| Tier 2 / Tier 3 13:15 - Oct 15 with 28544 views | aleanddale |
Matt Hancock hitting a new level of incompetence today in the commons.
Press leaks prior to confirmation with local authority.... then backtracking.
Dithering over a statement on Manchester and Lancashire regarding if and when we will move to tier 3.
No doubt the whole thing is complicated beyond belief BUT there should be much clearer / decisive communication and direction from the government.
Staff on minimum wage will be getting 2/3 or just over £5 an hour on this latest job support scheme that's replacing furlough. Minimum wage is just that the minimum required to survive.
Liverpool the ONLY city on tier 3. Honestly?
Ignoring the "Science" when the science advised a NATIONAL circuit break 3 weeks ago.
My two penneth is that this is set for the long term. I read an article saying the average life expectancy is 81 and the average Covid death age is 82. It is a very very tough decision to make i do understand that but everyone knows this and the day could arrive where shielding becomes self governing and everyone makes there own choices. Maybe new Covid Laws need to be applied to allow the nation to do that and the obvious rule breakers can be hit with more severe penalty.
This is one mighty mess and the problem is that the master plan is falling well short its time for a rethink and quickly. |  | | |  |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 13:45 - Oct 15 with 8512 views | isitme |
If lockdowns work, why do we need another one? |  | | |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 13:57 - Oct 15 with 8495 views | aleanddale |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 13:45 - Oct 15 by isitme |
If lockdowns work, why do we need another one? |
I am not sure we do... But they work in as much as they get the R rate to 1 or below and that significantly reduces hospital admissions and death.
The issue is that as soon as normal life resumes the virus gets a grip again.
I agree this is not working we cannot YO YO forever and people will not live under a rock.
Like most i would like to see a clear decisive plan rolled out and a plan explained for the short, medium and long term. It seems Boris and Matt find this quite difficult to do. | | | |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 14:10 - Oct 15 with 8459 views | D_Alien |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 13:57 - Oct 15 by aleanddale |
I am not sure we do... But they work in as much as they get the R rate to 1 or below and that significantly reduces hospital admissions and death.
The issue is that as soon as normal life resumes the virus gets a grip again.
I agree this is not working we cannot YO YO forever and people will not live under a rock.
Like most i would like to see a clear decisive plan rolled out and a plan explained for the short, medium and long term. It seems Boris and Matt find this quite difficult to do. |
Other than another total lockdown, the plain but sad truth is there can't be a "clear decisive plan"
Requiring certainty when pitted against an ever-moving target is literally asking for the impossible
I fully agree that messaging, communication and yes, competence from many of those tasked with trying to grapple with the virus continues to leave a lot to be desired, but it'd be a mistake to listen to any voices that claim they have anything like a definitive answer, and that includes a "short term" so-called circuit-breaker. So what happens if that doesn't work, or the virus returns with a vengeance immediately afterwards?
It could even be that transmission of the virus declined due to the rise in temperature during the summer months more than has been realised, and it's now simply thriving again, with more people spending more time in close contact indoors
Life must go on, and the balance of risks weighed as far as is humanly possible, both in the wider sphere and on a personal level |  |
| |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 14:18 - Oct 15 with 8433 views | aleanddale |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 14:10 - Oct 15 by D_Alien |
Other than another total lockdown, the plain but sad truth is there can't be a "clear decisive plan"
Requiring certainty when pitted against an ever-moving target is literally asking for the impossible
I fully agree that messaging, communication and yes, competence from many of those tasked with trying to grapple with the virus continues to leave a lot to be desired, but it'd be a mistake to listen to any voices that claim they have anything like a definitive answer, and that includes a "short term" so-called circuit-breaker. So what happens if that doesn't work, or the virus returns with a vengeance immediately afterwards?
It could even be that transmission of the virus declined due to the rise in temperature during the summer months more than has been realised, and it's now simply thriving again, with more people spending more time in close contact indoors
Life must go on, and the balance of risks weighed as far as is humanly possible, both in the wider sphere and on a personal level |
D_Alien the political voice of reason.
I agree with your post just concerned / frustrated and yes a little worried by the whole damn thing..
It beggars belief that in 2020 we are hit with something of this nature.
I guess we all need to stay safe as best we possibly can and support family, friends and each other physically, mentally and financially to get through this. There does not appear to be an answer or the end in sight any time soon.
One thing for sure the dithering has to stop and the communication improved. This morning following the news feeds was a real concern. | | | |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 14:28 - Oct 15 with 8402 views | ncfc_chalky |
I was expecting Nottingham to go into the top tier when it was announced this week because my sister has told me that her track and trace app is showing that Nottingham is showing as High Level |  |
| |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 14:33 - Oct 15 with 8392 views | off2div1 |
Its Andy Burnham that's causing all the problems. He thinks he's Nicola sturgeon. He doesn't want Manchester to go to stage 3 but he wants circuit breaker. Sick of hearing him on TV he thinks he important. |  | | |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 15:03 - Oct 15 with 8335 views | Salegraham |
Sorry if your going to blame anyone you only have to look at 2 people Boso and Cummins. You've got a track and trace they keep on trying to kid us into believing is working,with consultant's on £6K per day | | | |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 15:07 - Oct 15 with 8327 views | Ancoats_Blue |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 14:33 - Oct 15 by off2div1 |
Its Andy Burnham that's causing all the problems. He thinks he's Nicola sturgeon. He doesn't want Manchester to go to stage 3 but he wants circuit breaker. Sick of hearing him on TV he thinks he important. |
Like him or not, in this context he *IS* important. He’s responsible for Greater Manchester’s healthcare strategy amongst other items directly affected by COVID restrictions. For him to not be informed of changes (as he alleges) is poor from the government. And for him to not say anything or work on behalf of his constituents (as you’d want) would be poor from him or any other Metro Mayor in the same position. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 16:10 - Oct 15 with 8215 views | Plattyswrinklynuts |
Mr Burnham has just been on tv refusing to accept the govts financial package to aid the tier 3 lockdown measures, but sadly he’s as much part of the problem as anyone. He agitated for students to be allowed to attend the universities in Manchester, arguing that it was vital revenue for the city & defended the govts decision even in the face of rising infection rates. Surely they should have been lectured from home?
Sorry but you can’t have it both ways.
IMO the only feasible solution is a national circuit break of 2 weeks to coincide with autumn half term.
If that doesn’t work (& I doubt it will) then we’re resigned to living with the pandemic for the long haul. |  | | |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 16:23 - Oct 15 with 8177 views | James1980 |
If the test track trace and isolate system had been seen as vital for saving lives and not lining pockets. That would have helped. Not hindsight but flaming obvious. | |
| |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 16:25 - Oct 15 with 8170 views | tony_roch975 |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 16:10 - Oct 15 by Plattyswrinklynuts |
Mr Burnham has just been on tv refusing to accept the govts financial package to aid the tier 3 lockdown measures, but sadly he’s as much part of the problem as anyone. He agitated for students to be allowed to attend the universities in Manchester, arguing that it was vital revenue for the city & defended the govts decision even in the face of rising infection rates. Surely they should have been lectured from home?
Sorry but you can’t have it both ways.
IMO the only feasible solution is a national circuit break of 2 weeks to coincide with autumn half term.
If that doesn’t work (& I doubt it will) then we’re resigned to living with the pandemic for the long haul. |
We have a very centralised political system; thus it was the Govt who decided to open Universities and impose the 3 tier package, both without local/regional political agreement being required (whatever Andy Burnham's views) but if we had proper devolution to all the regions any Metro Mayor's decisions would be rightly open to scrutiny by their voters.
Agree a 'circuit break' will buy some time without being a final 'solution' and that we'll be living (and dying) with this for years. | |
| |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 16:36 - Oct 15 with 8134 views | BigDaveMyCock |
One of the benefits of a circuit-break lockdown is that we’ll know exactly how long it will be for. The problem with Tier 3 is that it is indefinite. Ok, it gets reviewed after four weeks but the outcome of that is not certain. I think people will be far more responsive if they know it will be for a certain period. [Post edited 15 Oct 2020 16:43]
| |
| |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 16:41 - Oct 15 with 8120 views | BigDaveMyCock |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 15:07 - Oct 15 by Ancoats_Blue |
Like him or not, in this context he *IS* important. He’s responsible for Greater Manchester’s healthcare strategy amongst other items directly affected by COVID restrictions. For him to not be informed of changes (as he alleges) is poor from the government. And for him to not say anything or work on behalf of his constituents (as you’d want) would be poor from him or any other Metro Mayor in the same position. |
Even on the base level he inspires more confidence. He comes across as erudite and not somebody who seems to be constantly bluffing it. [Post edited 15 Oct 2020 16:47]
| |
| |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 16:49 - Oct 15 with 8095 views | isitme |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 16:36 - Oct 15 by BigDaveMyCock |
One of the benefits of a circuit-break lockdown is that we’ll know exactly how long it will be for. The problem with Tier 3 is that it is indefinite. Ok, it gets reviewed after four weeks but the outcome of that is not certain. I think people will be far more responsive if they know it will be for a certain period. [Post edited 15 Oct 2020 16:43]
|
But do we? I agree that people would be more receptive for something that is timed and with a specific objective that people believe in. I am not sure that people think that it would work or that it would be for a limited amount of time.
At the start of the pandemic the lockdown was for three weeks to prevent the NHS from getting overwhelmed. I suspect most people in the country accepted that rational. What happens if a 'two week/three weeks/insert here circuit breaker' does not have the desired results? How long does it go on for? Businesses cannot plan, people lose their job and other health/societal issues kick in. What is the not even in the tenth highest cause of death in a given week (in recent times) is overriding everything else. 87% of all positive tests are of people without symptons. Mass testing at universities is detecting hundreds of asymptomatic cases that more than likely would not have been detected. Look at Durham university to day for example. The wide scale testing is not translating into the same scale of hospitalisations and/or deaths and treatments are better.
The proposed cure is worse than the illness. What I still do not understand is how closing a 'Covid Secure' venue such as Rochdale Leisure Centre or even the pub will stop my next door neighbour from having all and sundary round her house, getting smashed? [Post edited 15 Oct 2020 17:05]
| | | |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 20:59 - Oct 15 with 7763 views | BigDaveMyCock |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 16:49 - Oct 15 by isitme |
But do we? I agree that people would be more receptive for something that is timed and with a specific objective that people believe in. I am not sure that people think that it would work or that it would be for a limited amount of time.
At the start of the pandemic the lockdown was for three weeks to prevent the NHS from getting overwhelmed. I suspect most people in the country accepted that rational. What happens if a 'two week/three weeks/insert here circuit breaker' does not have the desired results? How long does it go on for? Businesses cannot plan, people lose their job and other health/societal issues kick in. What is the not even in the tenth highest cause of death in a given week (in recent times) is overriding everything else. 87% of all positive tests are of people without symptons. Mass testing at universities is detecting hundreds of asymptomatic cases that more than likely would not have been detected. Look at Durham university to day for example. The wide scale testing is not translating into the same scale of hospitalisations and/or deaths and treatments are better.
The proposed cure is worse than the illness. What I still do not understand is how closing a 'Covid Secure' venue such as Rochdale Leisure Centre or even the pub will stop my next door neighbour from having all and sundary round her house, getting smashed? [Post edited 15 Oct 2020 17:05]
|
Totally agree, it would have to be for the time specified. With regards to your irresponsible neighbours, I live in the centre of Manchester and witnessing the behaviour of some (and it is only some tbf) beggars belief. Still, the irresponsibility of some should not translate into the responsible not being able to act or it not worth the responsible acting.
Scientists and those in the medical profession are demanding/pleading something should be done, I think we at least all agree that we don’t want hospitals being overrun, so the option is what?
What would you prefer? [Post edited 15 Oct 2020 21:06]
| |
| |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 21:00 - Oct 15 with 7755 views | tony_roch975 |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 16:49 - Oct 15 by isitme |
But do we? I agree that people would be more receptive for something that is timed and with a specific objective that people believe in. I am not sure that people think that it would work or that it would be for a limited amount of time.
At the start of the pandemic the lockdown was for three weeks to prevent the NHS from getting overwhelmed. I suspect most people in the country accepted that rational. What happens if a 'two week/three weeks/insert here circuit breaker' does not have the desired results? How long does it go on for? Businesses cannot plan, people lose their job and other health/societal issues kick in. What is the not even in the tenth highest cause of death in a given week (in recent times) is overriding everything else. 87% of all positive tests are of people without symptons. Mass testing at universities is detecting hundreds of asymptomatic cases that more than likely would not have been detected. Look at Durham university to day for example. The wide scale testing is not translating into the same scale of hospitalisations and/or deaths and treatments are better.
The proposed cure is worse than the illness. What I still do not understand is how closing a 'Covid Secure' venue such as Rochdale Leisure Centre or even the pub will stop my next door neighbour from having all and sundary round her house, getting smashed? [Post edited 15 Oct 2020 17:05]
|
But that's the point - it won't stop your next door neighbour from having all and sundry round her house but it will stop people transmitting the virus in the pub - surely better to have some reduction in the transmission, hospitalisation and deaths, which are increasing; course you could introduce CCTV monitoring of people's houses by the State but I suspect you will object to that - it's the eternal libertarian argument. I think you have been consistent in arguing that the cure is worse than the illness, the health dangers of Covid have been overstated and people have to make their own judgment about risk. However one person's right to make their own choice comes at a cost to others - they take that marginally increased risk, catch the virus, possibly asymptomatic they pass it unwittingly to a more vulnerable person who then suffers or even dies. | |
| |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 21:31 - Oct 15 with 7702 views | isitme |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 20:59 - Oct 15 by BigDaveMyCock |
Totally agree, it would have to be for the time specified. With regards to your irresponsible neighbours, I live in the centre of Manchester and witnessing the behaviour of some (and it is only some tbf) beggars belief. Still, the irresponsibility of some should not translate into the responsible not being able to act or it not worth the responsible acting.
Scientists and those in the medical profession are demanding/pleading something should be done, I think we at least all agree that we don’t want hospitals being overrun, so the option is what?
What would you prefer? [Post edited 15 Oct 2020 21:06]
|
But that is the issue. If pubs/restaurants are closed will it not just drive people into drinking at other people's houses yet potentially destroy the livelihoods of those who work/own these businesses? Most transmission is within the home which is very difficult to address now as most people only have a limited lockdown threshold. Next is education and workplaces. Twenty percent of infections are caught in hospitals. All of these are things that are not going to be locked down. Restaurants/pubs and gyms are all well down the list. I would like local authorities to be able to use powers to close down places that are not Covid compliant. I am certainly 'safer' at the gym than an work.
Hospitals are not overrun. NHS data itself shows that. They were thankfully not overrun at the peak. Covid admissions are also not always what they seem. Go in with a broken leg test positive for Covid but display no symptoms and you are classed as a Covid admission. Any positive test within 28 days and you are Covid whether you are hospital due to it or not. Contract it whilst you are in there and it's Covid. Nearly every winter the NHS is 'overwhelmed' often due to respiratory related illnesses. Many of the older/infirm who are or will need hospital treatment for Covid would have been in anyway unfortunately.
To answer your question I would not have any further lockdowns at all. I would reduce the cycles of the PCR to 30. I would change the closing of school bubbles threshold to 5% of pupils being off sick before a bubble could be closed. For people who have been in contact with someone who tests positive who do not then develop symptoms themselves I would reduce the isolation period to 7 days. At the current 14 days only 18% of people are actually isolating.
The most important thing is to protect the vulnerable. Regular testing in care homes and proper support for those who need to isolate. I would also stop testing of people without symptoms, especially university students. There are stories of some universities forcing all students to have a test regardless.
I appreciate that others will view my suggestions with disdain and maybe even disgust. I think many of the scientists advocating further restrictions have little understanding of the economic and mental health effects of further restrictions. They are financially sound and would not have to face the implications of what they propose. I would also like to see what links the biggest cheerleaders have with pharmaceutical companies etc. We have all seen that Vallance has a significant shareholding in one of the companies tasked with developing a vaccine. As we have seen with the track and trace consultants there is a lot of money to be made from Covid. | | | |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 22:21 - Oct 15 with 7626 views | rochdaleriddler |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 21:31 - Oct 15 by isitme |
But that is the issue. If pubs/restaurants are closed will it not just drive people into drinking at other people's houses yet potentially destroy the livelihoods of those who work/own these businesses? Most transmission is within the home which is very difficult to address now as most people only have a limited lockdown threshold. Next is education and workplaces. Twenty percent of infections are caught in hospitals. All of these are things that are not going to be locked down. Restaurants/pubs and gyms are all well down the list. I would like local authorities to be able to use powers to close down places that are not Covid compliant. I am certainly 'safer' at the gym than an work.
Hospitals are not overrun. NHS data itself shows that. They were thankfully not overrun at the peak. Covid admissions are also not always what they seem. Go in with a broken leg test positive for Covid but display no symptoms and you are classed as a Covid admission. Any positive test within 28 days and you are Covid whether you are hospital due to it or not. Contract it whilst you are in there and it's Covid. Nearly every winter the NHS is 'overwhelmed' often due to respiratory related illnesses. Many of the older/infirm who are or will need hospital treatment for Covid would have been in anyway unfortunately.
To answer your question I would not have any further lockdowns at all. I would reduce the cycles of the PCR to 30. I would change the closing of school bubbles threshold to 5% of pupils being off sick before a bubble could be closed. For people who have been in contact with someone who tests positive who do not then develop symptoms themselves I would reduce the isolation period to 7 days. At the current 14 days only 18% of people are actually isolating.
The most important thing is to protect the vulnerable. Regular testing in care homes and proper support for those who need to isolate. I would also stop testing of people without symptoms, especially university students. There are stories of some universities forcing all students to have a test regardless.
I appreciate that others will view my suggestions with disdain and maybe even disgust. I think many of the scientists advocating further restrictions have little understanding of the economic and mental health effects of further restrictions. They are financially sound and would not have to face the implications of what they propose. I would also like to see what links the biggest cheerleaders have with pharmaceutical companies etc. We have all seen that Vallance has a significant shareholding in one of the companies tasked with developing a vaccine. As we have seen with the track and trace consultants there is a lot of money to be made from Covid. |
Liverpool hospitals intensive care units are nearly full, with Covid as the reason, not a broken leg. The ‘lockdown’ earlier this year did bring numbers down ( with the weather helping). That was the time to sort out testing and track and trace, that hasn’t happened and here we are again. However Bolton has had a lockdown of sorts recently, and it hasn’t sorted their infection rates out. It’s a total mess, not sure where we go from here, but enforcement against people breaking the rules on distancing would be a start |  |
| |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 22:27 - Oct 15 with 7612 views | nordenblue |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 21:31 - Oct 15 by isitme |
But that is the issue. If pubs/restaurants are closed will it not just drive people into drinking at other people's houses yet potentially destroy the livelihoods of those who work/own these businesses? Most transmission is within the home which is very difficult to address now as most people only have a limited lockdown threshold. Next is education and workplaces. Twenty percent of infections are caught in hospitals. All of these are things that are not going to be locked down. Restaurants/pubs and gyms are all well down the list. I would like local authorities to be able to use powers to close down places that are not Covid compliant. I am certainly 'safer' at the gym than an work.
Hospitals are not overrun. NHS data itself shows that. They were thankfully not overrun at the peak. Covid admissions are also not always what they seem. Go in with a broken leg test positive for Covid but display no symptoms and you are classed as a Covid admission. Any positive test within 28 days and you are Covid whether you are hospital due to it or not. Contract it whilst you are in there and it's Covid. Nearly every winter the NHS is 'overwhelmed' often due to respiratory related illnesses. Many of the older/infirm who are or will need hospital treatment for Covid would have been in anyway unfortunately.
To answer your question I would not have any further lockdowns at all. I would reduce the cycles of the PCR to 30. I would change the closing of school bubbles threshold to 5% of pupils being off sick before a bubble could be closed. For people who have been in contact with someone who tests positive who do not then develop symptoms themselves I would reduce the isolation period to 7 days. At the current 14 days only 18% of people are actually isolating.
The most important thing is to protect the vulnerable. Regular testing in care homes and proper support for those who need to isolate. I would also stop testing of people without symptoms, especially university students. There are stories of some universities forcing all students to have a test regardless.
I appreciate that others will view my suggestions with disdain and maybe even disgust. I think many of the scientists advocating further restrictions have little understanding of the economic and mental health effects of further restrictions. They are financially sound and would not have to face the implications of what they propose. I would also like to see what links the biggest cheerleaders have with pharmaceutical companies etc. We have all seen that Vallance has a significant shareholding in one of the companies tasked with developing a vaccine. As we have seen with the track and trace consultants there is a lot of money to be made from Covid. |
Some great points isitme and tough to argue most of them....
All I know is having cancelled 2 holidays already my "safe" bet of fooking off to Cornwall in a couple of weeks is looking increasingly like an unwanted trio of disasters, whilst at the same time fully expected to carry on working in strangers houses every day of the week regardless of what tier we may find ourselves in, go figure that one out. | | | |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 00:05 - Oct 16 with 7521 views | pioneer |
Boris and team are rapidly beginning to resemble the tourist in Ireland who asks one of the locals for directions to Dublin. The Irishman replies: ‘Well sir, if I were you, I wouldn’t start from here". | | | |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 05:50 - Oct 16 with 7452 views | Sandyman |
Given the Welsh ban on travel from Covid hotspots, will Tier 3 zone team Tranmere Rovers be allowed to travel to Newport County for their game on Saturday? |  | | |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 06:09 - Oct 16 with 7437 views | D_Alien |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 05:50 - Oct 16 by Sandyman |
Given the Welsh ban on travel from Covid hotspots, will Tier 3 zone team Tranmere Rovers be allowed to travel to Newport County for their game on Saturday? |
I believe travel for work purposes is allowed | |
| |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 07:30 - Oct 16 with 7377 views | pioneer |
Thank god there are still some MPs willing to speak out. Shame no one in the media has been monitoring these things. | | | |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 07:42 - Oct 16 with 7367 views | tony_roch975 |
| Tier 2 / Tier 3 on 07:30 - Oct 16 by pioneer |
Thank god there are still some MPs willing to speak out. Shame no one in the media has been monitoring these things. |
Not sure that's fair - lots of TV, radio & press coverage since the Summer has focussed on how the new private sector centralised Test, Trace & Isolate system is having problems largely because it ignores the existing Local Govt Public Health set up - ideology ruling over quality. Indeed it's one of the things the Metro Mayors have been arguing for. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
