Coronavirus outbreak

[stowie]

What I said is they won't isolate unless they have the virus. That means either they get a positive test result or they feel unwell with the sort of symptoms associated with the virus.
If they feel ok, and they haven't had a positive test result, they aren't going to isolate no matter what.

That plan is completely ineffective at containing the spread of COVID because the transmission occurs before any symptoms are present (not to mention the people who spread it but never get ill). So by the time your friends realise they have COVID it is too late.

From my basic understanding, this is one of the key problems in managing the disease (along with its contagiousness). SARS is much more deadly, but only contagious once symptoms are exhibited so the spread can be managed. Thus SARS hasn't become a global pandemic and has managed to be highly controlled even without a vaccine.

So, in conclusion, the government is trying to control the spread of a virus with only social rules being available to them whilst the virus is highly contagious for 2 weeks before symptoms show (if symptoms show at all). In my mind, an imperfect analogy is trying to control a car travelling at speed whilst wearing a VR set which is only giving you some visual information from 10 seconds ago. It isn't going to be easy and prone to continuous over correction. It seems like this would need a highly competent government with a talent for clear messaging. Has anyone thought Chris Grayling should manage this task?

 

[johnblack]

Sadly you're right. I've stopped posting in this important thread for exactly that reason. Hell, I was even in on Page 1 saying this might be really serious and I tried to provide useful information for everyone. But when it descended into an opportunity to post self affirmative political stuff it became boring so I stopped posting
There are much bigger issues re Covid than whatever the government says today or tomorrow; what happens if we can't develop a vaccine? How is a vaccine distributed? How does the world pay for the national debt it's take on? What happens to our city centres in the long run?

These are the issues exercising my thoughts. Not whether you should be able to meet more than 6 in a pub

So true, a pack of back slapping politically motivated people who will not accept any thought that does not comply with their group think and what a comedian said on twitter.

 

[oldfatfool]

The government IMHO is a pile of shite and responsible for this country about to become a wasteland of mad max proportions, however were covid is concerned anyone could see what was happening in the rest of Europe, I don't need to be ordered not to jump off a cliff anymore than people should have been needed to be told to start sensible social distancing, and still as soon as spoons opened it was jam packed, no doubt with people lamenting to one another how late/ poor the government response was. I might not think covid is the armaggeden people think but I still acted how I thought was sensible, in the same way I would avoid some bugger coughing/ sneezing at any other time.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

What bothers me about this thread is that something so important as this doesn't even warrant a mention

No, it's never mentioned at all. Certainly not the first thing posted in the morning.

https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/coronavirus-outbreak.256913/page-857#post-6126839

 

[Electric_Andy]

trying to control a car travelling at speed whilst wearing a VR set which is only giving you some visual information from 10 seconds ago.

The only option is to not let the car move. But that affects productivity, mental health, and carries a huge bill for the country. This is why I'm not overly critical of the government; it might be a shambles but we haven't got many other options. And even if more effective measures were in place, it's ultimately down to Joe Public to see them through, which many haven't been doing.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

it's ultimately down to Joe Public to see them through, which many haven't been doing.

No. It is up to the govt to clearly and effectively communicate this so the public does see it through. The govt has been beyond hopeless on this, Cummings most notably, but far beyond that. See "all over by Christmas", "Super Saturday", "get back to the office shirkers", etc etc etc etc etc etc

 

[Andy_R]

My take on it, is that the Govt has been reactive all the way through instead of being proactive,and have stumbled from pillar to post like a drunk on the way home on a Saturday night. Just my opinion though.

 

[mjr]

[Handcock said:] That is not what the testing is there for. We need it for people who are symptomatic. ''[/I]

I wonder if he hasn't been told that asymptomatic people can spread this, or if he's forgotten!

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

I wonder if he hasn't been told that asymptomatic people can spread this, or if he's forgotten!

Hands. Face. Space?
Hancock. Space. Waste.

 

[roadrash]

As long as people like the ones skipdiverjohn mentioned continue to please themselves (after all they are more important than anyone else) then social distancing is never going to work, as i mentioned above , guidance such as ... groups of six allowed in place A, but groups of more than six are allowed in place B , is absolute bolox, if more than six people isnt safe (and im not convinced it is) then it isnt safe ANYWHERE, ....oh yes you can meet your gran and four others in the pub, but dont you fekin dare meet gran in her own house....fekin madness.

 

[raleighnut]

As long as people like the ones skipdiverjohn mentioned continue to please themselves (after all they are more important than anyone else) then social distancing is never going to work, as i mentioned above , guidance such as ... groups of six allowed in place A, but groups of more than six are allowed in place B , is absolute bolox, if more than six people isnt safe (and im not convinced it is) then it isnt safe ANYWHERE, ....oh yes you can meet your gran and four others in the pub, but dont you fekin dare meet gran in her own house....fekin madness.

Yep but he's by no means alone, I see em all the time crowding past me in shops and as for the pub over the road.

 

[icowden]

guidance such as ... groups of six allowed in place A, but groups of more than six are allowed in place B , is absolute ***

It's more than that. The more rules you introduce along the lines of x can do this, y can do that, z can do the other unless included in x, the less likely you are to get anyone adhering to them. Rules need to be kept simple.

Secondly, why announce that Rule X on the 8th of September is going to come into force on the 14th September. That makes no sense. Surely if we need to change the rules, we need to do it now, not in a weeks time.

Oh - but the guidance isn't ready. So rule X hasn't actually been planned or thought through. We need a week to work out whether rule X is actually going to work, how it should be applied and whether it can be policed.

It's just nonsense.

Happily a significant amount of the population will fall back to common sense. Unhappily a significant amount of the population don't seem to have much common sense to fall back on. And while messages like "you can go to the pub" are in force, then easy false correlations will follow. If I can meet my mates in the pub for a drink, then we can have a picnic in the park for nana's birthday... etc

But - what about the £100 fine? Well what about it. Yes officer, it does look like a birthday party but honestly - it's a team building exercise for work...

 

[mjr]

As long as people like the ones skipdiverjohn mentioned continue to please themselves (after all they are more important than anyone else) then social distancing is never going to work, as i mentioned above

That depends what you mean by "work". This is a big numbers game and as long as the altruistic followers of the WHO advice hugely outnumber the selfish and the clueless followers of Dominic, then it works, in that case numbers fall despite them. Hooray! :-)

The big difficulty is, with something so stealthily spreadable and relatively lethal, is that it only needs a fairly small minority of selfish and followers for them to drag the rest of us into the plague pit with them. :-(

Secondly, why announce that Rule X on the 8th of September is going to come into force on the 14th September. That makes no sense. Surely if we need to change the rules, we need to do it now, not in a weeks time.

Because it's another week where few will be discussing Brexit and their latest illegal idea?

 

[roadrash]

Yep but he's by no means alone, I see em all the time crowding past me in shops and as for the pub over the road.

I agree totally as I stated earlier I too see it all the time

 

[roadrash]

It's more than that. The more rules you introduce along the lines of x can do this, y can do that, z can do the other unless included in x, the less likely you are to get anyone adhering to them. Rules need to be kept simple.

Secondly, why announce that Rule X on the 8th of September is going to come into force on the 14th September. That makes no sense. Surely if we need to change the rules, we need to do it now, not in a weeks time.

Oh - but the guidance isn't ready. So rule X hasn't actually been planned or thought through. We need a week to work out whether rule X is actually going to work, how it should be applied and whether it can be policed.

It's just nonsense.

Happily a significant amount of the population will fall back to common sense. Unhappily a significant amount of the population don't seem to have much common sense to fall back on. And while messages like "you can go to the pub" are in force, then easy false correlations will follow. If I can meet my mates in the pub for a drink, then we can have a picnic in the park for nana's birthday... etc

But - what about the £100 fine? Well what about it. Yes officer, it does look like a birthday party but honestly - it's a team building exercise for work...

Again I agree keep the rules simple and to the point and don't wait to bring them in next week . Implement them with immediate effect