Full imminent lockdown is inevitable according to members of Sage

And other scientists. One of the reasons relied upon , is what has been happening in France where local lockdowns have proved ineffective as rates rise .

The government are determined to hold out for longer , Although that’s what they did in the first waive and have subsequently been hammered for it . Go to early they get caned , go to late they get caned. It’s going to be a shit Xmas right ?

The R rate is too high nationally, a lockdown is bound to happen  but this fvcking Government will  dither for 2 weeks and make things even worse

Meanwhile down here no deaths, cases per 100,000 well below national average and only 0.04% of the population infected.  Can someone tell me why I need to be locked down because you dirty Londoners have been larging it in 'Spoons again?

Sails, you kept saying this was over in London and the south. What changed your mind?

I haven't Legal.  There's a strip between London and the coast where there's fuck all 'rona and a lockdown isn't justified.  Even in the areas around that strip the rates are not particularly high at around 0.06% of the population.  To be honest looking at London I think Tier 2 there is largely political so that the northerners don't feel singled out and think we're getting some of the pain too.

Sails you can always point to villages and towns with tiny numbers, but lockdowns can’t happen on the basis of numbers in towns and villages .

my borough when I last looked was below 30 per 100000, if they lock London down it should be by borough or county 

I don’t really see how full lockdown is going to have a material impact on the R rate. There’s not much to be gained now in locking down. It will reverse on its own after a while. Best to just be ready for the storm.

the point about national lockdown is two fold (1) it is growing everywhere even if areas where rates low and earlier lockdown the shorter it can be (2) evidence is increasingly suggesting that only the all in it together national lockdown message actually works to properly change peoples behaviour.   

And sails you have repeatedly said the infection has already blown through London, repeatedly.

'If they lock London down it should be by borough or county '

 

How thr fvck is that supposed to work?  Go on, tell us Professor

tell me more the office GIF

Yes it comes down to what is feasibly the smallest unit you could lock down.  It's like independence movements.  I'm sure Kensington & Chelsea would love to be an independent country as I'm sure most healthy people would love to see lockdowns on a house to house basis.

Goshh yet again  all these experts knowing sooooo much, I mean  why Boris and the scientists should have just had a look on RoF to get all the soloutions

 

 

Ebit they could basically leave East Sussex open based on the current figures.

Guy it's rising in some part of London but not others and the figures are all over the place.  It's still certainly nothing like we saw earlier in the year and I'm somewhat sceptical of some of the numbers especially those that involve extrapolating across populations.

London  you have to shut the whole place because the boundaries are so fluid and densely populated but this time shut the stations and put police on main roads before the announcement so that people don't just leave.

Out here in the country it's easier on a district by district basis because you're dealing with far fewer people and boundaries where there's often nobody actually living on the boundary.

There's a strip between London and the coast where there's fuck all 'rona and a lockdown isn't justified. 

There are lots of places like this. Most rural parts of the country which are sparsely populated, in fact.  Enjoy your freedom while it lasts. 

hospitals have plenty of space

hospitals need to start doing what they're paid to do

re freedom, will you follow the rules this time?

I don't really know anyone who is even following them now

Sails what are you chatting about as if they would or should leave a tiny strip of East Sussex open. Lockdown by Boroughs would be far easier .

clergham if the pubs , shops and restaurants are closed I don’t see how I could do anything but comply . In terms of visiting family and friends over Xmas , I shall certainly be doing that. I dont know anybody that won’t .

You can't put police on the streets stopping people from leaving before the law is changed. 

ebitda - house parties, to put it bluntly

no longer just a thing for the kidz

I shall be having anyone I chose at my house, for a gathering or drinks. I don’t know anyone who won’t be.

gosh that’s enticing

come to my rona party - you might catch a contagious disease!

itll be illegal!

you could get stuck in the kitchen listening to clergs or ebitda drone on about your loss of freedoms!

 

I'd rather come to her party than yours fc

 

This will go on

F

O

R

E

V

E

R

No exit plan. No way out. Govt painted into a corner. Everything is screwed forever

Ebit as above I'm not talking a tiny strip and it is fact several different districts and essentially half a county.  Quite easy to say East Sussex other than Brighton remains Tier 1.

Humph you have the police out so that they can stop people the moment the law changes rather giving people enough notice of the change to be half way to Barnard Castle before it kicks in.

Raab yesterday refused to rule out a national lockdown, and it is reported that BJ to announce a tier 4, what is tier 4

Tier four is really really fckd.  Unlike tier 3 which is just proper fckd.

At least 2 places on the country have invented Tiers Plus. Which is a random additional restriction pulled out of someone’s arse. 
 

Mooo! Keep us SAFE O wise Sages! Mooo!

Just had a long chat with a doctor who doesn't think it will get much worse in London and his local hospital currently has 40 patients with covid and is coping just fine.  Daily deaths for London are apparently plateauing.

What would be interesting is if the areas worst hit in London are the areas least hit last time, that would lend some credence to the idea that the worst hit areas last time have aquired some degree of immunity.  Do we know?

I CANNOT even believe this is going on and going to happen AGAIN. It is INSANITY. I have read the numerous threads, and don't need to rehash old information but 600 deaths in Under 44s, 6000 deaths in Under 65s, how on earth is this level of disruption warranted to the working population and why aren't more people outraged about it? 

No no sails, we must all suffer equally, it's only fair 

And we will all go together when we go
What a comforting fact that is to know
Universal bereavement
An inspiring achievement
Yes we all will go together when we go

For the millionth time IT IS NOT BEING DONE TO PREVENT DEATHS, it is being done to ensure there are not too many people needing hospital at once which would have far reaching consequences for all of us.   Now you may think even that is not worth a lock down to prevent but at least rage against the right thing rather than a straw man.

"why aren't more people outraged about it?"

I refer you to Sumption's excellent lecture, in particular this passage:

"Fear was deliberately stoked up by the government: the language of impending doom; the daily press conferences; the alarmist projections of the mathematical modellers; the manipulative use of selected statistics; the presentation of exceptional tragedies as if they were the normal effects of Covid-19; above all the attempt to suggest that that Covid-19 was an indiscriminate killer, when the truth was that it killed identifiable groups, notably those with serious underlying conditions and the old, who could and arguably should have been sheltered without coercing the entire population. These exaggerations followed naturally from the logic of the measures themselves. They were necessary in order to justify the extreme steps which the government had taken, and to promote compliance. As a strategy, this was completely successful. So successful was it that when the government woke up to the damage it was doing, especially to the economy and the education of children, it found it difficult to reverse course. The public naturally asked themselves what had changed. The honest answer to that question would have been that nothing much had changed. The threat had not been fairly presented in the first place."

It's not a straw man tho guy. It is exactly what the government told people to fear.

and the NHS is no use to anyone if we have to shut it down to protect it. It's as much use as North Korean aircraft carriers with no aircraft 

I guess if the government were to be honest and say that this is to avoid overwhelming the hospitals, people would legitimately ask why nothing was done after the first lockdown to increase the capacity to prevent this from happening, instead of having to rely on lockdown AGAIN.

Ok well I will am still raging that the response is disproportionate to the issue of the NHS being overwhelmed. 

Ok well I am still raging that the response is disproportionate to the issue of the NHS being overwhelmed. 

 

"

ullace30 Oct 20 11:34

Reply

Report

W1GWAG Linda

have I got that right?"

I have absolutely no idea what that means 

"The honest answer to that question would have been that nothing much had changed. The threat had not been fairly presented in the first place."

Absolute bullshit, the answer was that at the time restrictions were released there was no danger of cases overwhelming the health service (and in my view that danger had passed much earlier).  Like so many of Team Sane, Sumption for all his fabled intelligence, completely fails to recognise the key issue and what this has all be about and why governments all over the world have acted as they have.

 

 

"Ok well I am still raging that the response is disproportionate to the issue of the NHS being overwhelmed." 

I don't agree, but you are welcome!

 

"Capacity was increased"

Those nightingales were a (admittedly successful) PR stunt, they never had the people to staff them

Guy, people were led to believe that a deadly virus was stalking the country and lockdown was necessary to prevent tens of thousands of deaths. 

you may have understood that the mechanism by which that threat actually presented was healthcare capacity not a direct threat to their lives, well done you're the cleverest one of all. but an awful lot of people did not, and with catchy 3 words slogans like "control the virus" it is not surprising 

Protect the NHS featured pretty highly in the slogan as I recall.  

Yes well that takes me back to my earlier point - it's not a precious art work that must be kept in a glass case as it's too fragile for human contact. It either serves its purpose or it's pointless 

It either serves its purpose or it's pointless 

A great sentence illustrating the difference between "its" and "it's". 

Linda, give it a rest. You just quoted a slogan that exactly disproved your argument. 

It cannot possibly be run at a level to cope with a global pandemic that would be ridiculously expensive and it cannot expand quickly enough when one arises because training staff take time so the answer is to slow the pandemic.   But I am quite happy to argue whether lockdown was worth preventing an overwhelmed health service or indeed whether an overwhelmed health service was genuine risk, at least that is the right discussion, not the bullshit sumption is talking..

Is sumption a science denying ostrich type?

 the alarmist projections of the mathematical modellers;

Sounds like he in conveniently sweeping anything that goes against his baseless assumption that covid is not dangerous under the rug here. 

Does he have anything to backup his hyperbole?

fucking hell one of the things I like about rof compared to many messageboards is that it is not painful to the eye with endless gifs ,moving emojis etc.   Please stop.

The only parts of the first slogan people remember are protect the NHS and save lives.  Most of them only focused on the last bit because it led them to believe we could magically get through this with nobody dying and that was patently bollocks.

Not noticed the way that people were originally outraged at 300 deaths a day but now it's not announced in a press conference every afternoon people are barely aware of it so it's all about public perception.

They did, however, have staff and equipment for the Nightingales by requisitioning private hospitals.  Anaesthetist who did my mum's op the day before lockdown went from there to back working in the NHS the next day.

We Got The Power Cant Stop Wont Stop GIF by Black Voters Matter Fund

whilst we have thread after thread after thread about the SAME FVCKING THING SAYING THE SAME FVCKING THING OVER AND OVER AND OVER

We need more archers threads with 2 replies, that'll make rof better 

Pleased to see some Tom Lehrer making an appearance on this thread, thanks Hools

"I guess if the government were to be honest and say that this is to avoid overwhelming the hospitals, people would legitimately ask why nothing was done after the first lockdown to increase the capacity to prevent this from happening, instead of having to rely on lockdown AGAIN."

Or they might legitimately ask why the first lockdown wasn't actually aimed at preventing the hospitals being overwhelmed at all but rather was a completely futile attempt to suppress the virus altogether.

If they had implemented a regional system and kept lockdown at the absolute minimum possible (on a region by region basis) to prevent healthcare capacity from being exceeded, this would have been a reasonable approach. Instead, they completely trashed the country's finances for the "achievement" of deferring inevitable deaths until winter - as was widely pointed out at the time.

Why the lockdown went on so long is a very legitimate question, It went from beyond an emergency break on the surge to a longer term project, which was ill advised in my view.  That does not mean to say we may not need an another emergency break however.

GG the capacity cannot be increased because the bottleneck factor is adequately trained staff, not buildings and beds.

They built those Nightingale hospitals but couldn't staff them

Yes I know that is exactly what I said higher up the thread - thanks though

If everyone with a slight breathing difficulty needs a hospital bed and a trained nurse to chat to, yeah we are going to run out of hospital capacity pretty soon.

Oh well, I guess we have to lock down then!

I would rather more died including me than we keep the currently mandatory rules. We lose 600,000 people a year in a normal year. If that were doubled would it be that bad? Those are going to die anyway on the whole. Also I don't mind dying at home rather than in a hospital ward. It's nicer to die at home (and costs the NHS less).

Those are going to die anyway on the whole.

You can't argue with facts. 

"GG the capacity cannot be increased because the bottleneck factor is adequately trained staff, not buildings and beds."

I meant that lockdown should have been (i) region by region, and (ii) ended as soon as any risk of healthcare capacity (whatever that is) being exceeded with was dealt with. The lockdown shouldn't have applied across the board and should have ended much more quickly. If we'd done that, the country wouldn't be 20 trillion or whatever it is now in debt, we could have retained some "dry powder" to finance tightening restrictions again if necessary, and natural immunity would be slowing the virus down anyway. Yes deaths would have been higher but they're going to happen over the winter anyway.

They had staff for the London Nightingale because they shut every private hospital and took its equipment and staff to the Nightingale.  Where else do you think all those beds suddenly came from?  My mum was discharge from a private hospital the day before a truck came and emptied it and the staff were redeployed.  The private hospital remained shut until the Nightingale closed...

 

and the Gov is still payng the private hospitals for the beds they are not using 

Actually most of them open for paying punters again.

Well they are briefing press left , right, and centre now:
Officially the R rate in London is nearly 3, and will be in tier 3 in two weeks time.

sage have urged the government to put the country into hard lockdown now and either side of Xmas. Government are holding firm for the moment and there is infighting in cabinet as to when, where, and how.

Tier4 is apparently a national lockdown by another name .

 

im keen to learn how you can unlock for a week over Xmas . If they do that may as not bother with the restrictions.

Oh and every hospital will be at capacity within two weeks. Not looking good is it . So what happens when unlock happens and the numbers inevitably rise again, another lockdown?

SS

Then why weren't the Nightingale Hospitals used more at the peak back in April ? I thought the whole point of them was to take the vuvu patients so other local patients could go to hospital without fear of cathing it

Increasingly they are looking like a stunt

yes, rolling lockdowns until spring seem inevitable

They did not have enough staff anyway, even with the extra due to covid infecting the nursing staff  so numbers or working staff was always low

hospitals definitely will not be at capacity in two weeks

but piers morgan wants it so

The Nightingales were always a stunt, they were never used, the Gov knew they didnt have the staffing for them,  read MD in Private Eye -  all that money and never used

they should really have separate wards where it is assumed staff will have covid and so can come to work unless they actually feel sick

"If everyone with a slight breathing difficulty needs a hospital bed and a trained nurse to chat to, yeah we are going to run out of hospital capacity pretty soon."

See this glib nonsense does team sane no favours - in April you could only get into hospital if you were able to utter no more than three words, none of them were chatting with anybody.  And many hosptials were still full to capacity.

In April they were sedating conscious people and putting them on ventilation. 

I thought the nightingales were , where you were sent to die , to free up capacity in the main hospitals?

Guy what makes you say rolling lockdowns until spring ie another six months? The government can’t afford it , lockdowns of this nature just kick the cam down the road , and there is not an expert that says otherwise. It’s just a modest temporary control .

i think this is the last time the government may get a pass at a hard lockdown for a few weeks , they won’t get it a third time. They simply don’t work medium or long term  

If everyone with a slight breathing difficulty needs a hospital bed and a trained nurse to chat to, yeah we are going to run out of hospital capacity pretty soon.
 

WTF are you talking about?

hospitals never reached capacity in April

but yes a lot of people died at home because they were refused treatment

colleague of a friend was so delirious he can't remember 2 weeks and he was refused admission - his teenage son had to look after him

now more admissions and less wrong treatment (and also people seem to improve or die more quickly after admission if they are going to, which is a good thing from a bed management pov)

ebitda - sturgeon has basically promised exactly that

well, probably not rolling, just a ban on social contact until March

cromwell lasted 6 years

One of the places lockdown sceptics really come undone is the idea that hospitals are just over-treating mild illness because of “hysteria”. Inevitably delivered from a position of complete ignorance about the reality of medical practice.

and france is now in lockdown "for at least 4 weeks" and we all know what that means

The purpose is to prevent the health service being overwhelmed.   Think of it as releasing the overflow valve in a damn, yes it wont stop the reservoir from overflowing forever but it does stop it overflowing now, and later after lots more rain we can release the valve again.  

Now, I am not necessarily saying that a lock down is necessary to stop the overflow but if it is, the fact we may need another one later does not mean we should not lock down now.

And yet Macron says regional lockdowns don’t work, and National ones do?

We should not because hospitals being full for a bit is much less serious than society being permanently harmed in all ways

It's time to stop telling vascular dementia patients they have to die in lonely terror for the greater good