Lockdown in England from Thursday 5 November until Wednesday 2 December

[Crossover]

To be honest, I have no problem with people who need to shield, shielding. There ought to be some early retirement options provided. It's just having seen and experienced the efforts that businesses have gone to, to reduce risks and play by the ever changing rules, I find it depressing for them to be thrown to the wolves.

Agreed. It may be that it is things like this and recomepsing the isolaters (vice Covid SSP) etc where the state money should be aimed, rather than washing it about wildly across the nation (and thus in part missing the people it needs targeting at)

 

[yorksrob]

Agreed. It may be that it is things like this and recomepsing the isolaters (vice Covid SSP) etc where the state money should be aimed, rather than washing it about wildly across the nation (and thus in part missing the people it needs targeting at)

Indeed. I dare say that would cost less than trashing the whole economy every few months indefinately.

 

[NorthOxonian]

It appears Labour are in tune with the public on this matter.

https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1323408367143014400?s=20

A (pro-lockdown) Conservative MP cited the fact that she had found 55% support for lockdown in her constituency in the Commons debate earlier. Bearing in mind she represents an area which has an older demographic and has a relatively high number of cases, I find it difficult to believe the national figure is over 50%.

There's certainly a lot of disquiet about all this in Oxfordshire, Wiltshire, and the surrounding area.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

A (pro-lockdown) Conservative MP cited the fact that she had found 55% support for lockdown in her constituency in the Commons debate earlier. Bearing in mind she represents an area which has an older demographic and has a relatively high number of cases, I find it difficult to believe the national figure is over 50%.

There's certainly a lot of disquiet about all this in Oxfordshire, Wiltshire, and the surrounding area.

Where did she look and how hard? People who make direct contact with an MP are likely to be holding opinions at the extremes (either pro or against). Peope who don't mind / don't have strong opinions simply won't be contacting her. The silent majority.

 

[Crossover]

Indeed. I dare say that would cost less than trashing the whole economy every few months indefinately.

You're not the first today to say similar and I would tend to agree. It may also have a better effect on the "goal" insomuch as furlough aside, if isolaters are only going to get SSP (which, money wise, equates to be the best two parts of sod all) it will potentially drive an underworld of folk who can't afford two weeks of that and ignore symptoms or whatever, escalating the problem (I am aware of some businesses where I see this being an issue)

A (pro-lockdown) Conservative MP cited the fact that she had found 55% support for lockdown in her constituency in the Commons debate earlier. Bearing in mind she represents an area which has an older demographic and has a relatively high number of cases, I find it difficult to believe the national figure is over 50%.

There's certainly a lot of disquiet about all this in Oxfordshire, Wiltshire, and the surrounding area.

I understand there is disquiet in the South due to us "dirty Northerners"

 

[43096]

Mr Whitty also said that the tier system had made a difference particularly the tier three restrictions. I'd be interested to know what evidence he has to back up his claims about the tier 3 restrictions.

Whatever the evidence is, it is probably out of date. Saw this earlier today: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54785032

The interesting bit in this context is:

But it now turns out that projection was out-of-date.
It was based on figures from the start of October, which show by now there should be 1,000 deaths a day. The current average is a quarter of that number.
What is more, the Public Health England and the Cambridge University team that produced it have since published reports based on the more recently available data.
Grilled by MPs on this on Tuesday, chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance said he apologised if it caused confusion.

So the Government is making bad decisions based on bad data and the best Vallance can do is apologise for "confusion". That is frankly unacceptable and he really ought to be considering his position as, too, should "Dim" Whitty.

 

[yorksrob]

Whatever the evidence is, it is probably out of date. Saw this earlier today: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54785032

The interesting bit in this context is:


So the Government is making bad decisions based on bad data and the best Vallance can do is apologise for "confusion". That is frankly unacceptable and he really ought to be considering his position as, too, should "Dim" Whitty.

Yes, I read that article too. It doesn't fill me with confidence.

 

[43096]

Yes, I read that article too. It doesn't fill me with confidence.

I've had no confidence for quite some time. The fact we're managing the pandemic using Excel 2003 was the final straw!

 

[Chester1]

"People I've met" usually means "People I've met and am comfortable speaking to them about their views on a contentious subject because they are likely to agree with me"

There is certainly an element of people wanting to believe they are pro restrictions but then ignoring specific ones that are difficult for them. For instance I doubt many couples who don't live together and can't form support bubbles will follow the restrictions...

On a more general note @bramling is correct that true proof of support for lockdown will be activity not polling figures. I doubt tomorrow will look like the first lockdown, let alone days towards end of this month.

 

[43066]

I understand there is disquiet in the South due to us "dirty Northerners"

Absolutely. But that was the case long before Covid .

 

[Wuffle]

Lockdown Sceptics have this piece by Dr Mike Yeadon who left Pfizer to start his own company

3 main points he makes

I am certain the pandemic is over and was over before the end of June.

There was a clear peak of excess deaths in spring. COVID-19 clearly caused many deaths, mostly of the elderly and already ill.

Turning to late summer and into the autumn – despite exaggerated claims that there is an ongoing full-blown pandemic, there are still FEWER respiratory deaths than at the same time periods in all five of the years since 2015. The below shows monthly deaths with any respiratory primary diagnoses including COVID-19.

https://lockdownsceptics.org/2020/1...o-mps-from-mike-yeadon-dont-vote-for-lockdown

 

[yorkie]

In which case your sample is less skewed - but I stand by my view that "people I've met" is usually a distorted view of the population at large.

It depends on who you meet and how wide your circles are; for example the demographics of cleaners at my workplace are about as far removed from the forum membership, and yet I am hearing very similar views expressed among these contrasting groups.

There are very few pro-lockdown people at work that I know of; their arguments have never made sense and even they appear to be having doubts.

 

[kez19]

Call me cynical here in terms of England locking down again but didn't anyone catch this I believe last week? Newcastle: it was about the "wrong" warning had been displayed (level 3 - Very High)? - Newcastle was to go into tier/level 2? and the council kicked up about it..

Giant Tier 3 lockdown warning wrongly appears in Newcastle

A huge sign stating that the ‘Very High’ Covid-19 alert level, otherwise known as Tier 3, is in force was seen on the massive digital advertising screen in Northumberland Street

www.chroniclelive.co.uk

A huge sign stating that the ‘Very High’ Covid-19 alert level, otherwise known as Tier 3, is in force was seen on the massive digital advertising screen in Northumberland Street



A huge sign stating that the ‘Very High’ Covid-19 alert level, otherwise known as Tier 3, is in force was seen on the massive digital advertising screen in Northumberland Street on Tuesday morning.


The false information was taken down at around 9am from the screen, located at one of the busiest areas of the city centre near Haymarket Metro station.


Newcastle City Council said that the incorrect message was supplied by the government to the private operator which manages the advertising screen.


Council leader Nick Forbes said: "Clear, accurate and timely communication is essential in building public trust, compliance in the guidance and reassurance to local residents and businesses. Unfortunately the Government has repeatedly failed to deliver this. The levels of incompetence are breathtaking.


"Throughout the pandemic central Government's communication has lacked vital details, clarity of messages and in some cases the press have been briefed about major decisions before impacted local authorities have been sighted.

And tonight as if by magic the UK Government moves everyone into the higher level? I just thought it was rather strange as the council themselves had asked why.

 

[Crossover]

Absolutely. But that was the case long before Covid .

 

[Richard Scott]

Noticed a poll on an AOL page (sorry don't have a link to it) there were 48% against lockdown, with 44% for and rest undecided. Almost all polls up to now have been very pro restrictions, lockdown etc so tide is definitely turning.

 

[yorkie]

How about something nearer the actual situation, i.e measures necessary to arrest/retard a rapidly increasing infection rate.

How do you define "necessary"?
How will you measure success?
How do you define "rapidly rising" (positive test results have not risen in the past few days!)
If the rate reduces, do you then accept that locking down is over, or will you want further lockdowns when the rate increases again?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Nov 2020 ==

Noticed a poll on an AOL page there were 48% against lockdown, with 44% for and rest undecided. Almost all polls up to now have been very pro restrictions, lockdown etc so tide is definitely turning.

These polls are much more likely to be done by pro-lockdown people with loads of time on their hands and massively underestimate the true feeling of most ordinary people, so the fact that even online polls show more against than for demonstrates a huge shift.

The pro-lockdown brigade are dramatically reducing in numbers, though the vocal minority are more vocal than ever right now.

 

[jtuk]

Noticed a poll on an AOL page there were 48% against lockdown, with 44% for and rest undecided. Almost all polls up to now have been very pro restrictions, lockdown etc so tide is definitely turning.

AOL? Are we talking about the original SARS?

 

[35B]

It depends on who you meet and how wide your circles are; for example the demographics of cleaners at my workplace are about as far removed from the forum membership, and yet I am hearing very similar views expressed among these contrasting groups.

There are very few pro-lockdown people at work that I know of; their arguments have never made sense and even they appear to be having doubts.

You conflate two things; selection bias for those you associate with, and the population at large. For example, I inhabit circles in which for most it’s inconceivable that anyone could support Trump, yet the news tells me that those circles are not representative, and that plenty do.

 

[Richard Scott]

AOL? Are we talking about the original SARS?

AOL as in internet news page (is that what you're asking?).

 

[yorkie]

I'm glad I'm out of touch, quite frankly.

You aren't. @telstarbox is. Trust me; I've spoken to loads of people about lockdowns in the past week from a wide range of backgrounds, hardly any ordinary working people are in favour.

"People I've met" usually means "People I've met and am comfortable speaking to them about their views on a contentious subject because they are likely to agree with me"

Not in my case; I've spoken to people who do very different jobs to me who I do not know other than in a specific setting (e.g. at work) and whose names I don't know (well, I may know their first name but that is it).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Nov 2020 ==

You conflate two things; selection bias for those you associate with, and the population at large. For example, I inhabit circles in which for most it’s inconceivable that anyone could support Trump, yet the news tells me that those circles are not representative, and that plenty do.

It's nothing to do with who I "associate with" unless you count people who happen to work at the same place as me (in vastly different job roles and for a different employer) as that, in which case it's almost meaningless to say it.

I've been playing a lot of football games lately too, with a wide range of people, most of whom I only 'know' simply through playing football with them and they are all against it; people of all ages, all backgrounds etc. Now you could say "ah but they are active people" and that would be true, but that's just another example.

I know I mention the cleaners at my workplace as another example but I do so deliberately because they are so different from the demographic on this forum!

Of the people I work with who are pro-lockdown, it's become clear to me that their main reasons for being pro-lockdown are because they are underestimating the infectiousness of the virus, the economic and social impact of lockdowns and overestimating the proportion of people who develop serious symptoms. They are slowly coming round I think.

Another colleague at work was very worried about Covid but she then got a very nasty case of a rhinovirus and now accepts that actually we can't just consider Covid and that the current approach needs to change; that's a huge shift in opinion from early on in the pandemic.

The tide is well and truly turning, whether you like it or not

 

[35B]

It's nothing to do with who I "associate with" unless you count people who happen to work at the same place as me (in vastly different job roles and for a different employer) as that, in which case it's almost meaningless to say it.

I include, deliberately, those whom we encounter in just such circumstances.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Indeed. I dare say that would cost less than trashing the whole economy every few months indefinately.

Not sure it will be indefinitely because every time they do it there will be less left to trash!

 

[yorkie]

I include, deliberately, those whom we encounter in just such circumstances.

Well given the huge range of people I encounter through a variety of scenarios, who I do not even know (other than to recognise them and potentially know their first name), what conclusions can you meaningfully reach from it?

 

[43066]

AOL? Are we talking about the original SARS?

AOL as in internet news page (is that what you're asking?).

Probably referencing when AOL was a significant provider of dial-up internet in the 90s and early 00s. The brand is nowhere near as prominent these days.

 

[35B]

Well given the huge range of people I encounter through a variety of scenarios, who I do not even know (other than to recognise them and potentially know their first name), what conclusions can you meaningfully reach from it?

Who knows - which is my point. Those we encounter are not necessarily representative of the population as a whole.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I agree the lockdown won't be scrapped, but should the slowdown and hopeful decline continue/emerge over the next month there will be evidence and very strong calls not to extend it. If it suddenly goes up again it raises the question about the role of schools in this, given half term effects are starting to feed into the infection rates, but will be a temporary respite if schools are significant.

Elsewhere Chris Whitty has been subject of MP scrutiny today, where he's had to try and defend himself to MPs voicing concerns about negative impacts of lockdown:

Covid: Destructive rules only current option, says Chris Whitty

England's chief medical officer defends lockdowns as a further 397 coronavirus deaths are recorded.

www.bbc.co.uk

My fear is that cases may rise despite the lockdown because of the season we are in. If that is the case then it would then be mistake to blame the lockdown for a rise in cases. If cases fall, which we should hope for, I would not be too sure about relaxing the lockdown too quickly unfortunately.

It is likely that Covid19 cases will increase as we get near to winter irrespective of schools etc etc. It is very likely that hospitals will be under pressure as winter approaches for all the usual non-Covid19 reasons. Therefore I fear that a lockdown will be used to protect an NHS that is nearer to breaking point in December than it was just before Covid19 started hitting us in March/April.

can only see car use increasing tbh. Car usage almost back to pre COVID levels plus there seems to be huge demand lately for used vehicles.

This week my journey home from work has been worse than I ever recall in previous years. I am waiting to discover if an alternative road(s) has been closed.

The R-rate is on a downward trend now. If it starts increasing after the start of lockdown then that would suggest that the lockdown is having the opposite of the desired effect and therefore should definitely not be extended.

Your logic is flawed. More likely that the long, dark cold evenings are causing a rise. It is normal for most/all virus'. The lockdown would be far more likely to be reducing the increase rather than causing an increase.

............

There's also a 'silent voter' effect - people are scared to say that they're anti-lockdown because they'll be viewed as 'granny killers' and whatever else. It's like people who were too scared to admit in polls that they'd vote for Boris, Brexit, Trump etc but voted them anyway when the time came.

Conversely there will be people who are afraid to appear pro lockdown.

 

[yorkie]

Who knows - which is my point. Those we encounter are not necessarily representative of the population as a whole.

If you encounter enough people, in a wide range of scenarios, then it will be pretty close to being representative.

Conversely there will be people who are afraid to appear pro lockdown.

Because they know the majority do not approve!

 

[Mag_seven]

those we encounter are not necessarily representative of the population as a whole.

Neither are those who answer opinion polls.

 

[bramling]

Who knows - which is my point. Those we encounter are not necessarily representative of the population as a whole.

I suppose it depends on who one hangs around with. Most of the happy work-from-homers are, as it stands to reason, at home. By contrast pretty much everyone in my work is completely sick of this and just wants to return to normal and take their chances.

 

[yorkie]

Going back to whether @yorksrob is out of touch, I know @yorksrob well enough to say he probably is "out of touch" on certain matters (and he would not deny it, and would not want it any other way ) but on this? He is absolutely bang on the money.

Neither are those who answer opinion polls.

I did a few YouGov polls during lockdown 1 as I had spare time. My conclusion was that there was no way I would be doing their polls once I was busy at work and had my life back. I'd say their polls appear to people with FAR too much time on their hands; the results of numerous polls are certainly consistent with my observations!



== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Nov 2020 ==

I suppose it depends on who one hangs around with....

Indeed, but my biggest point here is that I people I do not "hang around with" as such but people who happen to work in the same building as me, or people I encounter through e.g. sporting events or suchlike.

Now if I was a retired person or if I worked from home, and didn't get to meet the huge range of random people that I get to meet, it would indeed be a very different story and would simply be people I hang around with, which would be far less representative.