “any number of households as long as only two meet at any one time”. Each household can only be a member of one extended household. Households cannot flip back and forth between one extended household and another.

Additionally, from Thursday it may not be permissible to stay away from home overnight.

Which just goes to show how silly these proposed rules are if they prevent people from looking after their nearest and dearest (assuming they are complied with).

 

[JonathanP]

It's quite surprising to me how negative and critical people are on here about the UK policy, even though it's broadly similar to the German policy, which is mostly supported by German residents so far as I can see. Does this forum represent typical attitudes in Britain?

In my view the big difference between Germany, which by most accounts has handled the pandemic well, and the UK is the implementation of policy. We have had a Track & Trace app since June for instance. Implementation doesn't seem to get discussed much here through.

 

[yorksrob]

It's quite surprising to me how negative and critical people are on here about the UK policy, even though it's broadly similar to the German policy, which is mostly supported by German residents so far as I can see. Does this forum represent typical attitudes in Britain?

In my view the big difference between Germany, which by most accounts has handled the pandemic well, and the UK is the implementation of policy. We have had a Track & Trace app since June for instance. Implementation doesn't seem to get discussed much here through.

It's difficult to tell how successful a particular policy is because none of them last more than a couple of weeks. SAGE aren't interested in any policies that aren't lockdown anyway.

 

[Richard Scott]

I actually signed the petition to shut schools even though it would mean my mum not working until new year (I'm still on furlough thanks to Rishi extending the scheme for another month)

Why? People aren't considering the mental well-being of children here, just saying that they'll get over it. No they won't, there are a lot who just want their education in school with their friends. We were all allowed to do that and they were good years for most of us do why deny children that?

 

[cuccir]

there is no timescale for a vaccine, and no guarantee that one will appear (or if it does how effective it will be). They are trashing the economy based on a series of unknowns.

There's a question of the certainty of these unknowns, but that level of unceratiny is a bit of a misrepresentation IMO.

There is no scientific, economic or policy reason to believe that a vaccine of some level of effectivenss won't be ready for some level of use during 2021. I've not seen any expert view which falls outside those parameters. Of course there are big differences between the most positive version - that a very effective vaccine which has mnay years' proteciton can be rolled out from December 2020 onwards - and the most negative - that a mild-effectiveness vaccine which protects for one witner only can be gotten to the most vulnerable and healthcare workers by October 2021.

But given that levels should naturally fall in the summer, even the most negative vaccination scenarios would suggest to me that full lockdowns are unlikely to continue on national level bases beyond the end of this winter (or early spring). The question about how much longer the mid-level/regional restricitons go on for is much more dependent on the variation in the plausible vaccination scenarios.

 

[PTR 444]

The danger is with the New Year 'spike' is that because January and February are regarded as 'dull' non eventful months, they are likely to imposed a proper prolonged lockdown that is likely to run close to Easter.

Alot of businesses have a dip in their trade anyway at the start of the year (any year that is), so I'm assuming the government's attitude is that they won't suffer too much. For example, hotels in tourist locations don't get many bookings until the Spring.

CJ

And for that reason, a lockdown after New Year’s Day would be much better than one over the Christmas trading period.

 

[43066]

So how are you going to convince the families of the elderly you want shielding not to see them? I seem to remember outcry that care homes could not be visited, grandparents could not see their grandchildren. Care home or not many shielders, if they do it properly will not be able to be seen. Do not see the masses buying that one. Then there is all the free childcare this older generation seems to provide, who will be picking that up whilst the young work?

How about we say: “Nobody has asked for this virus, but it represents a negligible risk to the vast majority of healthy working age people who catch it. We cannot continue to wreck our economy, and destroy the future of our country, to save people who are already close to the end of their natural lives.

Therefore it’s now time to ask those who are not elderly or medically vulnerable to return to their normal lives. Those who are in those categories are advised to shield as far as possible until a vaccine is available.”

Seems reasonable enough to me. Asking the elderly and vulnerable to shield makes a lot more sense than locking down the entire country every few months and condemning hundreds of thousands of much younger cancer and heart disease patients to death.

 

[35B]

Why? People aren't considering the mental well-being of children here, just saying that they'll get over it. No they won't, there are a lot who just want their education in school with their friends. We were all allowed to do that and they were good years for most of us do why deny children that?

Quite. I am a primary school governor, and what I hear from the school about the effect of lockdown clearly demonstrates how important it is that all children get their education, not just those whose parents have space and available technology. I see the same from my secondary age children.

 

[HSTEd]

There is no scientific, economic or policy reason to believe that a vaccine of some level of effectivenss won't be ready for some level of use during 2021. I've not seen any expert view which falls outside those parameters. Of course there are big differences between the most positive version - that a very effective vaccine which has mnay years' proteciton can be rolled out from December 2020 onwards - and the most negative - that a mild-effectiveness vaccine which protects for one witner only can be gotten to the most vulnerable and healthcare workers by October 2021.

Leaving aside that that would still be the fastest vaccine development programme in modern history, there is no guarantee any of the vaccine candidates will actually prove effective enough to be used.
This is why we have trials after all.

That chance may be small but it is not zero.

But given that levels should naturally fall in the summer, even the most negative vaccination scenarios would suggest to me that full lockdowns are unlikely to continue on national level bases beyond the end of this winter (or early spring). The question about how much longer the mid-level/regional restricitons go on for is much more dependent on the variation in the plausible vaccination scenarios.

Getting enough people vaccinated, even if a vaccine becomes available in December, by next winter is an extremely tall order.

So how are you going to convince the families of the elderly you want shielding not to see them? I seem to remember outcry that care homes could not be visited, grandparents could not see their grandchildren. Care home or not many shielders, if they do it properly will not be able to be seen. Do not see the masses buying that one. Then there is all the free childcare this older generation seems to provide, who will be picking that up whilst the young work?['/quote]

The advantage of this system is this outbreak would be over by February, probably earlier.

If the government had not deluded itself into believing it coudl ave the baby boomers through eternal lockdown this summer, this would already be over.