Coronavirus - Part Two.

[RiffRaff 10]

1 hour ago, gamezone07 said:

Obviously you have no breathing problem issues, etc

Not as bad as having no breath at all....

8 minutes ago, nightrider said:

Is this a joke? There is no way the supermarkets have capacity to deliver food. You'd be lucky to even get a slot in the next 2 weeks if you tried now! And panic buyers will strip the shelves bare if they have announced this.

 

I hope you mean this is in Lebanon, not that we are copying something that was done in Lebanon?!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-55631398

 

and yes, that's why I wrote "This is the way it is in Lebanon".

Edited January 12, 2021 by RiffRaff

[onewheeldave 22]

15 hours ago, Jim Hardie said:

If there are exemptions, the policy is not worth a light. If you can’t wear one, get your shopping delivered.

Of course it is 'worth a light'- look around you- most are wearing a mask which means less transmission. 

 

Your assumption that all mask exempt people have access to food delivery is very naive.

9 hours ago, Becky B said:

Did he ride there though? 7 miles isn't far, on a bike... 

The risk of transmission outdoors is much lower than where people are congregating indoors. 

 

 

8 hours ago, redruby said:

 

I don’t believe there is any limit on how far people can travel during outdoor exercise and if they are genuinely exercising I can’t see much point in there being a limit on time or distance as the risks are tiny when done within guidelines.  This government has done a lot wrong in the pandemic but one thing they have got right is recognising the importance of exercise.

 

5 hours ago, nightrider said:

 

 

The risk of transmission outside is extremely low. I doubt that is what is driving the pandemic. No point focussing on people going for a walk in the countryside - makes a nice headline, but won't stop the virus spreading which is mostly caused by indoors settings. 

Good to see that more people are aware of the extremely low transmission in outdoor spaces, and, the value of exercise. Being fit and healthy is one of the best defences against this, and other viruses

[Jim Hardie 524]

52 minutes ago, onewheeldave said:

Of course it is 'worth a light'- look around you- most are wearing a mask which means less transmission. 

 

Responsible people were doing that already.
If “I’m exempt” is all that has to be said, the policy is window dressing by the supermarkets. Nobody should be allowed in without a mask.

[Becky B 31]

9 hours ago, redruby said:

Ah, but did Johnson really need to visit Bristol in person?  I suppose the visit falls under ‘work related’ travel so is not breaking any rules but there’s a lot of talk about acting in the spirit of lockdown and, to me anyway, that journey and meeting people in person in Bristol was not essential.

I don’t believe there is any limit on how far people can travel during outdoor exercise and if they are genuinely exercising I can’t see much point in there being a limit on time or distance as the risks are tiny when done within guidelines.  This government has done a lot wrong in the pandemic but one thing they have got right is recognising the importance of exercise.

Agreed!  I'm quite passionate about this - it's a bit of a hobby horse of mine anyway, outside of the pandemic situation.

We'll be having a deconditioning pandemic - predicted in March, and it is having an effect on the elderly population.

Also agree people are getting blase about the lockdown.  And I feel like a lot of people just don't get social distancing.

Though I did read an interesting piece in the BMJ about using "lockdown fatigue" as a term, as it diverts blame onto the individual rather than the government for overall handling of the situation, which gave me pause for thought... https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/07/pandemic-fatigue-how-adherence-to-covid-19-regulations-has-been-misrepresented-and-why-it-matters/?fbclid=IwAR3GfLJMXC5_Wxmcy15FOq1AHFlyOquy0TRtpEBqmvwryEabS-nVF0LZ6Xo

[redruby 279]

2 hours ago, West 77 said:

I expect the British Prime Minister to carry on doing what is expected of a Prime Minister in normal times during the pandemic.  I don't have a problem whoever is Prime Minister carrying on doing duties and making journeys around the UK which someone who is not Prime Minister would be judged as non essential.  To be quite frank the media, political opponents and the social media users  are an embarrassment when they target Boris Johnson for criticism for carrying out day to day duties.

BJ ought to be setting an example. This kind of thing sends out mixed messages.

[Olive 10]

10 hours ago, nightrider said:

 

The risk of transmission outside is extremely low. I doubt that is what is driving the pandemic. No point focussing on people going for a walk in the countryside - makes a nice headline, but won't stop the virus spreading which is mostly caused by indoors settings. As others have said far to many companies think their workers are key workers. Perhaps because financial support for shutting down is not good enough?

Absolutely.  This obsession with how far can you go for a bike ride, what's local and what isn't, whether or not it's OK to drive somewhere to go for a walk - it's such a red herring.  It takes the focus away from behaviours that really do constitute transmission risks.

 

I also worry that if people think they might get into trouble meeting a friend for a walk, they might be more tempted to meet up indoors. Even people meeting in legitimate bubbles are better off doing this outdoors if they can.

Edited January 12, 2021 by Olive

[Baron99 779]

All this "You must stay local" is a bit vague.  Relatives of mine in the Irish Republic tell me that they are only allowed to travel 5km from home, unless the journey is covered by their low number of exceptions. 

 

Simple.  You have a defined distance that everyone, citizens, police are clear about. 

[Longcol 597]

1 hour ago, Baron99 said:

All this "You must stay local" is a bit vague.  Relatives of mine in the Irish Republic tell me that they are only allowed to travel 5km from home, unless the journey is covered by their low number of exceptions. 

 

Simple.  You have a defined distance that everyone, citizens, police are clear about. 

In France, we were only allowed 1km from our home for exercise. Glad we live in the countryside, must have been pretty awful for people living in cities.

 

 

[RiffRaff 10]

12 hours ago, nightrider said:

The risk of transmission outside is extremely low. I doubt that is what is driving the pandemic. No point focussing on people going for a walk in the countryside - makes a nice headline, but won't stop the virus spreading which is mostly caused by indoors settings....

Let's look at this another way.

The pub trade supposedly spent circa £500m by all accounts getting their premises "covid safe". But they're shut, so you can rule them out as culprits.

Cinemas, theatres, restaurants no doubt spent copious amounts to ensure they matched the then-demanded protection levels. But they're also shut, so we can rule them out as well.

Non-essential businesses are (supposedly) all closed. Covid safe or not, they're shut.

All the supermarket chains - "forced" to remain open since day one - claim they are "covid safe". Some even have a traffic light system to regulate numbers, and from today - mayhap 9 months overdue? - are querying people who turn up without face coverings.

Any business premises that are allowed to remain open make the same claim, for staff and customers. I've even seen a staff car park where new signs sprang up asking staff to reverse only into the parking bays, so making the drivers a car width apart - 2 metres-ish - if a few happen to turn up at the same time.

We're told that schooling is safe, for pupils and staff. They are also "covid secure".

Have I missed anyone?

 

You say the virus is spreading by/in "indoor settings".

So how is it there?

It's "getting in" somehow!

If we discount all the above as guilty parties, it really boils down to just "us".

Us, walking around? Us, exercising?

We're told not to visit other homes. Personally, we've had no visitors for months. Nor have we been tempted to visit anyone else.

Can't speak for you, of course... Might it be you?!

Could it be the panting, sweating jogger that narrowly avoids you on the pavement?

The wheezing runner who stops every few yards to check the time on his upper-arm gadget?

The bloke in lycra on his bike, dressed pretending he's a Team Sky-or-whatever rider?

The couple walking their labrador on the other side of the road who bid you a cheery 'hello'?

Perhaps the "you're OK as long as you're meeting/chatting for less than 15 minutes" is plain wrong.

 

If we are all truly behaving ourselves at home, we can only be picking it up.... outside?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Anna B 1,401]

I see they are transferring elderly people from hospital into care homes again to free up beds. 

 

Why?

 

Surely they could be transferred to the Nightingale hospitals if they are not being used much, or better still, empty hotels reserved for recovering covid patients' convalescence. They need rest and recuperation until they are well enough to return home, but putting them together with old and vulnerable people in care homes seems like a repeat of last year's  care home disaster. 

[redruby 279]

7 hours ago, RiffRaff said:

Let's look at this another way.

The pub trade supposedly spent circa £500m by all accounts getting their premises "covid safe". But they're shut, so you can rule them out as culprits.

Cinemas, theatres, restaurants no doubt spent copious amounts to ensure they matched the then-demanded protection levels. But they're also shut, so we can rule them out as well.

Non-essential businesses are (supposedly) all closed. Covid safe or not, they're shut.

All the supermarket chains - "forced" to remain open since day one - claim they are "covid safe". Some even have a traffic light system to regulate numbers, and from today - mayhap 9 months overdue? - are querying people who turn up without face coverings.

Any business premises that are allowed to remain open make the same claim, for staff and customers. I've even seen a staff car park where new signs sprang up asking staff to reverse only into the parking bays, so making the drivers a car width apart - 2 metres-ish - if a few happen to turn up at the same time.

We're told that schooling is safe, for pupils and staff. They are also "covid secure".

Have I missed anyone?

 

You say the virus is spreading by/in "indoor settings".

So how is it there?

It's "getting in" somehow!

If we discount all the above as guilty parties, it really boils down to just "us".

Us, walking around? Us, exercising?

We're told not to visit other homes. Personally, we've had no visitors for months. Nor have we been tempted to visit anyone else.

Can't speak for you, of course... Might it be you?!

Could it be the panting, sweating jogger that narrowly avoids you on the pavement?

The wheezing runner who stops every few yards to check the time on his upper-arm gadget?

The bloke in lycra on his bike, dressed pretending he's a Team Sky-or-whatever rider?

The couple walking their labrador on the other side of the road who bid you a cheery 'hello'?

Perhaps the "you're OK as long as you're meeting/chatting for less than 15 minutes" is plain wrong.

 

If we are all truly behaving ourselves at home, we can only be picking it up.... outside?

 

 

 

 

 

 

No that isn’t how it being spread. That’s not just my opinion; it has been stated by many scientists and Chris Whitty said the same the other day. I have suspicions that all the debate about limits of exercise and going for walk with a friend having a coffee is all a bit of a distraction from schools being kept open when they were advised by scientists to shut them, mixing at Christmas, borders and quarantine, failure of test and trace (i.e. just some the real reasons for the current nightmare)

If covid really did spread easily from fleeting outdoor contact, then it would be running far, far more rampant than it already is and indoor contact wouldn’t be safe without full PPE (not just a thin cloth mask). 

[nightrider 13]

11 hours ago, Baron99 said:

All this "You must stay local" is a bit vague.  Relatives of mine in the Irish Republic tell me that they are only allowed to travel 5km from home, unless the journey is covered by their low number of exceptions. 

 

Simple.  You have a defined distance that everyone, citizens, police are clear about. 

How do you define 5 km. A circle strictly centred on the home? Or how far you need to drive along the road? If the former can you drive out of the circle if thats the only way to access some other point within the circle? Nothing is simple!

9 hours ago, RiffRaff said:

Let's look at this another way.

The pub trade supposedly spent circa £500m by all accounts getting their premises "covid safe". But they're shut, so you can rule them out as culprits.

Cinemas, theatres, restaurants no doubt spent copious amounts to ensure they matched the then-demanded protection levels. But they're also shut, so we can rule them out as well.

Non-essential businesses are (supposedly) all closed. Covid safe or not, they're shut.

All the supermarket chains - "forced" to remain open since day one - claim they are "covid safe". Some even have a traffic light system to regulate numbers, and from today - mayhap 9 months overdue? - are querying people who turn up without face coverings.

Any business premises that are allowed to remain open make the same claim, for staff and customers. I've even seen a staff car park where new signs sprang up asking staff to reverse only into the parking bays, so making the drivers a car width apart - 2 metres-ish - if a few happen to turn up at the same time.

We're told that schooling is safe, for pupils and staff. They are also "covid secure".

Have I missed anyone?

 

You say the virus is spreading by/in "indoor settings".

So how is it there?

It's "getting in" somehow!

If we discount all the above as guilty parties, it really boils down to just "us".

Us, walking around? Us, exercising?

We're told not to visit other homes. Personally, we've had no visitors for months. Nor have we been tempted to visit anyone else.

Can't speak for you, of course... Might it be you?!

Could it be the panting, sweating jogger that narrowly avoids you on the pavement?

The wheezing runner who stops every few yards to check the time on his upper-arm gadget?

The bloke in lycra on his bike, dressed pretending he's a Team Sky-or-whatever rider?

The couple walking their labrador on the other side of the road who bid you a cheery 'hello'?

Perhaps the "you're OK as long as you're meeting/chatting for less than 15 minutes" is plain wrong.

 

If we are all truly behaving ourselves at home, we can only be picking it up.... outside?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its not spreading from people exercising outside.

 

Just go to your local high street and see how many premises think they are essential...is a coffee shop really essential retail? There is an invention called a thermos.

 

Schools all open and many at 50% occupancy....

 

Lots of households having visitors indoors...

 

 

 

1 hour ago, redruby said:

No that isn’t how it being spread. That’s not just my opinion; it has been stated by many scientists and Chris Whitty said the same the other day. I have suspicions that all the debate about limits of exercise and going for walk with a friend having a coffee is all a bit of a distraction from schools being kept open when they were advised by scientists to shut them, mixing at Christmas, borders and quarantine, failure of test and trace (i.e. just some the real reasons for the current nightmare)

 

Bingo. They have managed to get everyone at each others throats over how far you can go for exercise, whilst no-one is talking about the lack of measures from the government to shut down indoor settings.