And at long last the other shoe is acknowledged to have dropped.
But we "don't want to go into a second lockdown" because that would be "disastrous." Odd, considering that we are essentially already within what is fair to consider a natural disaster.
Now the question is whether this will top the first wave, and I'd say the answer depends on whether or not schools are closed down again.
So, yes it will.
Cases probably, but perhaps not deaths with any luck.
Our county council has arranged a meeting with the volunteer groups where they plan to update us on what they are planning to do in order to avoid a lockdown over Christmas.
As grim as it may sound we should be seeing fewer deaths with each wave as there's less elderly and infirm people left for it to kill. The first wave already went through the care homes like wildfire, the simple fact is there will be less elderly people in them to be killed this time around.
As grim as it may sound we should be seeing fewer deaths with each wave as there's less elderly and infirm people left for it to kill. The first wave already went through the care homes like wildfire, the simple fact is there will be less elderly people in them to be killed this time around.
Historically the second wave of pandemics tends to be worse. Not better.
+6
Options
RingoHe/Hima distinct lack of substanceRegistered Userregular
It depends if you've bought enough time between first and second waves to restock your medical supplies. Also, depending on the pandemic, train/hire replacement medical personnel. COVID19 is probably capable of killing 1% of a given population (which is still way too many people!) but the real disaster is the breakdown of essential services due to huge spikes of cases.
So my son can sit in a classroom with 34 people, my wife can interact with anywhere up to 200 people per day as a high school teacher, we could go to the pub or a restaurant but we can't go sit in either of our parent's back gardens
Less contact is less contact, its simply a matter of priorities. Clearly pubs should close, but to me its entirely reasonable to close and ban literally everything else that can cause transmission before you close schools.
It doesn't matter that schools are open. It matters how many opportunities there are to spread the virus, and the value of those opportunities. School is the most important thing society produces, so while it may produce many infections, its almost certainly worth it.
As grim as it may sound we should be seeing fewer deaths with each wave as there's less elderly and infirm people left for it to kill. The first wave already went through the care homes like wildfire, the simple fact is there will be less elderly people in them to be killed this time around.
Historically the second wave of pandemics tends to be worse. Not better.
Thats actually a random feature of the 1918 pandemic, not any kind of rule.
I can't pissing believe we're all (the nation) having the same discussions around lockdown as before. The facts are this:
This virus kills people.
The more people it infects, the more it kills.
The more we mingle, the more it infects.
Deaths might not be bad now, but they're rising, as are hospitalisations.
IF WE DON'T LOCK DOWN ASAP, WE'LL HAVE TO EVENTUALLY ANYWAY! And by then many more people will be dead, as before, and because of the delay the lockdown will have to be longer so the economy takes another kicking, meaning the worst of both world.
It's known that locking down 2 weeks earlier would have saved up to 20 THOUSAND people. Would 3 months and 2 weeks of lock down have really cost our economy that much more than 3 months? Hell, doing it earlier will mean it'll be shorter.
Of course it's also possible the government won't enact a national shutdown, just so many 'localised' ones that it'll just feel like one, but one they can deny is a national lockdown.
PR, the one thing you can guarantee the Tories will always end up doing first...
A National Lockdo...sorry Circuit Breaker during half term is all but confirmed.
The only question is whether they bring it forward to extend it, and I honestly can't see that not happening.
Start of October (3-5th perhaps) for two to three weeks would be my prediction, probably then extended by another one or two after it starts showing signs of working but isn't there yet.
The main aim is going to be trying to make Christmas as normal as usual, and we'll just take the aftermath in Jan and Feb on the chin.
Not only is the Government faced with the prospect of many more deaths in the coming months, it's also stuck with 100s of businesses across the country saying "we've barely escaped the spring lockdown and probably still in a position of 'when, not if' we go out of business - if we lockdown again, especially in the run up to Christmas, we are properly fucked"
The hospitality industry is already reeling at the prospect of not having a festive season this year. To not even have minimal business in the autumn is going to royally fuck it to death.
In so many ways, this winter is going to be disastrous.
Maybe we shouldn't have let people go on holiday abroad, you know, seems like a bad fucking idea
What the fuck is that all about anyway
It was driving me batty reading the news throughout half of lockdown. Just endless "can I go on holiday", "when can I go on holiday", "where can I go on holiday", "what are the rules for going on holiday" articles. It all just left me fuming at the kind of privileged prick who thinks the real disaster here is not going to Spain this year as is his God given right. The second this shit started non essential travel should have been banned. It should still be banned. Boo fucking hoo if you don't get to go on holiday this year, not everyone gets to go abroad every year it's not a necessity, it's a frivolous luxury that we pay far too high an ecological cost for as it is. I haven't been abroad in about eight years, it hasn't killed me and it won't kill anyone else.
People need to wise up and just deal with it not being on the cards for one year. Instead we get a bizzare roulette wheel of ineffective two week quarantines selected from what seems to be random destinations and a second wave. Thank you Ken and Karen I hope your trip to Spain was worth it...
"Taking a holiday abroad" is one of the totemic signifiers of being part of the prosperous middle class in the UK
It's hugely significant to the lower income brackets of the Tory base
Smashing the nail firmly on the head here. It's as crucial as owning a second hand Audi or Range Rover with a private plate to obscure the age. Just mind numbingly, small minded petty bullshit that people are literally dying for.
0
Options
Brovid Hasselsmof[Growling historic on the fury road]Registered Userregular
My uncle, aunt, his two daughters and at least one of the daughters' boyfriends went to Portugal a couple of weeks ago. My uncle is really overweight and suffered pleurisy as a result of blood clots in his lungs after flying back from India in February. My other aunt begged him not to go. He did anyway. People are dumb.
As grim as it may sound we should be seeing fewer deaths with each wave as there's less elderly and infirm people left for it to kill. The first wave already went through the care homes like wildfire, the simple fact is there will be less elderly people in them to be killed this time around.
Historically the second wave of pandemics tends to be worse. Not better.
Utterly irrelevant. You’re referring to a second wave caused by a disease naturally peaking while running unchecked due to running out of susceptible hosts, and then re-emerging due to adapting in some way to increase its range.
This is a second wave caused by a massive lockdown in human contact cutting the infection rate followed by a relaxing of that restriction, not a change in the virus.
The two are entirely unrelated.
Jam Warrior on
+1
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Maybe we shouldn't have let people go on holiday abroad, you know, seems like a bad fucking idea
What the fuck is that all about anyway
It was driving me batty reading the news throughout half of lockdown. Just endless "can I go on holiday", "when can I go on holiday", "where can I go on holiday", "what are the rules for going on holiday" articles. It all just left me fuming at the kind of privileged prick who thinks the real disaster here is not going to Spain this year as is his God given right. The second this shit started non essential travel should have been banned. It should still be banned. Boo fucking hoo if you don't get to go on holiday this year, not everyone gets to go abroad every year it's not a necessity, it's a frivolous luxury that we pay far too high an ecological cost for as it is. I haven't been abroad in about eight years, it hasn't killed me and it won't kill anyone else.
People need to wise up and just deal with it not being on the cards for one year. Instead we get a bizzare roulette wheel of ineffective two week quarantines selected from what seems to be random destinations and a second wave. Thank you Ken and Karen I hope your trip to Spain was worth it...
To be fair, this is the last year of it being so easy for you folks.
(Alyn Smith is an SNP MP, the map is from The Times)
I must be off base here, because I don’t quite see how local MP’s have an impact on whether testing resources are available. Aren’t those resources described and allocated nationally?
I must be off base here, because I don’t quite see how local MP’s have an impact on whether testing resources are available. Aren’t those resources described and allocated nationally?
It took me a second too, but he's pointing out how the Scotland (and Northern Ireland) have booking rates of 80%-100% while England and Wales are more in the 20%-40% range. (It's more apparent if you open up the image and see the entirety of the UK.)
I'm not sure how the resources are allocated, but it's evident that the Scottish and Irish are doing something better.
The electoral system was changed as a result of a 2018 referendum. The 38 members of the States will be elected from a single island-wide constituency by plurality-at-large voting, with voters being able to cast up to 38 votes.[6]
(Alyn Smith is an SNP MP, the map is from The Times)
I must be off base here, because I don’t quite see how local MP’s have an impact on whether testing resources are available. Aren’t those resources described and allocated nationally?
Health is devolved in Scotland and NI, so the NHS in Scotland is run entirely by the Scottish government
My impression this far had been that the Scottish testing sites were administered by the regional NHS Boards in Scotland rather than Serco as in England, but I can't find any good information on whether that's the case or not
Having said that, it would be unusual if Westminster was making decisions about how health funding was spent in Scotland or NI, because the governing legislation is set up to prevent that
Though isn't that because Scotland has it's own facility allotted to it, which is presumably running close to full capacity - whilst England as fewer facilities per 10,000 people and so they're all swamped.
I didn't think the Scottish Government arranged for their own testing facilities? It's still all Lighthouse.
To be fair, having the Irish Sea in the way does prevent NI from being a testing site option for pretty much anywhere else.
The overall handling of covid overe here has been a bit of a mixed bag. Some good steps, like actually having a working test and trace app before the rest of the UK, but a lot of blindly following whatever westminster is doing without a lot of regard for applicability. Also have the right wing nonsense seeping in through the dup as you'd expect.
Posts
And at long last the other shoe is acknowledged to have dropped.
But we "don't want to go into a second lockdown" because that would be "disastrous." Odd, considering that we are essentially already within what is fair to consider a natural disaster.
what is he talking about.
The uk never got over the first wave.
We're not the US. We very clearly had a first wave and are now in the second.
So, yes it will.
Our county council has arranged a meeting with the volunteer groups where they plan to update us on what they are planning to do in order to avoid a lockdown over Christmas.
Historically the second wave of pandemics tends to be worse. Not better.
Less contact is less contact, its simply a matter of priorities. Clearly pubs should close, but to me its entirely reasonable to close and ban literally everything else that can cause transmission before you close schools.
It doesn't matter that schools are open. It matters how many opportunities there are to spread the virus, and the value of those opportunities. School is the most important thing society produces, so while it may produce many infections, its almost certainly worth it.
Thats actually a random feature of the 1918 pandemic, not any kind of rule.
I think Christmas 2020 is going to be the thing that makes or breaks him, far as the 1922 committee goes.
This virus kills people.
The more people it infects, the more it kills.
The more we mingle, the more it infects.
Deaths might not be bad now, but they're rising, as are hospitalisations.
IF WE DON'T LOCK DOWN ASAP, WE'LL HAVE TO EVENTUALLY ANYWAY! And by then many more people will be dead, as before, and because of the delay the lockdown will have to be longer so the economy takes another kicking, meaning the worst of both world.
It's known that locking down 2 weeks earlier would have saved up to 20 THOUSAND people. Would 3 months and 2 weeks of lock down have really cost our economy that much more than 3 months? Hell, doing it earlier will mean it'll be shorter.
Of course it's also possible the government won't enact a national shutdown, just so many 'localised' ones that it'll just feel like one, but one they can deny is a national lockdown.
PR, the one thing you can guarantee the Tories will always end up doing first...
The only question is whether they bring it forward to extend it, and I honestly can't see that not happening.
Start of October (3-5th perhaps) for two to three weeks would be my prediction, probably then extended by another one or two after it starts showing signs of working but isn't there yet.
The main aim is going to be trying to make Christmas as normal as usual, and we'll just take the aftermath in Jan and Feb on the chin.
The hospitality industry is already reeling at the prospect of not having a festive season this year. To not even have minimal business in the autumn is going to royally fuck it to death.
In so many ways, this winter is going to be disastrous.
What the fuck is that all about anyway
It's hugely significant to the lower income brackets of the Tory base
It was driving me batty reading the news throughout half of lockdown. Just endless "can I go on holiday", "when can I go on holiday", "where can I go on holiday", "what are the rules for going on holiday" articles. It all just left me fuming at the kind of privileged prick who thinks the real disaster here is not going to Spain this year as is his God given right. The second this shit started non essential travel should have been banned. It should still be banned. Boo fucking hoo if you don't get to go on holiday this year, not everyone gets to go abroad every year it's not a necessity, it's a frivolous luxury that we pay far too high an ecological cost for as it is. I haven't been abroad in about eight years, it hasn't killed me and it won't kill anyone else.
People need to wise up and just deal with it not being on the cards for one year. Instead we get a bizzare roulette wheel of ineffective two week quarantines selected from what seems to be random destinations and a second wave. Thank you Ken and Karen I hope your trip to Spain was worth it...
Smashing the nail firmly on the head here. It's as crucial as owning a second hand Audi or Range Rover with a private plate to obscure the age. Just mind numbingly, small minded petty bullshit that people are literally dying for.
I found this hard to believe.
Yet...
Although there was a followup saying it wasn't SAGE's job to predict demand
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
Utterly irrelevant. You’re referring to a second wave caused by a disease naturally peaking while running unchecked due to running out of susceptible hosts, and then re-emerging due to adapting in some way to increase its range.
This is a second wave caused by a massive lockdown in human contact cutting the infection rate followed by a relaxing of that restriction, not a change in the virus.
The two are entirely unrelated.
To be fair, this is the last year of it being so easy for you folks.
Edit: obviously, I am being facetious
The Times is a newspaper.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Well fuck you is all I can say
I had been wondering why the Scottish press hadn't been focusing on testing availability in the way that the national orgs had
(Alyn Smith is an SNP MP, the map is from The Times)
I must be off base here, because I don’t quite see how local MP’s have an impact on whether testing resources are available. Aren’t those resources described and allocated nationally?
Goodreads
SF&F Reviews blog
It took me a second too, but he's pointing out how the Scotland (and Northern Ireland) have booking rates of 80%-100% while England and Wales are more in the 20%-40% range. (It's more apparent if you open up the image and see the entirety of the UK.)
I'm not sure how the resources are allocated, but it's evident that the Scottish and Irish are doing something better.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Guernsey_general_election#Electoral_system The referendum passed 52.5% to 47.5%
Health is devolved in Scotland and NI, so the NHS in Scotland is run entirely by the Scottish government
My impression this far had been that the Scottish testing sites were administered by the regional NHS Boards in Scotland rather than Serco as in England, but I can't find any good information on whether that's the case or not
Having said that, it would be unusual if Westminster was making decisions about how health funding was spent in Scotland or NI, because the governing legislation is set up to prevent that
I didn't think the Scottish Government arranged for their own testing facilities? It's still all Lighthouse.
The overall handling of covid overe here has been a bit of a mixed bag. Some good steps, like actually having a working test and trace app before the rest of the UK, but a lot of blindly following whatever westminster is doing without a lot of regard for applicability. Also have the right wing nonsense seeping in through the dup as you'd expect.
Even so, you can listen to those whose job it is and also plan accordingly.
Should have thought about this before he had them really. Isn't that what he tells single mothers?
Ah, but he's a man you see. That makes it totally different.