Coronavirus

[Comrade 86]

10 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Pennies dropped.

For the same reasons that you've been going on about Australia, New Zealand and Taiwan on the UK based forum for the last 9 months?

G-Star be like...

[GenBr]

9 hours ago, Andicis said:

Not sure we agree on this. It tends to be the older people with larger homes that are the least impacted by lockdown, therefore I'd say the Tory core are probably comfortable enough being locked down.

 

Not so sure that you're correct on this. 

I live in a tiny house, but lockdown hasn't bothered me at all so far. Not sure size of your house should have anything to do with how comfortable you are killing your fellow citizens. It isn't a prison - you can still go outside. 

Maybe you are correct about the second part. I'm only looking at it from my own experience, but i suppose anyone who works in hospitality or the arts probably has a completely different view to me. I'd still like to think most people actually care about the vulnerable though - even if they are suffering themselves.

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, GenBr said:

I live in a tiny house, but lockdown hasn't bothered me at all so far. Not sure size of your house should have anything to do with how comfortable you are killing your fellow citizens. It isn't a prison - you can still go outside. 

Maybe you are correct about the second part. I'm only looking at it from my own experience, but i suppose anyone who works in hospitality or the arts probably has a completely different view to me. I'd still like to think most people actually care about the vulnerable though - even if they are suffering themselves.

Think them emboldened bit is an awful thing to say.

Lets be honest everyone is going to put their own situations first. 

Do the vulnerable people worry about others losing their jobs and having mental issues? Of course they do. Do they think it is more important than their situation? No of course not.

[alexxxxx]

I think we've done australia to UK comparisons to death but I'm convinced that Australia and NZ never had the same initial undetected infected that UK, Italy and Spain had which had made it much easier to control. Geography helps them too. 

Politically I don't think that there is much dissent for the governments plans for tier system etc from within Parliament apart from some tory backbenchers. 

NHS is going to be under huge strain in 7d/14d time and the figures coming out will be miserable. 

I'm a bit wound up though that vaccine deployment (1-2 M  per day) infrastructure or personell seems to be a few weeks away. We've known for a two/three months now when these would be available. 

[GboroRam]

4 minutes ago, alexxxxx said:

I think we've done australia to UK comparisons to death but I'm convinced that Australia and NZ never had the same initial undetected infected that UK, Italy and Spain had which had made it much easier to control. Geography helps them too. 

Isn't that the point though - they responded faster and avoided the initial infections, where the UK decided Cheltenham festival was too important to stop?

Geography is remarkably similar to the UK, with Australia being an island. The UK not being part of Schengen was a big positive in maintaining biosecurity at the border. If we'd wanted to try.

[Albert]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

Pennies dropped.

For the same reasons that you've been going on about Australia, New Zealand and Taiwan on the UK based forum for the last 9 months?

The point is the comparison, to analyse how the UK could indeed have done better. Amazing the penny hasn't dropped for you yet. 

18 minutes ago, alexxxxx said:

I think we've done australia to UK comparisons to death but I'm convinced that Australia and NZ never had the same initial undetected infected that UK, Italy and Spain had which had made it much easier to control. Geography helps them too. 

We had direct flights from Wuhan right up until the end of January, and had confirmed cases earlier. The difference was how we responded. The UK is literally an island, so the 'geography' argument doesn't really fly, unless you think it's about population density, then Taiwan and Vietnam get a bit awkward. 

18 minutes ago, alexxxxx said:

Politically I don't think that there is much dissent for the governments plans for tier system etc from within Parliament apart from some tory backbenchers. 

NHS is going to be under huge strain in 7d/14d time and the figures coming out will be miserable. 

I'm a bit wound up though that vaccine deployment (1-2 M  per day) infrastructure or personell seems to be a few weeks away. We've known for a two/three months now when these would be available. 

The infrastructure also includes actually knowing what you're making. The UK has done well to get the rollout of the vaccine up and running so fast. It's one of the few areas that they've been doing so. 

[alexxxxx]

11 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Isn't that the point though - they responded faster and avoided the initial infections, where the UK decided Cheltenham festival was too important to stop?

Im sure an earlier national lockdown and closure of borders for non-essential travel would have been a good step to slow the initial spread but I don't think that we would have had a comparable outcome to Australia. 

11 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Geography is remarkably similar to the UK, with Australia being an island. The UK not being part of Schengen was a big positive in maintaining biosecurity at the border. If we'd wanted to try.

Not really, the roll on roll of nature of our freight infrastructure would always mean we had a leaker border. It goes without saying that the main population centres are much further apart in Australia. Local lockdowns/restrictions will be far more effective than here. 

[GboroRam]

4 minutes ago, alexxxxx said:

Im sure an earlier national lockdown and closure of borders for non-essential travel would have been a good step to slow the initial spread but I don't think that we would have had a comparable outcome to Australia. 

Not really, the roll on roll of nature of our freight infrastructure would always mean we had a leaker border. It goes without saying that the main population centres are much further apart in Australia. Local lockdowns/restrictions will be far more effective than here. 

Well, we know other countries with similar challenges to the UK managed it. It is clearly possible with the right approach.

[alexxxxx]

12 minutes ago, Albert said:

The point is the comparison, to analyse how the UK could indeed have done better. Amazing the penny hasn't dropped for you yet. 

We had direct flights from Wuhan right up until the end of January, and had confirmed cases earlier. The difference was how we responded. The UK is literally an island, so the 'geography' argument doesn't really fly, unless you think it's about population density, then Taiwan and Vietnam get a bit awkward. 

The infrastructure also includes actually knowing what you're making. The UK has done well to get the rollout of the vaccine up and running so fast. It's one of the few areas that they've been doing so. 

Don't get me wrong I don't think that the UK has done a good job, even in comparison to similar countries. We 'caught' the virus mainly from Italy rather than China. Hundreds/Thousands were infected there and came back in Feb. 

Vaccine deployment needs to be much faster in order to prevent more disruption and death. 

 

 

[Albert]

23 minutes ago, alexxxxx said:

Im sure an earlier national lockdown and closure of borders for non-essential travel would have been a good step to slow the initial spread but I don't think that we would have had a comparable outcome to Australia. 

Not really, the roll on roll of nature of our freight infrastructure would always mean we had a leaker border. It goes without saying that the main population centres are much further apart in Australia. Local lockdowns/restrictions will be far more effective than here. 

What do you think freight is like in Australia? 

The issue isn't even really distance in Australia, as most of the major population centres are clustered, and air travel is common. Equally, countries with higher population densities have managed just fine too. It's all just excuses with the UK, we know they could have achieved a similar outcome with better management simply on the fact that the lockdowns, when implemented properly, worked. Functionally, all that's required to get where Australia and co are is for the tools to control the virus to work, which we know for a fact they do. From there it's just a game of using them appropriately. 

5 minutes ago, alexxxxx said:

Don't get me wrong I don't think that the UK has done a good job, even in comparison to similar countries. We 'caught' the virus mainly from Italy rather than China. Hundreds/Thousands were infected there and came back in Feb. 

Vaccine deployment needs to be much faster in order to prevent more disruption and death. 

They're rolling out this vaccine at record pace already, there are limits to what can actually be done. 

[BIllyD]

There is no doubt that Australia has handled this better than the UK, as I'm sure have many other countries, I don't think anyone can argue with that.
 

I'm one of the governments biggest critics of how they have handled this, however the point has been made quite a few times, we are just going over and over and over the same topic. I for one don't care what's happening or happened in Australia, surely this thread should be about what's going on over here ? Even if we followed Australia's lead it would be to late for us.

[alexxxxx]

24 minutes ago, Albert said:

What do you think freight is like in Australia? 

There aren't ports like Dover, Harwich, Anglesey, Portsmouth, Plymouth, Immingham etc that have roll on roll off freight services from abroad with thousands of accompanied freight vehicles moving through every day. 

Internally I'm sure it's relatively similar with rail freight, Air freight and by road (with those horrendous road trains). 

24 minutes ago, Albert said:

The issue isn't even really distance in Australia, as most of the major population centres are clustered, and air travel is common. Equally, countries with higher population densities have managed just fine too. It's all just excuses with the UK, we know they could have achieved a similar outcome with better management simply on the fact that the lockdowns, when implemented properly, worked. Functionally, all that's required to get where Australia and co are is for the tools to control the virus to work, which we know for a fact they do. From there it's just a game of using them appropriately. 

I think the challenges faced by Australia and the UK are different. This is no way me defending the government. 

Australia do have clustered population centres, you've got Sydney-Newcastle, Act, Victoria, Bris-GC, Perth and adelaide. I appreciate that air travel in Australia is nearly as ubiquitous as rail travel in the UK, however these areas are easier to isolate, and the federal system allows state govs to achieve more than what a local council can in the UK. Contrast that to the sprawling nature of England..Local restrictions have limited impact here.

Still I agree with you that it does not explain why countries like Vietnam have achieved a better outcome as they are denser and have fewer resources at their disposal. There's no excuse for the scale of the problem all over Europe. 

The UK needed to implement proper quarantine when it was clear that the cases were brewing in ski resorts. We should have banned recreational foreign travel throughout the summer. University students shouldn't have been encouraged to return to campus. These were all obviously risky at the time. 

24 minutes ago, Albert said:

They're rolling out this vaccine at record pace already, there are limits to what can actually be done. 

In order for the government to meet its own targets of when life is getting back to normal they need to do better. 

Anyway most of this post just comes out of frustration that everything we've done is for nothing and the government seems like it doesn't learn anything. Schools back next week for example... 

[Albert]

20 minutes ago, BIllyD said:

There is no doubt that Australia has handled this better than the UK, as I'm sure have many other countries, I don't think anyone can argue with that.
 

I'm one of the governments biggest critics of how they have handled this, however the point has been made quite a few times, we are just going over and over and over the same topic. I for one don't care what's happening or happened in Australia, surely this thread should be about what's going on over here ? Even if we followed Australia's lead it would be to late for us.

The reason it keeps coming up is this incessant argument people seem to have that 'they've done their best', which is absolute nonsense. It goes hand in hand with this 'its either lives or the economy', when best practice saved both for other countries. 

The thing is though we can ignore all the other countries if we want. All that's required for the virus to be controlled is to have means by which to put the R number below 1 and keep it there, and we know for a fact that the UK was able to do that on a number of occasions. If that can be achieved, and then the virus is eradicated, then it is okay for restrictions to be relaxed. The issue is that the UK keeps relaxing restrictions, allowing that number to rise, while case loads are too high. It was never 'lives versus the economy', as both get harmed by the same thing long term. 

Realistically, the way things are going, the UK's last option, the corner it's backed itself into, is using the tools it knows puts that figure under 1, and just keeping it there until enough people are vaccinated. That's likely going to be months away, but it seems to be the last option left, particularly given that the hospitals have more Covid patients now than they did in the first wave. It's not a pretty place to be, but it's the result of the management of the situation. Once that reality is accepted, all that's really going to be left to do is discuss the aftermath of those choices. 

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

Well, we know other countries with similar challenges to the UK managed it. It is clearly possible with the right approach.

Our challenges are unique, because we have so many 'special' people, such as those who decided that a couple of weeks skiing in Switzerland, only to be placed in quarantine, then breaking said quarantine before legging it to France during the night was just what the situation warranted.

[Albert]

4 minutes ago, alexxxxx said:

There aren't ports like Dover, Harwich, Anglesey, Portsmouth, Plymouth, Immingham etc that have roll on roll off freight services from abroad with thousands of accompanied freight vehicles moving through every day. 

Internally I'm sure it's relatively similar with rail freight, Air freight and by road (with those horrendous road trains). 

True, but we managed even at the height of the Victorian outbreak with trucks crossing the border. The key is to manage those risks effectively. 

4 minutes ago, alexxxxx said:

I think the challenges faced by Australia and the UK are different. This is no way me defending the government. 

Australia do have clustered population centres, you've got Sydney-Newcastle, Act, Victoria, Bris-GC, Perth and adelaide. I appreciate that air travel in Australia is nearly as ubiquitous as rail travel in the UK, however these areas are easier to isolate, and the federal system allows state govs to achieve more than what a local council can in the UK. Contrast that to the sprawling nature of England..Local restrictions have limited impact here.

There was actually a lot of concern that, thanks to the constitution, was no power for the states to close their borders. Border communities also posed a lot of challenges. The key was that while there were concerns, they still followed the health advice and worked hard to do what had to be done, rather than wasting time appeasing everyone they could. 

4 minutes ago, alexxxxx said:

Still I agree with you that it does not explain why countries like Vietnam have achieved a better outcome as they are denser and have fewer resources at their disposal. There's no excuse for the scale of the problem all over Europe. 

The UK needed to implement proper quarantine when it was clear that the cases were brewing in ski resorts. We should have banned recreational foreign travel throughout the summer. University students shouldn't have been encouraged to return to campus. These were all obviously risky at the time. 

In order for the government to meet its own targets of when life is getting back to normal they need to do better. 

Anyway most of this post just comes out of frustration that everything we've done is for nothing and the government seems like it doesn't learn anything. Schools back next week for example... 

It is frustrating, and it seems quite likely now that things are just going to continue to spiral until the vaccine saves the day. When this is all over, and a thorough post-mortem must be carried out, even if just to rethink the UK's pandemic strategies in future. 

At least we've learned at the very least that this 'lives versus the economy' line is utter tripe. Protecting both has been the winning strategy for the countries around the World. 

In many ways, it would be less frustrating if the UK actually went down the path of trying to protect both, and bottled it, as it would at least have had something defensible in the thinking. I guess what annoys me in all this is that the UK, having tools that worked, moved to save livelihoods ahead of lives, and it ultimately has cost both.

[Norman]

3 minutes ago, Albert said:

True, but we managed even at the height of the Victorian outbreak with trucks crossing the border. The key is to manage those risks effectively. 

There was actually a lot of concern that, thanks to the constitution, was no power for the states to close their borders. Border communities also posed a lot of challenges. The key was that while there were concerns, they still followed the health advice and worked hard to do what had to be done, rather than wasting time appeasing everyone they could. 

It is frustrating, and it seems quite likely now that things are just going to continue to spiral until the vaccine saves the day. When this is all over, and a thorough post-mortem must be carried out, even if just to rethink the UK's pandemic strategies in future. 

At least we've learned at the very least that this 'lives versus the economy' line is utter tripe. Protecting both has been the winning strategy for the countries around the World. 

In many ways, it would be less frustrating if the UK actually went down the path of trying to protect both, and bottled it, as it would at least have had something defensible in the thinking. I guess what annoys me in all this is that the UK, having tools that worked, moved to save livelihoods ahead of lives, and it ultimately has cost both.

Least you have a few days of cricket coming up to take your mind of our problems. 

Oh wait. 

[Albert]

7 minutes ago, Norman said:

Least you have a few days of cricket coming up to take your mind of our problems. 

Oh wait. 

Was a terrific test match, with high quality bowling on both sides. Disappointing for Australia, but Rahane was magnificent. Shaping up to be a great rest of the series, and it's likely Warner and Pucovski will be fit for the third Test, which should help Australia's batting woes somewhat. 

I'd hate to be touring India anytime soon though with the side they've built. 

[sage]

I've been taking part in a coronavirus vaccine trial.

Half of us listened to one indie band and the other half to another.

Luckily I got The Cure and not the Placebo.

 

[ariotofmyown]

37 minutes ago, sage said:

I've been taking part in a coronavirus vaccine trial.

Half of us listened to one indie band and the other half to another.

Luckily I got The Cure and not the Placebo.

 

Was it organised by the Vaccines? (I think we should have a heated debate about if it's reasonable to describe The Cure and Placebo as indie bands!)

[Guest]

3 hours ago, GboroRam said:

Isn't that the point though - they responded faster and avoided the initial infections, where the UK decided Cheltenham festival was too important to stop?

Geography is remarkably similar to the UK, with Australia being an island. The UK not being part of Schengen was a big positive in maintaining biosecurity at the border. If we'd wanted to try.

The first recorded Covid death in the country was 31st January, the Cheltenham Festival was 16th March. 

As far as I am aware, there is very little if any data to support the theory that the Cheltenham Festival had any major effect on the level of infections. 

If the R rate was supposedly as high as 3 or 4 by time we closed down I think it is pretty safe to say the damage had already been done long before the Cheltenham Festival.