Coronavirus

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

This just makes the restrictions more bizarre

It brings Liverpool into line with the other Level 3 regions. But it is another BoJo U-turn.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

It brings Liverpool into line with the other Level 3 regions. But it is another BoJo U-turn.

.... or adjustment?

Originally Posted by nomadking

Lockdowns do work, IF PEOPLE OBEY THEM. That what is that worked for China and South Korea. Eg Daegu in South Korea, a city the size of Birmingham, went into VOLUNTARY lockdown because there was an outbreak caused by ONE person, who decided they weren't going to be tested or self-isolate.
New Zealand got away with things because they had LESS cases in the first place. Geography plays a part.
Link

New Zealand may have had fewer initial infections but don't underestimate the advantage of not being at the crossroads of the world, and not having a highly concentrated population. They have just 15 people per sq.km, while Scotland, with the same population, has 65. I happen to like Ms Ardern but I think she gats far too much credit for playing what was, in global terms, a very easy hand.

[downquark1]

The discussion has to move beyond what works and into what is worth doing. We know lockdowns "work", it would invalidate germ theory if they didn't. But you need to decide how much you are going to tolerate to abolish a virus that seems to be getting less and less potent at killing people.

Originally Posted by downquark1

We know lockdowns "work", it would invalidate germ theory if they didn't.

Always been a Miasma man myself.

Originally Posted by Damien

Always been a Miasma man myself.

Living in London, that’s understandable...

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by Damien

Always been a Miasma man myself.

Nothing a good application of leeches or trepanning can't fix...

It's all been downhill since the 1850s.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by downquark1

The discussion has to move beyond what works and into what is worth doing. We know lockdowns "work", it would invalidate germ theory if they didn't. But you need to decide how much you are going to tolerate to abolish a virus that seems to be getting less and less potent at killing people.

Is it getting less and less potent? Without the actual case numbers from March it’s not definitively possible to say. And it is recognised that it got into the care home system where it hit those most at risk.

Without restrictions when the NHS is overwhelmed - and I say when, not if, - restrictions become inevitable anyway. It’s better to be proactive than reactive.

What the real decision is to what extent the Government want to support people and businesses through the crisis. If it’s not willing to do either eventually it falls apart.

Fundamentally we’re all taxpayers and it’s cheaper to protect jobs (and businesses) in the interim than to lose millions to the dole for years.

[heero_yuy]

Quote from The Sun:

Boris Johnson ruled out a half-term circuit breaker for good yesterday as he accused Labour of trying to “turn the lights out” with a national lockdown.

He stood firm after Sir Keir Starmer again insisted on the short break despite medics saying it would not work.

Hours earlier, an expert warned MPs of tens of thousands of deaths if Britain stuck with the PM’s three-tier system.

But the PM said it would be wrong to shut down the whole country when infection rates in South West England and parts of the South East are minuscule compared with the North.

Mr Johnson turned on Sir Keir, saying: “It is the height of absurdity that he attacks the economic consequences of the measures we are obliged to take across some parts of the country when he wants to turn the lights out with a full national lockdown.”

Any problem solving strategy concentrates most effort where it will have most effect. (Pareto Principle)

With COVID 19, clamping down on the hot spots whilst leaving the rest of the country functioning has to be the better solution?

Our area has 1/20th the rate of infection compared to some northern towns.

Unless like Kier Starmer you want to drag everybody down to the same miserable level for precious little extra gain.

[jfman]

Considering following the science the best time to lock down was September 21st for those areas with lower prevalence they'd still benefit from time limited restrictions despite having significantly lower levels than the worst areas. It pushes them further from Tier 2 for a longer period.

[heero_yuy]

Quote from The Sun:

Nicola Sturgeon sparked more chaos and confusion today as she revealed a FIVE tiered coronavirus alert system for Scotland.

The First Minister outlined fresh systems which will come into place after the national circuit-breaker lockdown ends on November 2.

It features five levels of measures - from "level zero" to four - to be applied in different areas of Scotland depending on the spread of the virus.

The top level would be close to a full lockdown like back in March, but the aim is for schools to remain open at all times if possible.

The levels will be reviewed on a weekly basis.

Ms Sturgeon said today the new system "seeks to tackle the direct threat to life as a result of Covid."

People are already confused with 3 tiers, wee Kranky goes 2 better.

It'll all end in tiers [sic]

[nomadking]

If only people, and especially the media, spent more time trying to obey the rules or stick to the underlying principles, than desperately trying to find a way around the rules, there would be less cases and less of a problem.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

People are already confused with 3 tiers, wee Kranky goes 2 better.

It'll all end in tiers [sic]

The Republic of Ireland's got five tiers so I wonder if they're the same?

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

People are already confused with 3 tiers, wee Kranky goes 2 better.

It'll all end in tiers [sic]

She always tries to look a bit taller than Boris,standing on two extra steps achieves this