Coronavirus

[Albert]

3 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Scotland continued for longer than England and has zero benefits from doing so. They should have sorted track and trace, I agree. We locked down for plenty long enough though. We got cases as low as we were ever going to get them. 

Why are you arguing that the UK were too incompetent to achieve what other countries have? If the numbers could already be driven down, why could that not continue? 

[Andicis]

Just now, Albert said:

Why are you arguing that the UK were too incompetent to achieve what other countries have? If the numbers could already be driven down, why could that not continue? 

We've all been over this point with you. The same reason **no** European country has hit zero. It's not feasible. 

[Albert]

1 minute ago, Andicis said:

We've all been over this point with you. The same reason **no** European country has hit zero. It's not feasible. 

Why isn't it feasible? All the previously given reasons have been shown to be invalid through comparisons. 

Europe in general doing poorly is not an excuse. 

[1of4]

1 hour ago, Uptherams said:

Do you not see how the points you are making are points to also use against a lockdown? 

Shielding the vulnerable means people that are high risk are provided with government support and PPE. Almost all of these people are in care homes or live alone on their own. Almost all are retired. 

I have several family members who are classified as high risk. I've seen them throughout this ordeal. We aren't going to let them simply die on their own in isolation. We take precautions, but we also take our own risks. That's the point. One had to go to the hospital last week because they hurt themselves, while at home on their own. 

We aren't about to take them out to bingo everyday or down to the pub. But shielding doesn't mean no contact. It means take precautions. 

Some people on this forum have genuinely lost the plot. Eddie for example says he has left his hours for no more than 6 hours since lockdown. That's insane. 

 

I have health issues which means the virus is more of a danger to me than most but I'd be quite happy not to see a full lockdown, so long as everyone followed the rules of mask wearing and social distancing. 

I've been for a meal in a number of pubs where I've felt safe due to the precautions they've taken and the other people around me also following the rules. But the problem is to many people are not complying with the rules after the easing of the original full lock down and why there is an increase in the number of people being infected. Thus making it harder for vulnerable people to have a better chance of staying safe while also managing to have a semblance of a normal life.

So while I don't want to see a return to life before the pandemic, which will force me along with other vulnerable people to completely isolated ourselves. I also don't want to see a return to a full lockdown.

Yes these views may be seen as completely selfish on my part but so be it.

 

[Andicis]

2 minutes ago, Albert said:

Why isn't it feasible? All the previously given reasons have been shown to be invalid through comparisons. 

Europe in general doing poorly is not an excuse. 

Europe. Is. Interconnected. As you quite well know. If Australia is such a utopia, why are you on here lecturing Brits about how awful our country is. Go enjoy your utopia. 

[Albert]

2 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Europe. Is. Interconnected. As you quite well know. If Australia is such a utopia, why are you on here lecturing Brits about how awful we are. Go enjoy your utopia. 

Ah yes, back to the 'bugger off' line, rather than explaining yourself. 

The whole World is interconnected, but if that itself is the issue, surely border restrictions would be hardened to gain control of the situation. 

[Andicis]

Just now, Albert said:

Ah yes, back to the 'bugger off' line, rather than explaining yourself. 

The whole World is interconnected, but if that itself is the issue, surely border restrictions would be hardened to gain control of the situation. 

Because you're so extremely tedious. People try explain a point, you ignore the bits that don't suit you, and go around and around again in circles. You've done it with Maxjam for days. I'm sure it's that simple. Dunno why the politicians didn't just consider that. 

Even countries like Germany that have managed the pandemic well don't have zero covid. Comparing Europe and Oceania is just painful.

[jimmyp]

4 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

I have health issues which means the virus is more of a danger to me than most but I'd be quite happy not to see a full lockdown, so long as everyone followed the rules of mask wearing and social distancing. 

I've been for a meal in a number of pubs where I've felt safe due to the precautions they've taken and the other people around me also following the rules. But the problem is to many people are not complying with the rules after the easing of the original full lock down and why there is an increase in the number of people being infected. Thus making it harder for vulnerable people to have a better chance of staying safe while also managing to have a semblance of a normal life.

So while I don't want to see a return to life before the pandemic, which will force me along with other vulnerable people to completely isolated ourselves. I also don't want to see a return to a full lockdown.

Yes these views may be seen as completely selfish on my part but so be it.

 

Your views aren’t selfish, they are reasonable. Unfortunately reliant upon actions of unreasonable people though. 

[Albert]

Just now, Andicis said:

Because you're so extremely tedious. People try explain a point, you ignore the bits that don't suit you, and go around and around again in circles. You've done it with Maxjam for days. I'm sure it's that simple. Dunno why the politicians didn't just consider that. 

You say I ignore bits, but where? This is a pretty transparent attack when people don't know how to actually answer points, and it's pretty telling that you regress to this so quickly now. 

There is no 'going around in circles', it's points being put to you, then you immediately jumping to this because you have no actual argument. 

As to it being 'simple', I never suggested it was simple, but rather that such goals are achievable, and where they have been achieved, as well as the benefits. 

Just now, Andicis said:

Even countries like Germany that have managed the pandemic well don't have zero covid. Comparing Europe and Oceania is just painful.

Except I'm not just talking about Oceania. The same levels of success have been seen in Asia as well. 

[Andicis]

Just now, Albert said:

You say I ignore bits, but where? This is a pretty transparent attack when people don't know how to actually answer points, and it's pretty telling that you regress to this so quickly now. 

There is no 'going around in circles', it's points being put to you, then you immediately jumping to this because you have no actual argument. 

As to it being 'simple', I never suggested it was simple, but rather that such goals are achievable, and where they have been achieved, as well as the benefits. 

Except I'm not just talking about Oceania. The same levels of success have been seen in Asia as well. 

For one, you ignored the bit that I mentioned about Scotland locking down for longer than England and yet being in no different a position to England anyway. 

There is absolutely going around in circles, what? People have been pointing out Asia and Oceania aren't Europe and there are a multitude of sociocultural and economic reasons why this is the case. 

How is it that Germany has managed the pandemic well and yet not got zero covid? What more could they have possibly done? 

I certainly do have an actual argument, you said the UK didn't have a proper lockdown. I'm telling you - we did. You're saying we left it to early, I'm saying Scotland went on longer than England for no discernible benefit. You don't read what people are saying. It's like I'm debating a bot that repeats platitudes. 

[1of4]

1 hour ago, rammieib said:

https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/12/cdc-study-finds-overwhelming-majority-of-people-getting-coronavirus-wore-masks/
 

Genuinely expect more of these type of studies to come out.

Isn't the point of wearing a mask is that it stops the wearer from spreading the virus as opposed to them not catching it.

But ay this report originated in the USA and we all know everything is fake news unless it's spoken by the orange one.

[Albert]

5 minutes ago, Andicis said:

For one, you ignored the bit that I mentioned about Scotland locking down for longer than England and yet being in no different a position to England anyway. 

It's not ignored, it's just not particularly relevant, as the point is already dealt with, and I felt we agreed on it. Without the proper systems in place to leave lockdown, it was too early, and that was the mistake. As you point out, it's a connected country, and there aren't restrictions preventing that movement, hence it's no surprise that a longer lockdown was for naught. 

5 minutes ago, Andicis said:

There is absolutely going around in circles, what? People have been pointing out Asia and Oceania aren't Europe and there are a multitude of sociocultural and economic reasons why this is the case. 

Which are? Others who have discussed this has steered the conversation away from this consistently, usually not even wanting to name Singapore, Hong Kong or Korea in the discussion. 

Again, Europe doing poorly doesn't mean that they were destined to. 

5 minutes ago, Andicis said:

How is it that Germany has managed the pandemic well and yet not got zero covid? What more could they have possibly done? 

Have they managed it that well? They could have gone for a longer lockdown, more controls on movement, etc, as was done in countries in Asia. This would allow for more effective tracing methods, as well as more targeted interventions. 

5 minutes ago, Andicis said:

I certainly do have an actual argument, you said the UK didn't have a proper lockdown. I'm telling you - we did. You're saying we left it to early, I'm saying Scotland went on longer than England for no discernible benefit. You don't read what people are saying. It's like I'm debating a bot that repeats platitudes. 

As discussed above, Scotland going longer is moot without those systems and processes put in place, as noted earlier. The lockdown was ended prematurely, and the bits and pieces actions since has allowed this issue to fester until the point we're now at. 

The UK had a chance to wrest control back at a time they could, but as it has now been revealed, the government ignored the advice. 

[jimmyp]

@Albert out of interest, when everyone in Australia had to lockdown,  did the government offer financial incentives to cover loss of earnings? 

 

[Albert]

5 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

Isn't the point of wearing a mask is that it stops the wearer from spreading the virus as opposed to them not catching it.

But ay this report originated in the USA and we all know everything is fake news unless it's spoken by the orange one.

The Federalist is a right wing publication, and has misrepresented the CDC's report quite a bit, see my previous post on the topic. 

Masks help both out and in for the record. They're no magic bullet of course, but they are effective. 

[Albert]

Just now, jimmyp said:

@Albert out of interest, when everyone in Australia had to lockdown,  did the government offer financial incentives to cover loss of earnings? 

 

Kind of. There was a lot of stimulus, they introduced 'job keeper' to keep people employed while their industries were depressed, and upped the jobseeker payments and rolled back obligations for it. Victoria, which has had the harshest lockdowns as they were the only state with a second wave, also had their own rounds of stimulus. 

Lockdown through most of the country was very brief though, only a few weeks. 

[Andicis]

1 minute ago, Albert said:

It's not ignored, it's just not particularly relevant, as the point is already dealt with, and I felt we agreed on it. Without the proper systems in place to leave lockdown, it was too early, and that was the mistake. As you point out, it's a connected country, and there aren't restrictions preventing that movement, hence it's no surprise that a longer lockdown was for naught. 

So you think we shouldn't have ever opened up? We still don't have a proper track and trace. The economy couldn't take that. I agree the government should have sorted it - but they haven't. We couldn't stay closed forever, and those extra weeks Scotland did as you said are pointless, so what is the play here? You can blame the government, and I'd agree, but it's beside the point. It wasn't there. We had to open. 

 

3 minutes ago, Albert said:

Which are? Others who have discussed this has steered the conversation away from this consistently, usually not even wanting to name Singapore, Hong Kong or Korea in the discussion. 

Again, Europe doing poorly doesn't mean that they were destined to. 

Come on mate. Europe relies on each other for food, supplies, and trade, and it's not something that can be stopped. A lot of people work across the continent and have to take business trips etc, it's a lot easier for South Korea to stop flights with China, than it is for the UK to close borders with France. Hong Kong, who even believes the CCP numbers, I certainly don't. Singapore is a city state. 

European countries rely on each other and have been interconnected for much longer than Asia, Oceania, or anywhere else. They were never getting zero covid without closing borders, and you can't close borders in Europe. 

7 minutes ago, Albert said:

Have they managed it that well? They could have gone for a longer lockdown, more controls on movement, etc, as was done in countries in Asia. This would allow for more effective tracing methods, as well as more targeted interventions. 

They've minimised deaths and have a low number of cases. This is managed well. 

8 minutes ago, Albert said:

The UK had a chance to wrest control back at a time they could, but as it has now been revealed, the government ignored the advice. 

The Government also has a responsibility to people without covid risk. 

[Red Ram]

If you want a rational perspective read this.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/10/continual-local-lockdowns-answer-covid-control?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

The author argues against continually relying exclusively lockdowns and also against the Herd Immunity approach.

It's a very compelling analysis by a recognised expert in the field and has certainly changed my perspective. It goes beyond the binary pro-Lockdown/anti-Lockdown debate (I mean none of us actually WANT Lockdowns it's just the least worst option...) and argues for rational management of the Pandemic as successfully demonstrated by a number of other countries.

I read it expecting to disagree with it but it's certainly changed my perspective because I wasn't aware of the extent to which life could effectively return to something like normal if you happen to live in a country with a competent government.

 

[Albert]

16 minutes ago, Andicis said:

So you think we shouldn't have ever opened up? We still don't have a proper track and trace. The economy couldn't take that. I agree the government should have sorted it - but they haven't. We couldn't stay closed forever, and those extra weeks Scotland did as you said are pointless, so what is the play here? You can blame the government, and I'd agree, but it's beside the point. It wasn't there. We had to open. 

No, I think the UK should have made sure that the systems were in place before opening up, like other countries have done. You say that 'the economy couldn't take that', but the economy can't take what's happening now, or what's to come next. See later in the poster for more detail thoughts on this matter. 

16 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Come on mate. Europe relies on each other for food, supplies, and trade, and it's not something that can be stopped. A lot of people work across the continent and have to take business trips etc, it's a lot easier for South Korea to stop flights with China, than it is for the UK to close borders with France. Hong Kong, who even believes the CCP numbers, I certainly don't. Singapore is a city state. 

So, you think that Singapore and Hong Kong grow their own? 

You can question China's numbers overall, but there is no evidence of a large second wave occurring there, and there is nothing to suggest something untoward about Hong Kong's figures. 

I'm not sure what point you think you're making with Singapore to be honest. It being a city state forces it to be more connected with the outside World. 

16 minutes ago, Andicis said:

European countries rely on each other and have been interconnected for much longer than Asia, Oceania, or anywhere else. They were never getting zero covid without closing borders, and you can't close borders in Europe. 

Are you kidding? Singapore, Hong Kong and Korea rely on the interconnected nature of their regions. 

Equally, you can close borders, and have restrictions on travel anywhere. 

16 minutes ago, Andicis said:

They've minimised deaths and have a low number of cases. This is managed well. 

Compared to some countries performing much worse, but on global standards are far behind the leaders. 

16 minutes ago, Andicis said:

The Government also has a responsibility to people without covid risk. 

Everyone has a 'covid risk'. 

7 minutes ago, Red Ram said:

If you want a rational perspective read this.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/10/continual-local-lockdowns-answer-covid-control?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

The author argues against continually relying exclusively lockdowns and also against the Herd Immunity approach.

It's a very compelling analysis by a recognised expert in the field and has certainly changed my perspective. It goes beyond the binary pro-Lockdown/anti-Lockdown debate (I mean none of us actually WANT Lockdowns it's just the least worst option...) and argues for rational management of the Pandemic as successfully demonstrated by a number of other countries.

I read it expecting to disagree with it but it's certainly changed my perspective because I wasn't aware of the extent to which life could effectively return to something like normal if you happen to live in a country with a competent government.

 

This is the whole point, it's not 'lockdowns or no lockdowns', it's about the whole response together. Vietnam, Taiwan and New Zealand weren't successful because they put in harsh lockdowns and called it a day, it's because they've had well managed responses throughout, and have had tools to deal with outbreaks as they arrived. 

Covid normal isn't some fantasy, it is achievable with a well managed response. We don't know what the end of this will look like, there are too many unanswered questions, but we can prepare for the long haul, and live this Covid normal for as long as we need. 

[Andicis]

2 minutes ago, Albert said:

No, I think the UK should have made sure that the systems were in place before opening up, like other countries have done. You say that 'the economy couldn't take that', but the economy can't take what's happening now, or what's to come next. See later in the poster for more detail thoughts on this matter. 

So, you think that Singapore and Hong Kong grow their own? 

You can question China's numbers overall, but there is no evidence of a large second wave occurring there, and there is nothing to suggest something untoward about Hong Kong's figures. 

I'm not sure what point you think you're making with Singapore to be honest. It being a city state forces it to be more connected with the outside World. 

Are you kidding? Singapore, Hong Kong and Korea rely on the interconnected nature of their regions. 

Equally, you can close borders, and have restrictions on travel anywhere. 

Compared to some countries performing much worse, but on global standards are far behind the leaders. 

Everyone has a 'covid risk'. 

Yes, they should have. But the systems weren't ready. And still aren't. We couldn't have waited that long, because that'd have meant we never opened. It's easy for someone who (and I'm making an assumption here) will not have to deal with the economic permutations of lockdown to call for it. 

Hong Kong is part of China. We have no evidence of anything from China, we don't get reliable data. I don't think it's a useful example in the slightest. 

It's a lot easier to manage a singular city than a large nation of many, is it not? 

South Korea already had good frame work before the covid pandemic began due to the outbreak of SARS. They also had a culture which was quite tolerant to wearing masks and cleanliness anyway. Again, I don't want to be comparing city states to huge European nations. It's unhelpful. 

You can't close borders in Europe. 

I have a risk of being run over by a car. I cross roads still. 

[jimmyp]

4 minutes ago, Albert said:

No, I think the UK should have made sure that the systems were in place before opening up, like other countries have done. You say that 'the economy couldn't take that', but the economy can't take what's happening now, or what's to come next. See later in the poster for more detail thoughts on this matter. 

So, you think that Singapore and Hong Kong grow their own? 

You can question China's numbers overall, but there is no evidence of a large second wave occurring there, and there is nothing to suggest something untoward about Hong Kong's figures. 

I'm not sure what point you think you're making with Singapore to be honest. It being a city state forces it to be more connected with the outside World. 

Are you kidding? Singapore, Hong Kong and Korea rely on the interconnected nature of their regions. 

Equally, you can close borders, and have restrictions on travel anywhere. 

Compared to some countries performing much worse, but on global standards are far behind the leaders. 

Everyone has a 'covid risk'. 

This is the whole point, it's not 'lockdowns or no lockdowns', it's about the whole response together. Vietnam, Taiwan and New Zealand weren't successful because they put in harsh lockdowns and called it a day, it's because they've had well managed responses throughout, and have had tools to deal with outbreaks as they arrived. 

Covid normal isn't some fantasy, it is achievable with a well managed response. We don't know what the end of this will look like, there are too many unanswered questions, but we can prepare for the long haul, and live this Covid normal for as long as we need. 

As Brit’s we let ourselves down massively by not obeying the 14 day quarantine. The percentage of Brits who openly admit to going out whilst they should be in quarantine is disturbing. We also have a tendency to gather in small enclosed spaces frequently. A recipe for disaster.