Coronavirus - how is it/has it affected you?

All this talk of a ‘circuit break’ and how it is essential that we have one implemented to help slow the virus however SAGE admit that a 14 day lockdown will put the virus back by 28 days. Assuming we do press ahead with this break are we then saying that every 4 weeks we need to have a 2 week break ad infinitum? Seems a waste of time imo.
 
road2ruin said:
All this talk of a ‘circuit break’ and how it is essential that we have one implemented to help slow the virus however SAGE admit that a 14 day lockdown will put the virus back by 28 days. Assuming we do press ahead with this break are we then saying that every 4 weeks we need to have a 2 week break ad infinitum? Seems a waste of time imo.
Click to expand...

Should have gone for a 2 month shutdown, then go hell for leather over Christmas & New Year with clubs, pubs restaurants all open.

Plus, those 2 months get all the current crazy traffic back off the roads ?
 
road2ruin said:
All this talk of a ‘circuit break’ and how it is essential that we have one implemented to help slow the virus however SAGE admit that a 14 day lockdown will put the virus back by 28 days. Assuming we do press ahead with this break are we then saying that every 4 weeks we need to have a 2 week break ad infinitum? Seems a waste of time imo.
Click to expand...
Fair comment. I think the only workable tactic these days is to prevent ICU capacities being exceeded, that's what the original lockdown was about and it did prevent that. That's about all we can really control.
Lockdowns just delay, they don't fix. Also so many people now just don't accept the rules, rebelling either intentionally or through indifference. Population tried hard lockdown and saw it fails as soon as you come out of it so think it's pointless.
Effective test and trace with 100% of population onboard or vaccine needed, nothing else will do. I think maybe 20% of people here strictly follow the rules, many think they do but in reality don't.

No answer currently.
Herd immunity by stealth?
 
road2ruin said:
All this talk of a ‘circuit break’ and how it is essential that we have one implemented to help slow the virus however SAGE admit that a 14 day lockdown will put the virus back by 28 days. Assuming we do press ahead with this break are we then saying that every 4 weeks we need to have a 2 week break ad infinitum? Seems a waste of time imo.
Click to expand...

I have had a hypothesis for a while that circuit breakers are going to be used every school holiday

GCSE and a levels have been pushed back 3 weeks next year

My thinking is half term coming up normally 1 week. 2 week circuit
Xmas 2 week circuit

Feb half term
Easter
May half term

All breakers

In-between terms which would become 5-6 weeks instead 6-7 would be when the economy would regrow as much as possible .. or limp through as it were..

The 2 weeks each time would reset the balance allow the NHS not to go overwhelmed etc etc

Basically kick the can down the road .. and again.. and again until it's summer time and like last summer the increase in weather allows for the more freedom with less spreading .. and ofc hope by then science has come up with a vaccine

Life is never going back to the way it was so maybe this will be the "new normal" who knows

That's just my hypothesis anyways
 
pauldj42 said:
Absolute bellends:mad:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1316130417305677826
Click to expand...

But again I'd ask what are the root causes to why they are behaving like this. Are they all being thrown out at 10pm onto the streets at the same time and it's the last time young people who get one chance at university will be able to go out for a while? Why do they feel it will not effect them?

I mostly feel 'well what did we expect would happen?' when I see this kind if thing. Yes it is irresponsible to a certain extent, but to me there is a big danger of the narrative being 'it's all their fault'. And if we do not address why this is happening, it will happen in other cities, it will get posted on social media, people will get angry but nothing will change.
 
pauljames87 said:
I have had a hypothesis for a while that circuit breakers are going to be used every school holiday

GCSE and a levels have been pushed back 3 weeks next year

My thinking is half term coming up normally 1 week. 2 week circuit
Xmas 2 week circuit

Feb half term
Easter
May half term

All breakers

In-between terms which would become 5-6 weeks instead 6-7 would be when the economy would regrow as much as possible .. or limp through as it were..

The 2 weeks each time would reset the balance allow the NHS not to go overwhelmed etc etc

Basically kick the can down the road .. and again.. and again until it's summer time and like last summer the increase in weather allows for the more freedom with less spreading .. and ofc hope by then science has come up with a vaccine

Life is never going back to the way it was so maybe this will be the "new normal" who knows

That's just my hypothesis anyways
Click to expand...

One challenge could be that if people know a lockdown type circuit breaker is coming up on a regular then they will kind of over compensate for this before it happens. And you'll end up with stupid panic buying, people crowding into bars and restaurants before hand etc etc. Plus for a lot of people that would effectively be saying to them you can not have any holidays if you have kids at schools, assuming a circuit breaker will involve no unnecessary travel. So parents would start taking kids out of schools at a time when they desperately need to be there to catch up, leading to all sorts of other issues. This is why I think the government are currently not saying people can't travel, as it will decimate the tourist/holiday industry with no school holiday holidays so to speak.
 
Last edited:
All this graphs and projections - the one we need is the point at which this thread passes the Random Irritations thread for the most posts. :(
 
Hacker Khan said:
But again I'd ask what are the root causes to why they are behaving like this. Are they all being thrown out at 10pm onto the streets at the same time and it's the last time young people who get one chance at university will be able to go out for a while? Why do they feel it will not effect them?

I mostly feel 'well what did we expect would happen?' when I see this kind if thing. Yes it is irresponsible to a certain extent, but to me there is a big danger of the narrative being 'it's all their fault'. And if we do not address why this is happening, it will happen in other cities, it will get posted on social media, people will get angry but nothing will change.
Click to expand...
Because of the way Covid is being publicised, look at Uni’s, people should be horrified at the amount of cases, but instead of horror, it’s “oh, what about our fees” or “poor kids locked up” ie, the message we are getting is it’s not a problem to the young, therefore why should the young behave.
The attitude has now changed to, “I’m not at high risk, so lock up those that are”

People with covid should be made to feel like lepers, not wear it as a badge of honour.
 
pauldj42 said:
Because of the way Covid is being publicised, look at Uni’s, people should be horrified at the amount of cases, but instead of horror, it’s “oh, what about our fees” or “poor kids locked up” ie, the message we are getting is it’s not a problem to the young, therefore why should the young behave.
The attitude has now changed to, “I’m not at high risk, so lock up those that are”

People with covid should be made to feel like lepers, not wear it as a badge of honour.
Click to expand...

Again that is a subjective statement. Some may well say that fees are very important to them, some may say the mental health of kids is very important and over rides the very slim chance that they will have any lasting health consequences if they catch it. It's all about perceptions, i can see both sides of it and think that there should be a balance, yes youngsters should be (more) considerate but at the same time those that are vulnerable may need to take extra precautions until a vaccine is found. And compromises will have to be made o both sides.
 
Hacker Khan said:
One challenge could be that if people know a lockdown type circuit breaker is coming up on a regular then they will kind of over compensate for this before it happens. And you'll end up with stupid panic buying, people crowding into bars and restaurants before hand etc etc. Plus for a lot of people that would effectively be saying to them you can not have any holidays if you have kids at schools, assuming a circuit breaker will involve no unnecessary travel. So parents would start taking kids out of schools at a time when they desperately need to be there to catch up, leading to all sorts of other issues. This is why I think the government are currently not saying people can't travel, as it will decimate the tourist/holiday industry with no school holiday holidays so to speak.
Click to expand...

In my opinion and mine alone

You can't legislate for the great unwashed being morons.

If it's planned in advance u could in theory have everything set out planned so you get no panic buying, no rushing into bars etc

You say to people right guys it's 2 weeks that's it.. then your back again

I see the changes ATM and the rushing to bars. Panic buying as uncertainty as once in restrictions there is no end in sight

On the subject of holidays I'm withdrawing from that debate as my view on people's need to travel are against the grain and biased so I can't give a fair and balanced view
 
Hacker Khan said:
One challenge could be that if people know a lockdown type circuit breaker is coming up on a regular then they will kind of over compensate for this before it happens. And you'll end up with stupid panic buying, people crowding into bars and restaurants before hand etc etc. Plus for a lot of people that would effectively be saying to them you can not have any holidays if you have kids at schools, assuming a circuit breaker will involve no unnecessary travel. So parents would start taking kids out of schools at a time when they desperately need to be there to catch up, leading to all sorts of other issues. This is why I think the government are currently not saying people can't travel, as it will decimate the tourist/holiday industry with no school holiday holidays so to speak.
Click to expand...
Seems to me a bit like what addicts in recovery, but who have relapsed one or more times, will tell you - the relapses always get worse...and so yes - I can imagine a similar scenario every time restrictions are lifted...if we go into (or expect to go into) a sequence of circuit-break restrictions, then every time the restrictions are lifted there is a risk that the breaches of the basic rules gets worse...:(
 
pauljames87 said:
In my opinion and mine alone

You can't legislate for the great unwashed being morons.

If it's planned in advance u could in theory have everything set out planned so you get no panic buying, no rushing into bars etc

You say to people right guys it's 2 weeks that's it.. then your back again

I see the changes ATM and the rushing to bars. Panic buying as uncertainty as once in restrictions there is no end in sight

On the subject of holidays I'm withdrawing from that debate as my view on people's need to travel are against the grain and biased so I can't give a fair and balanced view
Click to expand...
Why keep blaming the “great unwashed” as you call them? Plenty of evidence it is Intelligent people in all levels of society that have ignored the rules.

People with money and status believing the rules don’t apply to them.
 
pauldj42 said:
Why keep blaming the “great unwashed” as you call them? Plenty of evidence it is Intelligent people in all levels of society that have ignored the rules.

People with money and status believing the rules don’t apply to them.
Click to expand...

Having money and status doesnt automatically mean they are intelligent.
 
Trying to work out how we sort things for my BiL to get to us to 'house/cat-sit' while we are away for a week - whilst adhering absolutely to the new restrictions. It is not easy - and it would be easy for us to say 'oh what the hell...'

But we are absolutely not doing that - for things that would normally be very straightforward and that in the current circumstances we could consider to be low risk in respect of transmission. However I can imagine some taking a different view. :(
 
Last edited:
Hacker Khan said:
Again that is a subjective statement. Some may well say that fees are very important to them, some may say the mental health of kids is very important and over rides the very slim chance that they will have any lasting health consequences if they catch it. It's all about perceptions, i can see both sides of it and think that there should be a balance, yes youngsters should be (more) considerate but at the same time those that are vulnerable may need to take extra precautions until a vaccine is found. And compromises will have to be made o both sides.
Click to expand...
No doubt the fees are important and far less than mental health, but this wave has started with the return to education, why not put education back for 6-12 months, call it an enforced “gap year” if you will or made sure every subject was available online etc.

I keep hearing how important the education is, but why not take the break and raise school leaving age to 17 for a 5-10yr period so kids and the Country could recover.

If it was done as one, nobody would miss out.

I don’t know how much more the vulnerable can give when you start with nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top