Life after the end of "lockdown" 2.0

[Bantamzen]

You have to remember that the SAGE lot are scientists. Academics. Never before have they had this sort of public exposure, and they seem to be lapping it up. But what's been in the news the past week or so. Dominic Cummings and Donald Trump. So therefore no one's been taking any notice of the SAGE scientists, and they don't like it. So what can they do about it. Why not shout "Christmas is cancelled" just so people remember they exist. They are like a bunch of three year olds.

I think the SAGE experts need to consider that they are rapidly coming into view as the reason for all these lockdowns. Its all very easy suggesting all these kinds of restrictions, but at some point people are going to want someone to be held accountable for the cost of them.

I see alot of criticism for SAGE on here but too me, they are just being realistic and because realism is not the news you want to hear, then they must be wrong and just too negative.

Sorry but this virus is very contagious and sadly for the elderly and vulnable, it's deadly also. You not going to get a well respected scientist like Chris Whitty saying anything otherwise or put some positive spin on it like the government will do. I mean Boris Johnson hope that things could be back to normal by November and Xmas was nothing but wishful thinking, the scientists always knew a 2nd wave was possible as we head into the darker months and well they are not wrong that is for sure.

Deaths and hospital admissions are still rising, thankfully not quite the levels as in the Spring but If this coronavirus favours colder conditions then even as the government are saying, it's going to be a very tough number of months ahead.

I hate to break it to you but this virus does not stand alone in being a risk to the elderly & ill. For example influenza was a significant factor in the 50,000+ excess deaths seen in the winter of 2017/18. But did we lockdown for that, in fact who even took a blind bit of notice? Scientists will have their opinions on how to reduce spread, and of course the easiest thing to suggest is to stop people interacting. The problem with reducing interaction means that society has to be sacrificed, and that has much wider consequences than the virus. Currently the people supporting the measures are those least affected by them, but the number of these people is diminishing all the time as people lose their jobs, lose their ability to pay their bills and keep a roof over their family's heads. And as more people lose their jobs, so tax revenue reduces, and more pressure is exerted on public services such as the NHS.

 

[big_rig]

We're being softened up for an extension of the lockdown

Next fortnight 'crucial' in ensuring England Covid lockdown ends as planned

Prof Susan Michie says vaccine hopes must not make Britons complacent

www.theguardian.com

Ah, Susan Michie, a psychologist and until 2018 a member of the Communist party who inherited a nice share of £50m Picasso (according to the Mail, not on my regular reading list mind).

A fun/tragic/rage inducing ‘game’ to play with ‘public health experts’ like her is to have a quick google and see what advice they have previously dispensed. In her case in May this year:

Professor Susan Michie, a behavioural psychologist at UCL, told a new committee of experts that the public needed to be helped to make regular washing of their hands a habit.


“Another model of success is population behaviour change because behaviour is at the heart of the transmission of this virus, both directly from coughing and sneezing into people’s faces, but also by touching surfaces and objects that other people have touched,” she said.


“The behaviours are quite simple, they are quite discreet and if all the population adopted the behaviours that are recommended, then the virus would stop dead in its tracks.”

http://camdennewjournal.com/article/how-the-covid-19-coronavirus-could-be-stopped-dead-in-its-tracks

If it was that simple why is she opining on a lockdown in December? It’s almost like these people have been making it up as they go the entire time!

 

[adc82140]

There will be no lockdown extension. For starters, after the events of this week Boris is trying to repair relationships with his backbenchers. There are now 50 of them in the anti lockdown group.

I wouldn't say an article in the Guardian is to soften people up. Guardian readers don't need softening up. I'd be more concerned if it was in the Mail.

 

[greyman42]

I don't think keeping pubs closed over Christmas and New Year will prevent reckless drunkeness. It will, as you say, push the problem into people's homes where it will be much harder to control.

Although it seems counter intuitive, I think it is actually better to keep as many places open as possible, for as long as possible.

That actually makes complete sense to anyone living in the real world.

 

[duncanp]

That actually makes complete sense to anyone living in the real world.

But the problem is that "SAGE scientists" don't live in the real world.

What is the chance that they will want to ban Christmas presents because Santa Claus visits every house in the world on Christmas Eve, and is therefore a superspreader of the virus?

 

[Chester1]

Eat out to help out should be revived indefinitely in Tier 3 areas (or devolved equivalent). It would be abused in tier 2 areas because they only have advice against households mixing indoors. The Tier 3 legal ban against households mixing indoors and ban on drinks without meals hammers restaurants and pubs. Encouraging people to eat out with members of their household would help to limit the damage.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Since transmission outside has most data showing much reduced risk, I think many outdoor restrictions will be removed.

 

[brad465]

Since transmission outside has most data showing much reduced risk, I think many outdoor restrictions will be removed.

I hope so; really they should have removed social distancing over the summer in outdoor environments on these grounds, especially when it was clear the protesting in June had hardly registered on infection numbers. Even if this policy had to be reintroduced for this wave, at least some business and many people's mental wellbeing would have had a relief period.

 

[C J Snarzell]

Given the grim death figures in recent days, I can't see there being much of a reprieve on the 2nd December which is only 16 days away.

I'm starting to suspect that any hopes of a decent Christmas are not going to happen this year.

I think we will be either looking at a lockdown extension for a further two weeks (bringing the review date up to around the 16/17th December) or the UK will revert back to the Tier system which will only see a slight change in tight restrictions.

I do hope gyms can at least reopen for some much needed exercise but I am not holding my breath.

CJ

 

[Ian Cunningham]

But the problem is that "SAGE scientists" don't live in the real world.

What is the chance that they will want to ban Christmas presents because Santa Claus visits every house in the world on Christmas Eve, and is therefore a superspreader of the virus?

It'll be fine - according to the Scottish Government Santa is a "Key Worker"

'Santa is a key worker': Nicola Sturgeon reassures children over Christmas fears

THE First Minister sought to reassure children at today’s briefing after the national clinical director said there is “absolutely no question”…

www.thenational.scot

 

[duncanp]

Given the grim death figures in recent days, I can't see there being much of a reprieve on the 2nd December which is only 16 days away.

I'm starting to suspect that any hopes of a decent Christmas are not going to happen this year.

I think we will be either looking at a lockdown extension for a further two weeks (bringing the review date up to around the 16/17th December) or the UK will revert back to the Tier system which will only see a slight change in tight restrictions.

I do hope gyms can at least reopen for some much needed exercise but I am not holding my breath.

CJ

I am not so sure about this.

Death figures are a lagging indicator, in that they reflect the number of infections that took place in the past.

If new cases start to fall, then death figures will start to fall a few weeks later.

If the lockdown is extended in its current form by two weeks, then that will leave people only one week to do Christmas shopping, if they need to visit a shop which is currently closed. That will mean that between 17th and 24th December the shops will be absolutely mobbed, with social distancing out of the window, which is the exact opposite of what the government wants to achieve.

So I think that non essential retail will reopen on December 3rd as planned, along with gyms, swimming pools and hairdressers.

Re-opening of pubs and restaurants may be delayed by about a week, but on the other hand now that the arch locktivist Dominic Cummings is out of the way, Boris may open them on December 3rd as well.

 

[Chester1]

I am not so sure about this.

Death figures are a lagging indicator, in that they reflect the number of infections that took place in the past.

If new cases start to fall, then death figures will start to fall a few weeks later.

If the lockdown is extended in its current form by two weeks, then that will leave people only one week to do Christmas shopping, if they need to visit a shop which is currently closed. That will mean that between 17th and 24th December the shops will be absolutely mobbed, with social distancing out of the window, which is the exact opposite of what the government wants to achieve.

So I think that non essential retail will reopen on December 3rd as planned, along with gyms, swimming pools and hairdressers.

Re-opening of pubs and restaurants may be delayed by about a week, but on the other hand now that the arch locktivist Dominic Cummings is out of the way, Boris may open them on December 3rd as well.

I doubt they will want to reopen pubs later because it encourages mixing in homes. If I had to guess then a mix of tier 2 and 3 for three weeks depending on local case rates. That would take us up to 23rd December for 1 week of UK wide rules agreed between the 4 governments for Christmas.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Outside social distanced sports such as golf, tennis etc should have virtually all restrictions removed.

 

[Tomp94]

What was the tier 2 ban on indoor mixing? Is that all indoor mixing in any setting, or just applicable to private homes?

 

[adc82140]

I am not so sure about this.

Death figures are a lagging indicator, in that they reflect the number of infections that took place in the past.

If new cases start to fall, then death figures will start to fall a few weeks later.

If the lockdown is extended in its current form by two weeks, then that will leave people only one week to do Christmas shopping, if they need to visit a shop which is currently closed. That will mean that between 17th and 24th December the shops will be absolutely mobbed, with social distancing out of the window, which is the exact opposite of what the government wants to achieve.

So I think that non essential retail will reopen on December 3rd as planned, along with gyms, swimming pools and hairdressers.

Re-opening of pubs and restaurants may be delayed by about a week, but on the other hand now that the arch locktivist Dominic Cummings is out of the way, Boris may open them on December 3rd as well.

We are only now seeing the case rate respond to the lockdown announcement. (that big one day spike was a response to "last meetings" the weekend of the announcement). Only this week will we get any indication of whether the lockdown lite is working. Honestly everyone in government (including SAGE) is like a load of 4 year olds waiting for Santa. I want it now. Now. NOW!!!!

A good analogy is filling a large hole in the wall. You can layer the polyfilla, waiting patiently for it to harden before doing the next bit, or you can chuck it all in at once, getting increasingly annoyed when it falls out, before trying to jam more in until the box runs out.

 

[yorksrob]

What was the tier 2 ban on indoor mixing? Is that all indoor mixing in any setting, or just applicable to private homes?

All indoor mixing, with some exceptions.

 

[Tomp94]

Ok assuming pubs weren’t busy in tier 2 then?

 

[yorksrob]

Ok assuming pubs weren’t busy in tier 2 then?

I went in a few and they seemed to be holding their own, with small groups and individuals.

 

[duncanp]

I went in a few and they seemed to be holding their own, with small groups and individuals.

I live in what was a Tier 2 area, and the pubs were quite busy, after taking account of social distancing rules and regulations.

There was some inventive use of plastic screens to effectively divide one table into two, so that people from one household could sit one side of the screen, and those from another household could sit on the other side.

Also, you were able to have a conversation with someone from another household, providing they were sitting more than two metres away from you.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

I do hope gyms can at least reopen for some much needed exercise but I am not holding my breath.

I should hope not, CJ. If you should pass out and die in the gym, it’ll probably be classed as ‘with Covid’

 

[yorksrob]

I live in what was a Tier 2 area, and the pubs were quite busy, after taking account of social distancing rules and regulations.

There was some inventive use of plastic screens to effectively divide one table into two, so that people from one household could sit one side of the screen, and those from another household could sit on the other side.

Also, you were able to have a conversation with someone from another household, providing they were sitting more than two metres away from you.

Yes, they managed to maintain the rules, while still providing a pleasant atmosphere.

 

[yorkie]

Ah, Susan Michie, a psychologist and until 2018 a member of the Communist party who inherited a nice share of £50m Picasso (according to the Mail, not on my regular reading list mind).

A fun/tragic/rage inducing ‘game’ to play with ‘public health experts’ like her is to have a quick google and see what advice they have previously dispensed. In her case in May this year:

http://camdennewjournal.com/article/how-the-covid-19-coronavirus-could-be-stopped-dead-in-its-tracks

If it was that simple why is she opining on a lockdown in December? It’s almost like these people have been making it up as they go the entire time!

Susan Michie sounds bonkers to me; if anyone in any power is listening to people like her, we're in big trouble...

These attempts to blame people for being human are distasteful and counterproductive. People like her are a complete and utter disgrace.

 

[WelshBluebird]

But the problem is that "SAGE scientists" don't live in the real world.

What they live in a simulation then?
Come on no need for the hyperbole.

People need to remember, that once again, the scientists are giving their advice purely on a "what do we need to get rid of COVID-19 and prevent as many COVID-19 related deaths as possible" basis. It is up for government to take that advice, tally it with impact to the economy, impact to people's lives etc etc, and come up with policies that take all of this into account. If the government cannot do that, or is unwilling to, then that is the fault of government and not the fault of the scientists.

 

[Paul_10]

But are SAGE being 'realistic' though?

They seem to take no consideration of the effect that the measures they are advocating have on the economy, people's mental health and also the thousands of non COVID-19 patients who are being denied treatment, or are having their treatment delayed?

To me, 'realistic' means balancing what is desirable from the point of view of controlling the virus against what is need to protect the economy and the other factors I have mentioned above. Whilst a stricter lockdown may bring down the number of cases sooner, it will cost more (eg extending the furlough scheme) and eventually that cost is going to have to be paid.

And that is ultimately the government's job, not the scientists. Boris has said he will follow the science but obviously the economy will come into his thinking. I love to know where this money for extended furlough has came from and I got my concerns with that in terms of how we will pay that back but I guess that is something to think about whenever this pandemic ends.

Chris Whitty has acknowledged in the past regarding the economy side of things but even he says, we are on the edge of what we can open up whilst this infectious disease is around. I do suspect alot of people coming back from abroad and perhaps breaking isolation rules will be a factor in this, more than pub and restaurants I suspect.

 

[Bantamzen]

And that is ultimately the government's job, not the scientists. Boris has said he will follow the science but obviously the economy will come into his thinking. I love to know where this money for extended furlough has came from and I got my concerns with that in terms of how we will pay that back but I guess that is something to think about whenever this pandemic ends.

Chris Whitty has acknowledged in the past regarding the economy side of things but even he says, we are on the edge of what we can open up whilst this infectious disease is around. I do suspect alot of people coming back from abroad and perhaps breaking isolation rules will be a factor in this, more than pub and restaurants I suspect.

What is this obsession about looking for people to blame? Viruses do what viruses do, they spread. The sooner we get out of this tedious cycle of blame, and actually get down to restarting our society & support those we know statistically most at risk the better.

 

[duncanp]

..What they live in a simulation then?
Come on no need for the hyperbole.

People need to remember, that once again, the scientists are giving their advice purely on a "what do we need to get rid of COVID-19 and prevent as many COVID-19 related deaths as possible" basis. It is up for government to take that advice, tally it with impact to the economy, impact to people's lives etc etc, and come up with policies that take all of this into account. If the government cannot do that, or is unwilling to, then that is the fault of government and not the fault of the scientists.

When I said that SAGE scientists don't live in the real world, I meant that they seem to think that COVID-19 is all that matters, whereas in the real world other factors such as the economy, people's mental health and the impact of postponing non COVID-19 treatments on the NHS need to be considered.

I agree that it is up to the government to decide what to do, taking all factors into account.

But I also think that the scientists should accept that they are paid to advise the government, not to make decisions on the government's behalf.

And if the government makes a decision that the scientists don't agree with, they should keep quiet and not go whining to the media every day. If they have concerns about the consequences of a government decision, they should express that in private to the relevant minister.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

I don’t know if this is common knowledge, but Neil Ferguson is back on the SAGE committee

List of participants of SAGE and related sub-groups

www.gov.uk

I just remembered the BBC interviewed him during the afternoon of that postponed ‘Lockdown 2.0’ press conference. I don’t recall them stating in what capacity he was speaking, but I’m pretty sure I would have screamed ‘WHAAATTT?’ if the strapline had said Member Of SAGE...

 

[kristiang85]

Ok assuming pubs weren’t busy in tier 2 then?

I went to pubs in London when it was tier 2. They seemed fine, there must have been a lot of 'business meetings' (and indeed a couple of weeks back I went in with my colleagues and we said it was a business meeting as it was bloody cold outside - although our only intention was to drink a few pints - and no questions were asked. And this was a reputable bar in central London).

 

[greyman42]

Ok assuming pubs weren’t busy in tier 2 then?

I drink in pubs in both York and London and both were doing OK by covid standards.

 

[bramling]

What they live in a simulation then?
Come on no need for the hyperbole.

People need to remember, that once again, the scientists are giving their advice purely on a "what do we need to get rid of COVID-19 and prevent as many COVID-19 related deaths as possible" basis. It is up for government to take that advice, tally it with impact to the economy, impact to people's lives etc etc, and come up with policies that take all of this into account. If the government cannot do that, or is unwilling to, then that is the fault of government and not the fault of the scientists.

That’s fine, however it doesn’t excuse the culture of leaking which we keep seeing from SAGE.

It’s quite clearly being done in such a way as to set the government up for “you ignored the scientists“ accusations.

Of course if Boris was more articulate then this wouldn’t be a problem, but he’s not and so it is.