Further Restrictions Announced by Johnson (22/09)

[david1212]

On the latest news bulletin, the Government has apparently said that there "is now evidence that considerable transmission of the virus takes place in hospitality venues".

Let's see if they publish this evidence, including how hospitality compares with other sectors.

Rather than the venue I wonder if the data collected was analysed against ' considerable transmission of the virus is taking place because members of different households / bubbles are not staying 2m apart except when impractical ' what the result would be ?

.... There was one group close together, but I know them as a group of mates anyway, .....

Keeping strictly to the guidelines except any that were the same household / bubble they should have been sat 2m apart.

 

[Andyh82]

I struggle to accept some of the posts on here which make it sound like the UK, or more specifically the UK government are playing a political game.

Has anyone looked what is going on in many European countries and cities?

In todays news.....Ukraine, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia have all announced record single day case figures, France is adding more cities to its harsh lockdown which sees bars and restaurants closed completely, Brussels has just closed all bars and cafes for a month, Italy has just announced that mask wearing is now compulsory at all times outdoors, Germany is worried about increasing cases and has brought in overnight stay bans and controls on gatherings again.

Many countries also have a 10pm curfew (Austria, Czech, Denmark, Finland, Slovakia), Portugal has an 8pm curfew. In Poland they have just made a ruling that you need to carry a medical certificate showing you don't have to wear a mask

Of course our government has not covered itself in glory over its handling of the crisis, but we are by no means alone in that.

That’s an interesting review, and I really wish the media would tell us all this, to put our restrictions into context

It’s fresh in my memory how not locking down in line with other countries back in March was a cause for many complaints for months, so there is no way commentators would allow us to be an outlier

 

[Yew]

Define ok.......?

A slightly HIGHER positive case to population ratio than the UK, and a slightly LOWER death to population ratio. Are you saying that if we'd done nothing we'd be no worse off?

One or two deaths a day sounds little good right now...

 

[DB]

That’s an interesting review, and I really wish the media would tell us all this, to put our restrictions into context

It’s fresh in my memory how not locking down in line with other countries back in March was a cause for many complaints for months, so there is no way commentators would allow us to be an outlier

Not sure how the context of 'look, some countries are going even more over the top' really helps!

 

[brad465]

I struggle to accept some of the posts on here which make it sound like the UK, or more specifically the UK government are playing a political game.

Has anyone looked what is going on in many European countries and cities?

In todays news.....Ukraine, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia have all announced record single day case figures, France is adding more cities to its harsh lockdown which sees bars and restaurants closed completely, Brussels has just closed all bars and cafes for a month, Italy has just announced that mask wearing is now compulsory at all times outdoors, Germany is worried about increasing cases and has brought in overnight stay bans and controls on gatherings again.

Many countries also have a 10pm curfew (Austria, Czech, Denmark, Finland, Slovakia), Portugal has an 8pm curfew. In Poland they have just made a ruling that you need to carry a medical certificate showing you don't have to wear a mask

Of course our government has not covered itself in glory over its handling of the crisis, but we are by no means alone in that.

That’s an interesting review, and I really wish the media would tell us all this, to put our restrictions into context

It’s fresh in my memory how not locking down in line with other countries back in March was a cause for many complaints for months, so there is no way commentators would allow us to be an outlier

What happened back in March was Europe thought China locking down Wuhan was a good idea (Not realising China is China as partly why they did that), where Italy was first to lockdown, then other major countries just copied them and each other panic reactions and as said above, to avoid being an outlier. Sweden just about go away with implementing their strategy, but not without getting a surge in interest from the rest of the world. Now what's happened is none of the Government's are prepared to admit they were wrong because so much time, money and effort has gone into the measures already implemented, like the quote in Macbeth about wading so far into the blood that turning back is as bad or worse for their reputation than carrying on, but the reality is, as the Barrington declaration is starting to expose, carrying on this way will long term be much more harmful for all, but no-one has worked out how to admit it yet.

 

[Silverlinky]

Not sure how the context of 'look, some countries are going even more over the top' really helps!

There was a lot of anti-government sentiment in this thread and it was made to look like Boris/The UK was doing everything wrong, or it was even suggested that its some kind of political game. We are more restrictive than some countries and less restrictive than others, but we are not acting unilaterally...far from it.

 

[DB]

There was a lot of anti-government sentiment in this thread and it was made to look like Boris/The UK was doing everything wrong, or it was even suggested that its some kind of political game. We are more restrictive than some countries and less restrictive than others, but we are not acting unilaterally...far from it.

As mentioned above though, they are all in the same boat - they've all gone down the route of trying to suppress it, have no exit strategy other than hoping for a vaccine, and are now panicking because 'respiratory infection season' is upon us.

 

[Silverlinky]

As mentioned above though, they are all in the same boat - they've all gone down the route of trying to suppress it, have no exit strategy other than hoping for a vaccine, and are now panicking because 'respiratory infection season' is upon us.

I don't disagree....but the question I asked earlier is what other "route" should they be taking instead?

 

[bramling]

What happened back in March was Europe thought China locking down Wuhan was a good idea (Not realising China is China as partly why they did that), where Italy was first to lockdown, then other major countries just copied them and each other panic reactions and as said above, to avoid being an outlier. Sweden just about go away with implementing their strategy, but not without getting a surge in interest from the rest of the world. Now what's happened is none of the Government's are prepared to admit they were wrong because so much time, money and effort has gone into the measures already implemented, like the quote in Macbeth about wading so far into the blood that turning back is as bad or worse for their reputation than carrying on, but the reality is, as the Barrington declaration is starting to expose, carrying on this way will long term be much more harmful for all, but no-one has worked out how to admit it yet.

China was presumably attempting an elimination strategy, which may have been sensible at the time in an attempt to actually get rid of it. This presumably might have worked had it not already spread.

 

[Mag_seven]

What happened back in March was Europe thought China locking down Wuhan was a good idea (Not realising China is China as partly why they did that), where Italy was first to lockdown, then other major countries just copied them and each other panic reactions and as said above, to avoid being an outlier.

Oddly enough I was thinking about this today - the idea of lockdown I assume came from China where as you say they locked down entire cities such as Wuhan. If China hadn't done that would Europe have followed suit?

 

[C J Snarzell]

China was presumably attempting an elimination strategy, which may have been sensible at the time in an attempt to actually get rid of it. This presumably might have worked had it not already spread.

Elimination is a very key word in China - those who tried to speak out about the origins of the virus seem to have been 'eliminated'.

On the subject of China, Trump has had another poke at Chinagate again in the last couple of days.

CJ

 

[kez19]

Yet oddly enough if we are led to believe that the people of China/Wuhan are back to "normal"

I know I have picked up The Sun....

Wuhan turns hospital into sports arena as UK’s Nightingales set for 2nd wave'

CHINA has showed off a newly reopened sports centre in Wuhan which was used as a hospital during the first days of the coronavirus pandemic. Meanwhile, Britain’s NHS Nightingale temporary hos…

www.thesun.co.uk

China continues to face many questions as it was accused of withholding information about the killer virus.

And as China dismantles its temporary hospitals, doctors reportedly warned just weeks ago plans are being drawn up to bring back the wards, including NHS Nightingale in London.

I have an open mind on everything but can we believe everything we see/hear/listen to these days from the media? (not sure if this is in right thread but just came across it)

 

[DB]

Oddly enough I was thinking about this today - the idea of lockdown I assume came from China where as you say they locked down entire cities such as Wuhan. If China hadn't done that would Europe have followed suit?

If this had first arisen in pretty much any other country, I think it would have been handled very differently.

It's also worth noting that the European country which was the first to go down this route (and has had some of the most daconian measures) is Italy, which has strong links with China and was advised by China on this situation.

 

[brad465]

China was presumably attempting an elimination strategy, which may have been sensible at the time in an attempt to actually get rid of it. This presumably might have worked had it not already spread.

Wuhan was locked down on January 23rd this year: they may have genuinely believed they could eliminate it by that point, however some other countries worldwide already had their first cases, while that story of someone in France being treated for it over Christmas 2019 proved in hindsight it was too late by the time they locked down.

What is really bad though that's come to light recently is how any scientist who's point of view was a different strategy, namely the one all the signatories of the Barrington Declaration want us to pursue, was effectively silenced for much of this year. None of them were on SAGE, they didn't get a good voice in the media; I didn't know who Professor Sunetra Gupta was until she appeared on Question Time last month, now she's one of the primary authors of the above declaration that has gained 1000s of signatures from other health professionals. Even if their strategy was/is wrong, they should never have not been allowed to voice their opinion, where not all science agrees with itself (if that makes sense).

 

[DB]

What is really bad though that's come to light recently is how any scientist who's point of view was a different strategy, namely the one all the signatories of the Barrington Declaration want us to pursue, was effectively silenced for much of this year. None of them were on SAGE, they didn't get a good voice in the media; I didn't know who Professor Sunetra Gupta was until she appeared on Question Time last month, now she's one of the primary authors of the above declaration that has gained 1000s of signatures from other health professionals. Even if their strategy was/is wrong, they should never have not been allowed to voice their opinion, where not all science agrees with itself (if that makes sense).

I think one of the crucial points is that they are proposing a strategy which can reasonably be expected to work. In contrast, the one being followed by most governments is entirely reliant on there being an effecctive vaccine in a fairly short time period - that's a very, very risky strategy and they have no fall-back position if it doesn't happen.

 

[brad465]

I think one of the crucial points is that they are proposing a strategy which can reasonably be expected to work. In contrast, the one being followed by most governments is entirely reliant on there being an effecctive vaccine in a fairly short time period - that's a very, very risky strategy and they have no fall-back position if it doesn't happen.

Indeed, where this strategy I'm confident won't work: even if a vaccine is ready tomorrow, we don't yet have a high number of doses available, or especially the storage and capacity to assist rapid distribution; I recall reports saying a mass vaccination programme would be delayed by 2 years due to inadequate supply of equipment to store and transport them.

 

[trebor79]

Define ok.......?

A slightly HIGHER positive case to population ratio than the UK, and a slightly LOWER death to population ratio. Are you saying that if we'd done nothing we'd be no worse off?

So overall Sweden is no worse off than us, but without all of the despair, economic damage, non-fucntioning health service, liberty restrictions and mandates to wear fashion apparel that we are having to put up with?
It's obvious "lockdowns" do no more than delay the inevitable, and perhaps not even that. Sweden has gone for and stuck with a sustainable, long term strategy that aside from mass events allows people to love their lives as normal.
I think they've got it right and we've got it massively wrong.
I'm annoyed but unsurprised the government is doubling down (though the dither over Nottingham etc gives me hope there is at least an argument raging in cabinet). I'm disgusted at Starmer saying he doesn't support the 10pm curfew, but then instructing his party to abstain so it passes anyway.

 

[Reliablebeam]

Wuhan was locked down on January 23rd this year: they may have genuinely believed they could eliminate it by that point, however some other countries worldwide already had their first cases, while that story of someone in France being treated for it over Christmas 2019 proved in hindsight it was too late by the time they locked down.

What is really bad though that's come to light recently is how any scientist who's point of view was a different strategy, namely the one all the signatories of the Barrington Declaration want us to pursue, was effectively silenced for much of this year. None of them were on SAGE, they didn't get a good voice in the media; I didn't know who Professor Sunetra Gupta was until she appeared on Question Time last month, now she's one of the primary authors of the above declaration that has gained 1000s of signatures from other health professionals. Even if their strategy was/is wrong, they should never have not been allowed to voice their opinion, where not all science agrees with itself (if that makes sense).

There is some interesting history here - Neil Ferguson's group at Imperial is an offshoot of the group Sunetra Gupta is in at Oxford and it seems there are some weird academic shenanigans at play..

 

[Bantamzen]

What is really bad though that's come to light recently is how any scientist who's point of view was a different strategy, namely the one all the signatories of the Barrington Declaration want us to pursue, was effectively silenced for much of this year. None of them were on SAGE, they didn't get a good voice in the media; I didn't know who Professor Sunetra Gupta was until she appeared on Question Time last month, now she's one of the primary authors of the above declaration that has gained 1000s of signatures from other health professionals. Even if their strategy was/is wrong, they should never have not been allowed to voice their opinion, where not all science agrees with itself (if that makes sense).

There is some interesting history here - Neil Ferguson's group at Imperial is an offshoot of the group Sunetra Gupta is in at Oxford and it seems there are some weird academic shenanigans at play..

Its disappointing, maybe even slightly worrying to read this. Unfortunately this is what happens when you mix politics & science, much like mixing politics with religion politicians will usually pick the views that suit their needs best instead of weighing up a more balanced view. All I can say is that Ferguson is treading a dangerous path, more and more people are getting angry and whilst politicians come and go, his role in all this may not be so easy to hide.

 

[C J Snarzell]

I'm annoyed but unsurprised the government is doubling down (though the dither over Nottingham etc gives me hope there is at least an argument raging in cabinet). I'm disgusted at Starmer saying he doesn't support the 10pm curfew, but then instructing his party to abstain so it passes anyway.

I think Kier Starmer has some genuinely good ideas and criticisms directed at the government. Sadly, I don't necessary believe Labour would have done any better leading us through this mess. Can you imagine having Angela Rayner as the Health Secretary or Lisa Nandy as Foreign Secretary? We would all be well & truly f**ked (pardon my French).

CJ

 

[Domh245]

though the dither over Nottingham etc gives me hope there is at least an argument raging in cabinet

Hopefully they've realised that locking down an entire city because of (what is, in effect) freshers flu is a terrible idea

 

[adc82140]

Looking at the Arcgis map, via the Covid dashboard, you can see clearly where the universities are just by the density of infections. Brighton has a dark blob, Exeter has one, Guildford has one, Bath has one. However some university towns don't, like Plymouth. Why is this I wonder?

 

[takno]

Looking at the Arcgis map, via the Covid dashboard, you can see clearly where the universities are just by the density of infections. Brighton has a dark blob, Exeter has one, Guildford has one, Bath has one. However some university towns don't, like Plymouth. Why is this I wonder?

Some unis set up dedicated testing facilities, or are in areas with local lockdowns where units have been set up to hunt for positive cases. Other unis have no way (or desire) to find out how many of their students are not ill with it

 

[hwl]

I think one of the crucial points is that they are proposing a strategy which can reasonably be expected to work. In contrast, the one being followed by most governments is entirely reliant on there being an effective vaccine in a fairly short time period - that's a very, very risky strategy and they have no fall-back position if it doesn't happen.

Germany had already analysed that strategy in detail and decided it wouldn't work. Other countries have already reviewed the German analysis, hence why it isn't being taken seriously.

 

[trebor79]

Hopefully they've realised that locking down an entire city because of (what is, in effect) freshers flu is a terrible idea

You would hope so. Alas I strongly suspect not, and that the argument is about to what extent the city's economy (and perhaps the whole county according to some reports) is to be destroyed.

Germany had already analysed that strategy in detail and decided it wouldn't work. Other countries have already reviewed the German analysis, hence why it isn't being taken seriously.

And lockdowns are working are they? Surely it's time to try something else. Was the German analysis sound? Why wouldn't it work - too politcially risky perhaps, when everyone else "locks down" and you don't, you risk a period of time as a pariah like Sweden experienced - perhaps Merkel decided she didn't have the political clout or just couldn't be bothered.

 

[DB]

Germany had already analysed that strategy in detail and decided it wouldn't work. Other countries have already reviewed the German analysis, hence why it isn't being taken seriously.

So do you think an open-close-open-close-open-close strategy is workable then? While the economy tanks, and the virus works its way through the population anyway, just possibly a bit slower than it would have done otherwise? What is this actually achieving?

The reason any alternative isn't 'taken seriously' is that nearly every European government is now so invested in the suppression strategy and has blown so much money on it that changing tack now would be a massive loss of face and make them look totally incompetent.

Meanwhile,Sweden continues to do well...

 

[hwl]

What is really bad though that's come to light recently is how any scientist who's point of view was a different strategy, namely the one all the signatories of the Barrington Declaration want us to pursue, was effectively silenced for much of this year. None of them were on SAGE, they didn't get a good voice in the media; I didn't know who Professor Sunetra Gupta was until she appeared on Question Time last month, now she's one of the primary authors of the above declaration that has gained 1000s of signatures from other health professionals. Even if their strategy was/is wrong, they should never have not been allowed to voice their opinion, where not all science agrees with itself (if that makes sense).

Prof Gupta is seen as some what of an outlier in their own department and with in the epidemiological community. Gupta was one of the authors of a modelling paper earlier this year that suggested circa 50% of the UK population had already had Covid in March, that it would be over in 2-3 months and therefore there was no reason for a lockdown.
See FT article on that work here:

Coronavirus may have infected half of UK population — Oxford study

New epidemiological model shows urgent need for large-scale testing

www.ft.com

"Coronavirus may have infected half of UK population — Oxford study"
(never made it to peer review)

The 2 US leaders of the Barrington declaration have strong Republican / Trump links and have been to see the US health secretary and Trumps Covid Adviser (no respiratory disease experience) this week.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Oct 2020 ==

You would hope so. Alas I strongly suspect not, and that the argument is about to what extent the city's economy (and perhaps the whole county according to some reports) is to be destroyed.

And lockdowns are working are they? Surely it's time to try something else. Was the German analysis sound? Why wouldn't it work - too politcially risky perhaps, when everyone else "locks down" and you don't, you risk a period of time as a pariah like Sweden experienced - perhaps Merkel decided she didn't have the political clout or just couldn't be bothered.

The German analysis is pretty sound, it showed that the virus would get to those isolating over time anyway (they have plenty of real case studies for how this happens already) and the higher the level in the general non isolating population is then the big driver for severe cases among those isolating. Then there are all the severe cases in those that aren't self isolating because isolating won't capture all the high risk individuals.
The Barrington declaration authors haven't actually done any detailed work on their own proposals and how well they would work it is a very big PR exercise.

 

[DB]

The German analysis is pretty sound, it showed that the virus would get to those isolating over time anyway (they have plenty of real case studies for how this happens already) and the higher the level in the general non isolating population is then the big driver for severe cases among those isolating. Then there are all the severe cases in those that aren't self isolating because isolating won't capture all the high risk individuals.

So how do you think it' not going to get to those people whatever happens? We seem to be back to the policy of trashing the economy and causing many other massive social issues based solely on the hope that a vaccine proves viable.

 

[hwl]

So do you think an open-close-open-close-open-close strategy is workable then? While the economy tanks, and the virus works its way through the population anyway, just possibly a bit slower than it would have done otherwise? What is this actually achieving?

The reason any alternative isn't 'taken seriously' is that nearly every European government is now so invested in the suppression strategy and has blown so much money on it that changing tack now would be a massive loss of face and make them look totally incompetent.

Meanwhile,Sweden continues to do well...

There are dangers when comparing countries

Sweden has

• a very low population density
• a low number of people per household (most cases are transmitted within households, in the UK it was ~60% in household till early September)
• a personal space culture (i.e. natural 1m social distancing pre Covid)
• a very low proportion of multigenerational (i.e. 3 or more generations) households

Just because something appears to work in one country doesn't mean it is easily transferable with similar results to other countries with different circumstances.

 

[DB]

There are dangers when comparing countries

Sweden has

• a very low population density
• a low number of people per household (most cases are transmitted within households, in the UK it was ~60% in household till early September)
• a personal space culture (i.e. natural 1m social distancing pre Covid)
• a very low proportion of multigenerational (i.e. 3 or more generations) households

Just because something appears to work in one country doesn't mean it is easily transferable with similar results to other countries with different circumstances.

Sweden isn't that different to many other European countries, and the population density in the larger cities (Stockholm, Gothenburg, Malmo) makes them fairly comparable with UK cities. Multigenerational households are pretty rare in this country too, overall.

You claim that personal space is so important, and yet distancing restrictions seem to be having limited effect in the countries which have mandated them.

You still haven't told us what you think is a viable strategy. The current trajectory is massively damaging, and has no guarantee of success (if there is no vaccine, or one of limited effectiveness, all the damage has been caused for precisely no benefit.