Generic Virus Thread

[snowychap]

 

 

3 hours ago, bickster said:

 

I don't think Wirral Council's tweet is correct. I think their tweet exemplifies the difficulty with the whole guidance/law stuff.

Should is not the same as must (or must not). Should means not legally required to must is legally required to.

Edited January 10, 2021 by snowychap

[Rugeley Villa]

8 minutes ago, snowychap said:

 

 

I don't think Wirral Council's tweet is correct. I think their tweet exemplifies the difficulty with the whole guidance/law stuff.

Should is not the same as must (or must not). Should means not legally required to must is legally required to.

Our daughters best mate at school got diagnosed with Covid . The whole class had to isolate for two weeks , but because the girl in question had been in close contact with our daughter we got informed of that as well. Our other two children were still to go into school , and having looked online I was still able to go to work providing I weren’t showing any symptoms. Infact even with close contact to someone who’s tested positive, you’re only advised to get a test yourself if you’re showing symptoms. 

[Genie]

1 minute ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Our daughters best mate at school got diagnosed with Covid . The whole class had to isolate for two weeks , but because the girl in question had been in close contact with our daughter we got informed of that as well. Our other two children were still to go into school , and having looked online I was still able to go to work providing I weren’t showing any symptoms. Infact even with close contact to someone who’s tested positive, you’re only advised to get a test yourself if you’re showing symptoms. 

This is what I expected. I don’t understand the stance of our children’s school that no isolation for other children in the same class was required, apart from the couple “in contact”.

[Rugeley Villa]

1 minute ago, Genie said:

This is what I expected. I don’t understand the stance of our children’s school that no isolation for other children in the same class was required, apart from the couple “in contact”.

Personally thought it was government requirement, but obviously not, which in that case must be your kids schools policy . Makes no sense anyway because if your child has siblings and your child has been exposed to Covid, their siblings still go into school which defeats the object of isolatIng .

[snowychap]

32 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Our daughters best mate at school got diagnosed with Covid . The whole class had to isolate for two weeks , but because the girl in question had been in close contact with our daughter we got informed of that as well. Our other two children were still to go into school , and having looked online I was still able to go to work providing I weren’t showing any symptoms. Infact even with close contact to someone who’s tested positive, you’re only advised to get a test yourself if you’re showing symptoms. 

All of this is a bit mixed up, Ruge.

The point that I was making is that the law says that if you're advised by a named person in the legislation that you are to isolate because you're a contact of someone who has tested positive then you have a legal duty (i.e. you must) to follow the isolation requirements as set out in the legislation.

So, if you have 'close contact' with someone who has tested positive then you should (according to the guidance) self-isolate but you are only required to (i.e. must) if you have been told to by someone listed in the law (in practice, I believe, someone from Test and Trace).

Edit: Or that was the case in September when the law came out and I don't believe it has been changed since.

Edited January 10, 2021 by snowychap

[Rugeley Villa]

2 minutes ago, snowychap said:

All of this is a bit mixed up, Ruge.

The point that I was making is that the law says that if you're advised by a named person in the legislation that you are to isolate because you're a contact of someone who has tested positive then you have a legal duty (i.e. you must) to follow the isolation requirements as set out in the legislation.

So, if you have 'close contact' with someone who has tested positive then you should (according to the guidance) self-isolate but you are only required to (i.e. must) if you have been told to by someone listed in the law (in practice, I believe, someone from Test and Trace).

Edit: Or that was the case in September when the law came out and I don't believe it has been changed since.

Got ya .....

Easy to see why people get confused as it’s mixed messages . 

[Genie]

Some talk of teachers moving up the queue of priority for jabs. I assume this is to avoid them bullying the government again about it being unsafe for them to work (rather than the government caring about their welfare).

[HanoiVillan]

4 hours ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Get stricter on schools 

close parks 

close places of worship 

bring in a curfew(legitimate reason to be out) 

cancel  contact sport 

I’d do that just for starters 

On those 5:

yes, worth doing / no, absolutely not / yes / no, absolutely not / I'd prefer if they didn't

[Rugeley Villa]

4 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

On those 5:

yes, worth doing / no, absolutely not / yes / no, absolutely not / I'd prefer if they didn't

Regarding parks, when they opened them back up last year there were park keepers wiping down the swings, slides etc etc. None of that this time round. With the time of year and crap weather  I’d close them.  Another thing what they should have done from the start was massively cut down on people coming in and out of the country. Essential travel only . 

[HanoiVillan]

4 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Regarding parks, when they opened them back up last year there were park keepers wiping down the swings, slides etc etc. None of that this time round. With the time of year and crap weather  I’d close them.  Another thing what they should have done from the start was massively cut down on people coming in and out of the country. Essential travel only . 

I suspect that people have largely given up wiping down surfaces since it is almost completely pointless. Study after study shows that contaminated surfaces ('fomites') are not important vectors of transmission. The virus is carried through airborne droplets, and this is how transmission occurs.

It is really important to understand this. If viral transmission is occuring through airborne droplets (it is), then the most dangerous places are poorly-ventilated indoor spaces. If you close places that are outdoors, then you are forcing people to spend more time indoors; specifically, you are forcing people away from spaces in which less transmission will occur and into spaces in which more transmission will occur. This is completely counter-productive.

I also don't think there is any point in making air travel impossible, especially at a time when we are running at more than 50,000 cases per day. There is a good argument that we should have imposed travel restrictions in January/February time last year, but it has been redundant ever since then.

[Rugeley Villa]

5 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I suspect that people have largely given up wiping down surfaces since it is almost completely pointless. Study after study shows that contaminated surfaces ('fomites') are not important vectors of transmission. The virus is carried through airborne droplets, and this is how transmission occurs.

It is really important to understand this. If viral transmission is occuring through airborne droplets (it is), then the most dangerous places are poorly-ventilated indoor spaces. If you close places that are outdoors, then you are forcing people to spend more time indoors; specifically, you are forcing people away from spaces in which less transmission will occur and into spaces in which more transmission will occur. This is completely counter-productive.

I also don't think there is any point in making air travel impossible, especially at a time when we are running at more than 50,000 cases per day. There is a good argument that we should have imposed travel restrictions in January/February time last year, but it has been redundant ever since then.

Yeah no point now, but air travel should have been shut down massively early last year. We underestimated the situation I think. Just thinking of parks being open encourages more kids/parents out mingling in the same place. Think we need to get to grips with people not going out unless it’s essential and for exercise. A family walk is as good for the kids than 45 minutes in a park this time of year. 

[HanoiVillan]

3 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Yeah no point now, but air travel should have been shut down massively early last year. We underestimated the situation I think. Just thinking of parks being open encourages more kids/parents out mingling in the same place. Think we need to get to grips with people not going out unless it’s essential and for exercise. A family walk is as good for the kids than 45 minutes in a park this time of year. 

I think the key thing here is that if you live in a city or a highly-urbanised area, the chances are that a park *is* the place you go to exercise. I moved to the suburbs last year, so now I have a garden, some quiet streets nearby, a golf course and two hills within short car ride distance. However, before that I lived in a second-floor apartment in Blackheath, where the only green space suitable for exercising is the park.

Parks are good. They are places where people can exercise, and can look at flowers and trees and nice things. They bring physical and mental health benefits, and they aren't high-risk spaces, so we absolutely shouldn't close them. Doing so would make people in aggregate fatter, unhappier and more likely to transmit the virus.

[chrisp65]

Close car parks, not parks.

 

[Rugeley Villa]

9 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

I think the key thing here is that if you live in a city or a highly-urbanised area, the chances are that a park *is* the place you go to exercise. I moved to the suburbs last year, so now I have a garden, some quiet streets nearby, a golf course and two hills within short car ride distance. However, before that I lived in a second-floor apartment in Blackheath, where the only green space suitable for exercising is the park.

Parks are good. They are places where people can exercise, and can look at flowers and trees and nice things. They bring physical and mental health benefits, and they aren't high-risk spaces, so we absolutely shouldn't close them. Doing so would make people in aggregate fatter, unhappier and more likely to transmit the virus.

Not explained myself well enough. I mean kids play areas where there are swings , slides etc . The biggest park near us has a kids area which is surrounded by gates and can be locked up , and that area is surrounded by a large area of grassland where people walk their dogs and chill when the weather is nice. There’s also a nice little brook that runs through it. I’m not saying to lock the whole of it down, just the kids park area . People still need to walk their dogs and get exercise themselves. With how the weather is this time of year I can’t see people gathering in groups on the grass , which you would potentially get in the summer. The kids play areas would encourage kids to have close contact with each other which we are trying to avoid anyway . 

Edited January 11, 2021 by Rugeley Villa

[Rugeley Villa]

There’s apparently a meeting today to discuss elite sports closing down for 3-4 weeks. No surprise given the scenes in the fa cup over the weekend and also footballers not sticking to the rules. The BHA(British horse racing authority) are meeting government officials today)  . Very little contact between people in horse racing , so looks like the lot is shutting down. 

Edited January 11, 2021 by Rugeley Villa

[magnkarl]

The mental effect that this situation has on people needs to be lifted much more in my opinion. My neighbour, a normally happy working class man who owns his own little plumbing and electrical parts shop has turned into a shut in and is clearly showing signs of depression. He's not married and has very little family, and so he's been large parts of this pandemic alone. The community is trying to get him to talk to us outside (when we're allowed), but it's not really helping. I would normally go with him to the pub a couple of times a week for quizes or just to talk, but that is no longer allowed. He's not good with skype or zoom either and so most of what I hear of him is through text or phone call, but this doesn't replace face to face interaction.

I worry for the hidden casualties of this pandemic that aren't necessarily seen in the covid death toll. People who were lonely before could at least go out to a pub or see friends, now they can't. I'm sure the long lasting psychological effects of this pandemic is going to be a massive issue for years to come. 

Edited January 11, 2021 by magnkarl

[Rugeley Villa]

5 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

The mental effect that this situation has on people needs to be lifted much more in my opinion. My neighbour, a normally happy working class man who owns his own little plumbing and electrical parts shop has turned into a shut in and is clearly showing signs of depression. He's not married and has very little family, and so he's been large parts of this pandemic alone. The community is trying to get him to talk to us outside (when we're allowed), but it's not really helping. I would normally go with him to the pub a couple of times a week for quizes or just to talk, but that is no longer allowed. He's not good with skype or zoom either and so most of what I hear of him is through text or phone call, but this doesn't replace face to face interaction.

I worry for the hidden casualties of this pandemic that aren't necessarily seen in the covid death toll. People who were lonely before could at least go out to a pub or see friends, now they can't. I'm sure the long lasting psychological effects of this pandemic is going to be a massive issue for years to come. 

I’d say the non COVID casualties will be just as devastating, if not more than the actual COVID related. Other health issues such as cancer being neglected or not picked up in time. Then as you point out the mental health side to it. I think a lot of us know someone who’s being effected by this mentally. My mum has suffered with depression and anxiety for years. She locked herself away for years which didn’t help, but then found some enjoyment in going out again at the weekend for a few hours Friday/Saturday. She hates where she works. Lives alone and is lonely , so those few hours out at the weekend was what she worked towards. She’ll be lucky if she gets that back this side of spring.  Various addictions will rise back up. Gambling addiction has gone through the roof. People have lost their face to face support groups and have relapsed. Domestic abuse , sexual abuse etc etc . 

[magnkarl]

4 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

I’d say the non COVID casualties will be just as devastating, if not more than the actual COVID related. Other health issues such as cancer being neglected or not picked up in time. Then as you point out the mental health side to it. I think a lot of us know someone who’s being effected by this mentally. My mum has suffered with depression and anxiety for years. She locked herself away for years which didn’t help, but then found some enjoyment in going out again at the weekend for a few hours Friday/Saturday. She hates where she works. Lives alone and is lonely , so those few hours out at the weekend was what she worked towards. She’ll be lucky if she gets that back this side of spring.  Various addictions will rise back up. Gambling addiction has gone through the roof. People have lost their face to face support groups and have relapsed. Domestic abuse , sexual abuse etc etc . 

Agreed, and I think the polarised debate environment these days with anti-restrictions on one side and pro-restrictions on the other leaves very little space for people to talk about these hidden human costs. The media needs to actually focus on something else than 'this many people died from covid' or 'these restrictions are making this angry liverpudlian angry'. Just a little bit of focus on how we can interact or reach out to people who suffer even through this shitstorm of a pandemic would probably save lives. 

[Genie]

16 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Other health issues such as cancer being neglected or not picked up in time.

Cancer and other deadly illnesses will be much higher in the medium and long term. GP’s are incredibly reluctant to see people at the moment despite how many times Hancock says the NHS is open.

So much work with men in particular and the stigma around asking for help physical and mental issues help will be undone.

I don’t know the numbers surrounding male suicide but I’ve been aware of several friends of friends that have done it this year. A family member of mine attempted it too.

[sidcow]

Chris Whitty just said on Breakfast that people complying with existing rules is more important than introducing new rules.

So he's now voicing that people are basically not complying.  I honestly don't think if they introduced more rules it would help now, people are just ignoring them. 

I wouldn't mind betting that the majority of infections are with people visiting homes they are not supposed to.