The Covid-19 serious chat thread

[Dolphin Ziggler]

First topic message reminder :

I will edit misinformation that I consider disrespectful and insulting. If you can’t respect that, they’ll be changed more firmly.

Such censorship is disappointing, but unsurprising given the often over-zealous moderating on here. Little wonder so many posters have drifted away when fair discussion is discouraged and alternative points of view are policed.

Over such a sensitive subject, and with people on here likely to have known people who have died, I stand by it on this issue and find your need to make a dig at the site disappointing.

Any further complaints can be directed to my inbox. Further comments will be moderated. Dangerous misinformation, especially presented as fact, will be moderated. If you feel your liberties unjustly compromised, go shout out a window or something.

[Luckless Pedestrian]

That's the idea, I think. It's the new bread and circuses.

[doctor_grey]

Insane.

[jimbopip]

So according to Hapless Hancock...
Until recently the party line was that the pandemic was a totally unexpected once in a lifetime event which caught governments all over the world unprepared.  This was why our government created the  VIP Lane and gave hundreds of millions of pounds to pest control companies or companies that had only existed for a couple of weeks in order to purchase PPE which we needed desperately.
Now, today, he is telling us there was never  a shortage of PPE  and he had been briefed  IN LATE JANUARY about how high the death toll could reasonably be.  
I can't help but believe that in an enlightened, caring, cultured, civilised  society that bas tard would be hanging from a lamppost by now.

[Duty281]

I can't help but believe that in an enlightened, caring, cultured, civilised  society that bas tard would be hanging from a lamppost by now.

What a strange idea of an 'enlightened, caring, cultured, civilised' society that is - lynching political opponents.

The very fact we are a civilised society is why we don't do things like this.

[lostinwales]

I can't help but believe that in an enlightened, caring, cultured, civilised  society that bas tard would be hanging from a lamppost by now.

What a strange idea of an 'enlightened, caring, cultured, civilised' society that is - lynching political opponents.

The very fact we are a civilised society is why we don't do things like this.

I know things are all very tribal right now but it isn't about politics. It is about basic competency. Using an argument like that feels like finding a mechanism to dismiss what to many people are valid points of view.

It is also easy to start thinking about harder sanctions because quite frankly they have f**ked up and so far they have not paid any price for so doing.

[Duty281]

I can't help but believe that in an enlightened, caring, cultured, civilised  society that bas tard would be hanging from a lamppost by now.

What a strange idea of an 'enlightened, caring, cultured, civilised' society that is - lynching political opponents.

The very fact we are a civilised society is why we don't do things like this.

I know things are all very tribal right now but it isn't about politics. It is about basic competency. Using an argument like that feels like finding a mechanism to dismiss what to many people are valid points of view.

It is also easy to start thinking about harder sanctions because quite frankly they have f**ked up and so far they have not paid any price for so doing.

To me, murder doesn't qualify as a 'harder sanction'. Imprisonment after a fair trial? Sure (not saying that's necessarily what I want to happen).

Using the term 'political opponent' isn't tribal. Matt Hancock is a politician, occupying a politician's office. If you oppose what he does (as I and many others do) you're a political opponent.

[jimbopip]

281 I hate to sound patronising but I suspect my humour eluded you. The contrast between "enlightened, caring etc" and stringing him up from the nearest lamppost was deliberate and intended (a) to express my frustration that it looks like he'll get away with it, and (b) to open the debate that if we don't hang him what should we do?
It was intended in the same spirit as Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal " . Which isn't about eating babies! Before you accuse me of promoting infanticide and cannibalism.

[doctor_grey]

An short article discussing the effectiveness of at least the Pfizer vaccine against the Delta (or India) variant of Covid-19.  Makes the point to keep rolling out the vaccines as fast as possible.  Even more so with issues being seen with one of the Rapid Covid tests.

https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2021/06/delta-covid-variant-does-pfizer-vaccine-work-against-new-strain.html

[Samo]

Restrictions (predictably) extended because of the rise in cases of the Delta varient. The one that originated in India, but Johnson refused to put India on the red list until it was too late because he’s desperate for a post-Brexit trade deal with them.

Outstanding leadership managing to almost undo all the work done by the vaccine rollout.

[lostinwales]

Restrictions (predictably) extended because of the rise in cases of the Delta varient. The one that originated in India, but Johnson refused to put India on the red list until it was too late because he’s desperate for a post-Brexit trade deal with them.

Outstanding leadership managing to almost undo all the work done by the vaccine rollout.

It already has undone the work in one respect. One of the important side effects of the early vaccine rollout was going to be an early relaxation of regulations in comparison with countries in the EU. Now they are looking to open up before us.

[doctor_grey]

Part of the current problem, I think, was the government convincing the scientific and medical communities to go along with the idea that one jab is better than none.  That resulted in the 12 week window between the first and second jabs, when the direction from those who developed the two-dose vaccines was either 3 or 4 weeks gap, depending on which vaccine, for maximum effectiveness.  Some of that guidance was based on the push for maximum immunity against the (now realised) possibility of strains developing against which the vaccines had minimal testing data.  

The structure and strength of Delta strain was not predictable from a clinical point of view.  But one or more difficult strains developing is well borne out by past history with other viruses.  

I have no idea whether this was a political calculation, to crow about the number of people getting jabs, or a sincere desire to do something to get at least partial immunity.  But certainly in hindsight it was the wrong approach.

And that means I haver to cancel my flight home in the end of June.....

[lostinwales]

Part of the current problem, I think, was the government convincing the scientific and medical communities to go along with the idea that one jab is better than none.  That resulted in the 12 week window between the first and second jabs, when the direction from those who developed the two-dose vaccines was either 3 or 4 weeks gap, depending on which vaccine, for maximum effectiveness.  Some of that guidance was based on the push for maximum immunity against the (now realised) possibility of strains developing against which the vaccines had minimal testing data.  

The structure and strength of Delta strain was not predictable from a clinical point of view.  But one or more difficult strains developing is well borne out by past history with other viruses.  

I have no idea whether this was a political calculation, to crow about the number of people getting jabs, or a sincere desire to do something to get at least partial immunity.  But certainly in hindsight it was the wrong approach.  

And that means I haver to cancel my flight home in the end of June.....

Sh!te... Sorry mate

At the time the single dose strategy seemed like a successful gamble - a key part not just being who gets it but what happens to them when they do get it, and to the best of my knowledge even a partial vaccination seems to have greatly improved the prognosis in many cases.

As ever the key word is 'gamble' and it does seem that the government, always hoping for the best and not working hard enough to prepare for the worst, has not done so wisely.

[doctor_grey]

It was a gamble for sure. And, to be fair, with COVID-19 so much was predictable and some things were not. Everyone just wants to get through this damn thing and the government took a shot.  And, as I said, in hindsight I think  it was the wrong approach.

But there is something else to it. Throughout the pandemic and the lockdowns the news was almost always bad and good news seemed to be far out into the future. I do think there is value in injecting (little joke) a dose of optimism into the process. Which I think we could all use from time to time.

[dummy_half]

Must be remembered that the move to a single dose was in the context of the Kent variant running amok. Also, highly vulnerable people were still getting their second vaccine to schedule, it was just those in lower risk groups that had delays.

And of course Government decisions at times are not based on complete evidence, or even necessarily on what is actually best practice, but have a component of PR - so what looks better to the general public.

We don't know that the changes to the vaccine schedule were a bad thing - it's possible that with more infections amongst the larger unvaccinated population another variant may have mutated and cauased a much higher and later peak.

Of course none of this excuses the Government's failure to block travel to and from India sufficiently early to prevent the Delta variant taking hold here. You would have hoped they would have learned the lessons of spring 2020 (where infection was brought in from southern Europe) and from the effectiveness of the international travel bans in Aus and NZ.

[lostinwales]

Must be remembered that the move to a single dose was in the context of the Kent variant running amok. Also, highly vulnerable people were still getting their second vaccine to schedule, it was just those in lower risk groups that had delays.

And of course Government decisions at times are not based on complete evidence, or even necessarily on what is actually best practice, but have a component of PR - so what looks better to the general public.

We don't know that the changes to the vaccine schedule were a bad thing - it's possible that with more infections amongst the larger unvaccinated population another variant may have mutated and cauased a much higher and later peak.

Of course none of this excuses the Government's failure to block travel to and from India sufficiently early to prevent the Delta variant taking hold here. You would have hoped they would have learned the lessons of spring 2020 (where infection was brought in from southern Europe) and from the effectiveness of the international travel bans in Aus and NZ.

Absolutely. In itself the vaccine policy was a gamble that at the time helped, but may not have helped long term. It is understandable. Not restricting flights from India sooner is not.

[doctor_grey]

Agree. It was a gamble. And the gamble was that enough people would attain full vaccination before any dangerous strains had a chance to mutate and spread. The problem is the COVID-19 evolves faster then people thought it would.

On the other hand, it is incomprehensible that we didn’t restrict people coming from countries which developed into high-risk countries.

[doctor_grey]

Agree. It was a gamble. And the gamble was that enough people would attain full vaccination before any dangerous strains had a chance to mutate and spread. The problem is the COVID-19 evolves faster then people thought it would.

On the other hand, it is incomprehensible that we didn’t restrict people coming from countries which developed into high-risk countries.

[doctor_grey]

Good news about vaccines v. Delta India variant.  Pfizer and AZ very effective at reducing/preventing hospitalizations for that variant:
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/two-doses-vaccine-highly-effective-against-delta-variant-u-k-n1270776
We WILL get there, mates.

Another sign of progress:  Last night I was called into the local hospital 10 minutes from home, a smaller hospital affiliated with the main one I usually work at, but we couldn't transfer the patient.  We had almost no Covid restrictions in place which made our work a lot easier and much better for the patient.  Six hours later (it's now almost 4:00am), he is fine, and not in an iso ward which means the staff can see him without biohazard garb.  And even a vaccinated and rapid tested family member can go see him.  I checked and the Covid ward has only two patients.  We really are getting through this.  Now if our PM will allow fully vaxxed and people tested clean into the country (a politician with the initials BJ can't be good, let alone the DTs, which might be a Jersey expression), things can really get back to (ab)normal.  

My county is now 73% fully vaxxed adults (aged 18+), and including those aged 12+ is 70%.  What the f**k else do we have to do?  NJ as a whole is 66% fully vaxxed and 77% with one dose so far.  Stop with the QT for people whom are safe already.  One more month and I'm coming over, and good after I stuff the QT.  

[doctor_grey]

More good news despite the bad news from today's Telegraph:

By Global Health Security Team

Coronavirus infection rates in England have climbed to their highest level in five months, according to Office for National Statistics estimates.

Around one in 160 people had Covid-19 in the week to July 3, the latest ONS survey of private households shows, the highest since February 19.  This means case rates are up 50 per cent in a week, from one in 260, but the vaccines are still weakening the link with hospitalisations and deaths, which remain very low.

In Scotland, the cases figure was the highest since mid-January at one in 100 people in private households. Levels in Wales and Northern Ireland are lower, at one in 340 and one in 300 respectively.

Elsewhere, the latest data from Public Health England (PHE) show cases of the dominant delta variant rose by a third in the past week.

A total of 216,249 confirmed and probable cases of the strain, first identified in India and which now accounts for approximately 99 per cent of confirmed Covid cases across the UK.

But hospitalisations from delta were mostly in the under-50s, and just 4 per cent in this group were fully vaccinated.

It's the vaccines boys and girls.  Got to get them.

[Big]

Morning all.  

I've only just seen this separate section on the site, and in it what appears to be reasonably sensible commentary around the covid situation.  For what it is worth, my wife is a Dr in the North East, and has been working in the fight against Covid - both in terms of treating patients with it, and monitoring the cases coming in and trying to deal with the ever changing work load in response to the latest government decision.  So via her I've had a reasonably good insight into what is happening - at least on the hospitalisation side.  Speaking to GP friends who are dealing with some of the fallout from isolation, and the resultant rises in domestic abuse, mental health difficulties, etc, you get a different picture and set of priorities again.

However, my overall impression of where we are at thus far is:
- The government were too slow to control borders from January last year.  From the moment human to human transmission was confirmed last January my wife was arguing we needed to be controlling and (depending where they'd come from) quarantining whoever was coming in.
- The government was again far too slow to respond to the new variant in India.  The tragic irony of this (and the initial failure to control borders) is that this same Tory government long argued for Brexit with a principle argument being that it would allow us to control our borders.  However, now, when Brexit has actually happened and we do have a bit more control over who does/doesn't come in, and there's a situation in which controlling our borders more tightly would actually be a good idea - they utterly fail to actually do it in anything approaching a timely manner.
- Lockdown started too late and ended too early last year.  Had they pushed case numbers lower (and quarantined incoming travellers) we probably could have been living quite freely while the vaccine was rolled out.  The case numbers needed to be got down to the point the last few could be effectively squished out by local lockdowns, and effective test and trace and quarantine.  And people definitely shouldn't have been encouraged to go on holiday, bring back new loads of the virus...    and then eat out to help the virus get about.
- The government have been far too free and easy with public money when it comes to signing lucrative contracts with mates.  At some point that needs to be dealt with.  Deals should be reviewed and if found to be corrupt the politicians and business folk involved prosecuted appropriately.
- The idea that we do or have ever had adequate PPE is total rubbish.  Last March we all got it as a family because my wife was working on a covid ward with inadequate PPE.  Today she is working on a covid ward with inadequate PPE.  Cases in staff can be reduced to pretty much 0 with the right fitted masks, rather than the paper ones that are more intended to catch a bit and reduce risk to others if you breathe it out.  Any suggestion we are adequately protecting staff is a lie, plain and simple.  Looking at our local situation, it is better now but only because most staff have already had it and been double vaccinated - it is not because they suddenly have great PPE.  Last year several staff ended up in ITU and at least one healthcare worker died.  In another friend's hospital at one point over half the beds in ITU were occupied by staff from the hospital.  That is not what happens when staff are adequately protected.

For what it's worth though, I don't disagree with the shift to 12 weeks for the vaccines.  12 weeks is optimal for AZ, which is the main vaccine used.  And Pfizer was only recommended at 3 weeks because that was what they tested to get results quickly so it could be approved.  I don't think there is a conclusive study yet, but as I understand it early results indicate there may be better and longer lasting protection as a result of the 12 week interval for Pfizer as well.  Combining the improved protection for those who have the extended interval, and the fact that more people got the first dose and first bit of protection sooner this way - very much justifies the shift.  The only real complaint is that those who agreed to the first dose on the basis of a second 3 weeks later, in line with the Pfizer study, should not have had the treatment they consented to changed without their consent for that change - that is simply not ethical.

I also think it is good that the government pressed for vaccines ASAP - even if it is the only thing they got right, and they didn't do the other stuff to better limit damage in the meantime. Vaccination is ultimately the way out.

General impression from the wards thus far is that the double vaccination is effective.  Most coming in ill have not had the double vaccination.  Of those with it - none are as dramatically ill as previously, most have other complicating factors that would make them susceptible to any illness, and in some it is incidental (e.g. someone comes in with a broken leg, and just happens to have a mild or even asymptomatic case of covid).

So the vaccine is really helping, but we aren't out of the woods yet.  And, if we have to live with this longer term (even if it's a more moderate illness once enough people have had it/been vaccinated) we need to have capacity to deal with the additional workload in what was already an overstretched service.

The other problematic bit is that I'm not sure about is the efficacy of the vaccine against long covid.  Given the mild but longer term illness isn't what gets people in hospital, that's not what the wife is seeing.  Intuitively I think it should help, but haven't seen results for studies either way.  The NHS are, as I understand it, trying to set up centres to support the massive (but not very much reported) group of people struggling with this.  I would like to think the vaccine will help prevent more being added to this group, even if it comes too late for those already affected.

[dummy_half]

Big

Thanks for the long and detailed post.
As someone who has just had to home-school both my kids for the last week, it's another stress (also meant I only worked half days for the week).
I think with the benefit of hindsight we can all agree that the Gov did a poor job regarding travel restrictions, and that in trying to get the optimum balance between maintaining economic activity and public health we ended up with the worst of both worlds rather than the best.
Test and Trace, and the PPE procurement issues definitely need looking at, but probably not for a few more months until we're out of the new spike.

Obviously, long COVID is still a concern, as by definition you can't know the long term effectiveness of the vaccine against this until sufficient time has passed. Interesting comment that many of the long covid sufferers probably won't show up at hospitals and GPs, so the statistics will be difficult to compile.

Hopefully however, the vaccine programme means that, even if we cannot completely eliminate the disease, it can be treated in the same way as seasonal flu - additional vaccine protection for those that need it, and otherwise we just live with it.

[Samo]

Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson with a record breaking U-turn this morning. After Sajid Javid tested positive for Covid-19 Sunak and Johnson were both pinged by track and trace. After coming out and saying they werent going to self-isolate, and that they were taking part in a “workplace pilot”. However after seeing the fury this caused because it was heavily viewed as “one rule for them…” they back tracked within hours and are now both self isolating.

The gift that keeps on giving. Except the gift is incompetence.

[WELL-PAST-IT]

Incompetence is the only thing you can rely on from this government

[jimbopip]

World beating Test and Trace.
World beating U Turn.

[WELL-PAST-IT]

You would think that they would learn that after all the other times they have been caught out over "us and them" they WOULD learn.

The one before, interfering in a BBC appointment as the person had worked for a left wing publication, great if they are from the Spectator or the Telegraph, fit to run a country even.

[doctor_grey]

Outside of securing vaccines for the UK, which is significant, I think the current leadership has absolutely failed with every other aspect of one of the biggest challenges in the last half-century.  

Did Sajid Javid get his vaccinations?

[Luckless Pedestrian]

Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson with a record breaking U-turn this morning. After Sajid Javid tested positive for Covid-19 Sunak and Johnson were both pinged by track and trace. After coming out and saying they werent going to self-isolate, and that they were taking part in a “workplace pilot”. However after seeing the fury this caused because it was heavily viewed as “one rule for them…” they back tracked within hours and are now both self isolating.

The gift that keeps on giving. Except the gift is incompetence.

They can't even bring themselves to admit that they performed a U-turn. Johnson yesterday and Nahawi today said that they only 'considered' taking part in the pilot scheme. Well that's not true. They didn't consider that option, they chose that option, and issued a press release saying so, only to backtrack when they saw the uproar it had caused. So not only is their judgement absolutely terrible, or they'd have known what the reaction would be, they also for some reason won't be honest about the events of the day.

[BamBam]

You've all upset the resident Johnson fanboy

[doctor_grey]

It shows me, once again, this group have no empathy or understanding what is going on in the country or the world. They ensconced themselves in their tiny little bubble which allows no light in from the outside.

[WELL-PAST-IT]

It shows me, once again, this group have no empathy or understanding what is going on in the country or the world.  They ensconced themselves in their tiny little bubble which allows no light in from the outside.

They remind me of my wife's favorite dessert an "Eton Mess". Most went to Eton and everything they do is a mess.

Also, like most things that are sweet and sickly , they will not do you, or the country any good in the longer term

[WELL-PAST-IT]

I do have another issue /question, there are tens of thousands of people that have been keeping themselves effectively out of society as they would be susceptible to Covid, due to respiratory problems or the like, are they now safe to go out with Covid once again running rampant through the population?

They may have been double jabbed, but that still does not stop you catching it as Javed has found, how will these people fare if they catch it?

[Samo]

My hope is it will prevent them getting severely ill, however everyone is different and will be affected differently.

We never should have opened up fully until everyone over 18 who can get the vaccine has had both doses. This is going to be chaos. Cases will skyrocket, half the country will get pinged and have to isolate, businesses will be forced to close because they dont have the staff, all because Johnson just HAD to set an open up date to appease his Frak supporters. Instead of doing the sensible thing and say “we will open up fully when we think it is safe”.

He’s made a rip roaring Kumquat of it from day one, and has turned into Lord Farquad from Shrek “Some of you may die, but that is a risk I am willing to take”.

[Soul Requiem]

Yes lets just stay in a perpetual state of lockdown, seems the best course of action.

[Duty281]

Over 90% of adults in the UK have had one dose of the vaccine. Around 70% of adults have had two doses. It's long been time to open up, it's not going to get much safer than it is now.

Weird to say 'businesses will be forced to close' in an attack on the UK approaching the end of lockdown. Small and medium-sized businesses have been decimated by lockdown.

[WELL-PAST-IT]

Over 90% of adults in the UK have had one dose of the vaccine. Around 70% of adults have had two doses. It's long been time to open up, it's not going to get much safer than it is now.

Weird to say 'businesses will be forced to close' in an attack on the UK approaching the end of lockdown. Small and medium-sized businesses have been decimated by lockdown.

1.6 million people went into self isolation last week, if anything is killing small and medium businesses it is allowing the bug to spread so quick and infect so many people. I have talked to all sorts of businesses around my part of the world (North Midlands), they have the work but not the people (a lot went home after Brexit feeling unwelcome) add onto that the numbers self isolating and it is a government made disaster. We are short 60,000 HGV drivers in this country, many supermarkets are paying £35/hour for their delivery drivers (more than double the standard rate) as they just cannot meet demand. add onto that the people self isolating and you have a recipe for disaster. Trucking companies are turning work away as they cannot meet demand. Pubs and restaurants just cannot get enough staff and when they do get them they are at the highest risk of being infected or getting a T&T call to self isolate.

[Soul Requiem]

So the solution to staff shortages within hospitality is to keep the industry closed for even longer?

[WELL-PAST-IT]

Try, stop so many people from having to self isolate would be a big help. Not saying things should remain as they are, but compulsory masking wearing in crowded places especially public transport would not go amiss. Tough on clubs, but places that serve large quantities of alcohol and encourage people to dance around in close proximity whilst spewing out loads of potentially virus laden spittle to all and sundry should be closed or at least restrained to stop as much as transfer as possible.

I thought the classic was that in the Autumn, all club goes are going to have to show that they have had a double vac, but not until then. Until the Autumn the young of this world can pick up the virus and spread it about to whoever the come in contact with; like their aged aunt who suffers from chronic asthma who then ends up in an ICU. If you believe that they will refrain from seeing their relatives because the have been clubbing you need to come back and join the real world.

Still awaiting the third member of the Band of Three to show up.

[Samo]

Yes lets just stay in a perpetual state of lockdown, seems the best course of action.

Pretty sure lockdown ended months ago. This is about removing all restrictions. Although once millions of people are self isolating it’ll be like being back in lockdown anyway.

Weird to say 'businesses will be forced to close' in an attack on the UK approaching the end of lockdown. Small and medium-sized businesses have been decimated by lockdown.

Correct, but this is just going to throw fuel on the fire and decimate even more, but this time its entirely avoidable.

[doctor_grey]

I do have another issue /question, there are tens of thousands of people that have been keeping themselves effectively out of society as they would be susceptible to Covid, due to respiratory problems or the like, are they now safe to go out with Covid once again running rampant through the population?

They may have been double jabbed, but that still does not stop you catching it as Javed has found, how will these people fare if they catch it?

Was Javid vaccinated?

The short answer to your question is we don't really know, and I have seen nothing definitive yet at my hospital.  How much can we test on high risk people?  However, proclivity to respiratory issues does not directly imply a susceptibility to the Covid-19 virus.  

One very key piece of data we know is the vaccines have broken the link (for the overwhelming majority) between catching the disease and severe complications.  You or I may get the damn thing despite our jabs, but not react in a way which puts us or people around us in any form of jeopardy.  And we may not notice.   

That said, there is always a small high risk immuno-suppressed % of the population.  For the most part they already know who they are, and will need to remain mindful about their behaviour.  In a way similar to pre-Covid when people with compromised immune systems had to take care.  

I'm not sure the answer, but agree in all highly vaccinated countries like ours and most of thee US, Israel, and so on, the time has come to open up without being brain-dead about it, for our cumulative sanity and to get people working and the economy moving again.  But still watch the numbers and react if something unanticipated happens. New information and data seems to come out weekly.

[lostinwales]

Yes lets just stay in a perpetual state of lockdown, seems the best course of action.

Unless there is more to Gove than we know the virus doesn't actually listen to the pronouncements of the government, and fully opening up at a time when infections are soaring is, surprisingly enough, asking for trouble. Nobody wants more lockdowns, but the way that infections are increasing it seems like there is a high probability we will have to.

Hindsight etc, but the reason we are in such a sh!tty situation is because we got so much wrong to date, and by 'we' I mean our glorious government.

'Some of you may die, but that is a price I am willing to pay'

[Soul Requiem]

Yes lets just stay in a perpetual state of lockdown, seems the best course of action.

Unless there is more to Gove than we know the virus doesn't actually listen to the pronouncements of the government, and fully opening up at a time when infections are soaring is, surprisingly enough, asking for trouble. Nobody wants more lockdowns, but the way that infections are increasing it seems like there is a high probability we will have to.  

Hindsight etc, but the reason we are in such a sh!tty situation is because we got so much wrong to date, and by 'we' I mean our glorious government.

'Some of you may die, but that is a price I am willing to pay'

By we you mean we, the general population are as much to blame as anyone else. I realise blaming ordinary people doesn't suit the general agenda on here but it's an undeniable reality, too many people have blissfully carried on from the beginning.

[BamBam]

Poor little Boris, he really really really did do the best job ever but the mean and nasty general population just didn't listen

[lostinwales]

Yes lets just stay in a perpetual state of lockdown, seems the best course of action.

Unless there is more to Gove than we know the virus doesn't actually listen to the pronouncements of the government, and fully opening up at a time when infections are soaring is, surprisingly enough, asking for trouble. Nobody wants more lockdowns, but the way that infections are increasing it seems like there is a high probability we will have to.  

Hindsight etc, but the reason we are in such a sh!tty situation is because we got so much wrong to date, and by 'we' I mean our glorious government.

'Some of you may die, but that is a price I am willing to pay'

By we you mean we, the general population are as much to blame as anyone else. I realise blaming ordinary people doesn't suit the general agenda on here but it's an undeniable reality, too many people have blissfully carried on from the beginning.

There are things the population are responsible for (like mask wearing, social distancing etc) - although it is foolish to believe that the actions of the population at large are not influenced by the messages and behaviour of the government. There are the things that the government are responsible for - which include the regulations which are in place to support that behaviour (lockdowns), managing travel, and in setting up the necessary support systems such as track and trace.

Blaming the population for a lack of common sense is just a way of diverting blame.

Political rant to follow -

Look I really don't care who you support politically. Any one party state is dangerous, left or right. But this particular government? This government is dangerous to all of us, and I don't get why the 'average tory voter' with half a brain would not want to replace this version of a conservative government with something even just barely competent. (And for what its worth Corbyn would have been hopeless, just in different ways).

[Samo]

Yes lets just stay in a perpetual state of lockdown, seems the best course of action.

Unless there is more to Gove than we know the virus doesn't actually listen to the pronouncements of the government, and fully opening up at a time when infections are soaring is, surprisingly enough, asking for trouble. Nobody wants more lockdowns, but the way that infections are increasing it seems like there is a high probability we will have to.  

Hindsight etc, but the reason we are in such a sh!tty situation is because we got so much wrong to date, and by 'we' I mean our glorious government.

'Some of you may die, but that is a price I am willing to pay'

By we you mean we, the general population are as much to blame as anyone else. I realise blaming ordinary people doesn't suit the general agenda on here but it's an undeniable reality, too many people have blissfully carried on from the beginning.

I’ve not seen anyone get so achingly close to the point but still missing it since Chris Iwelumo missed an open goal from a yard out vs Norway.

No, the general public cant be trusted. Governments know this which is why they introduce things like mandatory seatbelts, banning smoking indoors and the sugar tax. All these things were done to help people help themselves but the furiously hard of thinking instantly brand it as the “Nanny State”.

What you see as common sense might actually not be that common, which is why we need strong, competent leadership. Especially in a time if national crisis.

[Duty281]

Nonsense like the smoking ban and the partial sugar tax are perfect examples of government overreach and they feed the cycle. The government regulates too much, the public then become less able to do things for themselves because they expect the government (like an overzealous parent) to mollycoddle and look after them. It results in further nonsense like the Met Office warning of 'sunburn' when it's the middle of July and rather warm.

If the government intervened less you would have a public better able to exercise common sense, like in some far East and European countries.

[Samo]

Thanks for proving my point.

[lostinwales]

Nonsense like the smoking ban and the partial sugar tax are perfect examples of government overreach and they feed the cycle. The government regulates too much, the public then become less able to do things for themselves because they expect the government (like an overzealous parent) to mollycoddle and look after them. It results in further nonsense like the Met Office warning of 'sunburn' when it's the middle of July and rather warm.

If the government intervened less you would have a public better able to exercise common sense, like in some far East and European countries.

You'd be too young to know but I went to pubs before the smoking ban and I still do if only very occasionally. Being able to leave a pub without hair and clothes reeking of tobacco is a minor but important pleasure, but then I never was a smoker. All these things come back to health and how much it costs to look after the population. For all the tax revenue that smoking brings in, reducing the number of smokers is cheaper in the long run because a significant number of smokers get ill, cost a lot to look after and can't work.

I am a lot less sure about taxing sugar, but it might work.

[Duty281]

Nonsense like the smoking ban and the partial sugar tax are perfect examples of government overreach and they feed the cycle. The government regulates too much, the public then become less able to do things for themselves because they expect the government (like an overzealous parent) to mollycoddle and look after them. It results in further nonsense like the Met Office warning of 'sunburn' when it's the middle of July and rather warm.

If the government intervened less you would have a public better able to exercise common sense, like in some far East and European countries.

You'd be too young to know but I went to pubs before the smoking ban and I still do if only very occasionally. Being able to leave a pub without hair and clothes reeking of tobacco is a minor but important pleasure, but then I never was a smoker. All these things come back to health and how much it costs to look after the population. For all the tax revenue that smoking brings in, reducing the number of smokers is cheaper in the long run because a significant number of smokers get ill, cost a lot to look after and can't work.

I am a lot less sure about taxing sugar, but it might work.

I remember being in a few pubs before the smoking ban - my father used to run a few - so I remember a little of what it was like. I'd need to check, but I believe the government takes in more from tobacco-related revenue than it does in the expenditure of tobacco-related illnesses.

The point anyway is there shouldn't be a government-mandated smoking ban in pubs - it should be down to the individual establishment. If a landlord/landlady wants to ban smoking in their pub, fine it's their gaff and their rules; but if they want to allow it they should be given that freedom.

Taxing sugar is another nonsense, at the moment it's only partially in place as (I think) it only exists on soft-drinks. But it seems the unconservative Conservative Party will soon be extending that taxation and taxing salt for good measure. Lunacy.

And all this government overreach leads to is a general public less able to exercise common sense. Which can be quite an irritant with an infectious disease going around.

[JuliusHMarx]

What do you mean by 'less able'? Do you mean restricted from exercising our common sense, or that our common sense is being eroded?

[WELL-PAST-IT]

Nonsense like the smoking ban and the partial sugar tax are perfect examples of government overreach and they feed the cycle. The government regulates too much, the public then become less able to do things for themselves because they expect the government (like an overzealous parent) to mollycoddle and look after them. It results in further nonsense like the Met Office warning of 'sunburn' when it's the middle of July and rather warm.

If the government intervened less you would have a public better able to exercise common sense, like in some far East and European countries.

You'd be too young to know but I went to pubs before the smoking ban and I still do if only very occasionally. Being able to leave a pub without hair and clothes reeking of tobacco is a minor but important pleasure, but then I never was a smoker. All these things come back to health and how much it costs to look after the population. For all the tax revenue that smoking brings in, reducing the number of smokers is cheaper in the long run because a significant number of smokers get ill, cost a lot to look after and can't work.

I am a lot less sure about taxing sugar, but it might work.

Don't tell them that alcohol is fattening,.................... please.

It is simply really, the majority of the public will behave with common sense, a minority have the attitude that I won't be told what I can do or are just blissfully ignorant of the harm thy can cause. This minority put the majority at risk by their behavior and need to be slapped down hard. I find it hard to believe but I am sort of in agreement with Duty here.

Anti-social issues like smoking in public places, agree has to be banned purely for the health of others if nothing else.

This government accused the Labour and Lid-Dem parties of wanting a "Nanny State", but has brought in more legislation of that kind than any I can remember. Instead of legislating for smoking, drinking, sugar, just tell them that they are at risk of cancer due to smoking, kidney problems drinking, or just about everything due to being obese and if they don't sort themselves out the NHS will not do anything for self inflicted problems.

[Sponsored content]