STAY HOME

[DonPeffers]

On 25/03/2020 at 11:14, Nick Mace said:

Just saw this on a Q&A on the BBC.  The answer is pretty obvious I guess, but perhaps worth repeating here:

 

"Can I go for a drive by myself to get out of the house for a while?"

Dr Peter Drobac of the Syed Business School at Oxford said: "The answer is no - we are told to go out to do essential shopping and go out once a day for exercise. The individual risk is low from driving around but the best thing we can do is adhere to the guidelines very strictly."

A refinement of this answer was given recently stating that if your car was electric and charged at home (ie. no need to stop for fuel and therefore no risk of virus transmission) then a leisure drive was permissible.

 

However still inadvisable in case of accident and A & E overloaded.

 

I should clarify this answer was given before the new legislation giving Police powers to stop and potentially fine those on non-essential journeys.

[Gary Taylor]

Just had a call to go back to work..... confused

[Michaelaitken]

I work in a big motor factor which is staying open. So may use the kit car to get to and from work on the nice days so it gets some use. 

[tolf]

On 24/03/2020 at 09:21, tex said:

Don't be so sure.. 63 days so far in China with their resources and iron fist lock down... Italy,, few weeks behind them.. Until the whole of the EU 🇪🇺 and the world sees significant reduction we're still locked down... Re-infection bounce back measures

Not sure I agree with this. China- lied about the initial virus and only when it came to light started to do anything.

Italy - ignored the issue, people continued to kiss and hug each other, spreading the virus. Bad idea.

 

I fail to see how one can catch the virus in the middle of a country lane, by oneself, going directly to and from home and not stopping anywhere

 

i am shopping tomorrow for my parents who are  in their mid 70s, so I will take the Westfield 

[tex]

There may well be little chance of you catching or spreading in that instance, but there has to be a blanket rule because dozens will take no notice or spread without knowing it. So the only thing government can do is lock everyone down. Like it or not your not alone, your not the only one in that situation. Recklessly going out when you were told to stay away from people is irresponsible IMHO. You should see what has happened in my local hospital were my wife has the unenviable job of organising the fight against this virus. There has been cancellations of important operations to make room for this virus which could be reduced if people make the effort to do what they've been told

[tolf]

6 minutes ago, tex said:

There may well be little chance of you catching or spreading in that instance, but there has to be a blanket rule because dozens will take no notice or spread without knowing it. So the only thing government can do is lock everyone down. Like it or not your not alone, your not the only one in that situation. Recklessly going out when you were told to stay away from people is irresponsible IMHO. You should see what has happened in my local hospital were my wife has the unenviable job of organising the fight against this virus. There has been cancellations of important operations to make room for this virus which could be reduced if people make the effort to do what they've been told

Ok so do I not get food for my parents then??

they need some now, not in 2 weeks when the supermarkets can deliver

[tex]

Just now, Ian Tolfree (tolf) - WSCC AO Rep said:

Ok so do I not get food for my parents then??

they need some now, not in 2 weeks when the supermarkets can deliver

Yes you can because that situation is within the rules but ask yourself each time you do go out - do I really need to go out? It could indirectly kill someone 

[Steve (sdh2903)]

5 minutes ago, Ian Tolfree (tolf) - WSCC AO Rep said:

food for my parents

 

2 minutes ago, tex said:

do I really need to go out? It could indirectly kill someone 

 

Think food for your parents is a neccesity.

[tolf]

51 minutes ago, tex said:

Yes you can because that situation is within the rules but ask yourself each time you do go out - do I really need to go out? It could indirectly kill someone 

Thanks for the lecture. I am qualified in bio-hazards so understand the risks

[XTR2Turbo]

It does seem that the pm speech on Monday regarding ‘essential’ is being skewed.  The next day the Health secretary and gove clarified that they want people to continue to work (if safe) but from home if at all possible but if not to still go to work. What they want to avoid is unnecessary social interaction and retail / leisure activities. People seem to have latched on to only essential workers being those that should work. This is not government policy that I have seen anywhere. The closest was in london where they asked only essential workers to use public transport. The 80% subsidy for furloughed workers will probably have accelerated business closures beyond what the government expected but they won’t have data for this yet. 
 

Indeed the government does not want any lock down ideally beyond what is needed to allow the nhs to cope with the demands placed on it. Given the lag of numbers - information we have probably now erred on the side of caution and numbers will not reach the scary forecast previously being suggested.  We do ultimately want the virus to spread through the population and that still seems to be the goal if you listen to the CMO but just at a controlled rate. We are not seeking a halting of all economic activity . That will lead to more issues and deaths in its own right. 

[AdamR]

I dunno if we should let it spread, looking at the data it's tough to call, and the spread is hard to control. Viruses mutate and this one is no exception - the more people it infects, the more mutations, and the harder it is to stop / slow down.

 

The modelling so far shows there will be a spike - with number of critical patients way over what the NHS can handle - we are just delaying it with the current measures.

 

The delay beween full lockdown in Hubei and maximum number of cases was 12 days. We don't have that same level of 'control' as the Chinese employed yet so we still have exponential growth in cases for the next two weeks at least...

 

 

We need to get transmission rate below 1 to start reversing the trend. These are the measures estimated to be required, and their effectiveness:

 

 

So we have done quite a lot of that and should be under 0.5 now, and thus new cases declining - only time will tell if it's working...

 

Further info here for anyone interested: https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56

 

This is also really interesting - shows how much effect small changes on transmission rate, speed of intervention, intubation time, etc have on the overall rates of spread and death: http://gabgoh.github.io/COVID/index.html

 

With our first infection on 15th Feb, first death on 5th March, serious interventions to try and bring transmission rate under 0.5 on 24th March, we have done pretty well I think having learned from others.

 

 

Personally I think the crux of it is to apply common sense. 'Stay at home' is a good message to the general population though!

[jeff oakley]

There is confusion of that there is no doubt as to what counts as permissable. On the BBC website on the Q&A, can I drive to a place to exercise? Yes was the answer, which appears to be wrong as police are saying differently.

 

In the front of my home we have a fishing lake, we have people fishing which according to the Police is fine and two sitting together is fine if from same household, but with the huge trolleys of tackle they are bringing they are driving there, so unacceptable. 

 

As for unnecessary journeys, if you live and constantly see people driving around then it is more likely that you will think it is okay to join in hence the need to limit the travel of people.

 

As for businesses, I think that HMG missed a trick, they should have said all companies which can sustain paying staff them selves should not be allowed to use the "Furlough" straight away or make people redundant. Why should the likes of Sports direct, B&Q who make millions in profit each year who could carry the full cost easily  be treated the same s the small manufacturer who lives hand to mouth.

 

Already we have seen companies trying to knock us for payments yet they have been told they can defer Vat they have been collecting and access funds but many hope they will never have to pay us especially if this lasts long enough to put them out of business.

 

Hopefully there will be restrictions lifted in 3 weeks or so but it is unlikely we will see large group activities lifted for months but if it gives time to find treatments and vaccines then that is a price worth paying  

 

 

[tex]

9 hours ago, Steve (sdh2903) said:

 

 

Think food for your parents is a neccesity.

As I said, that's within the rules so is an essential run. I'm doing the same thing for myself and an elderly family member. Trying to do one journey for both. 

[tex]

8 hours ago, Ian Tolfree (tolf) - WSCC AO Rep said:

Thanks for the lecture. I am qualified in bio-hazards so understand the risks

I'm in no position to lecture anyone but common sense prevailing going out in your westy is going to attract attention for 2 things, attract the attention of the police and attract the attention of the public who are immediately going to think your just out for a joy ride. Setting an example will encourage people to follow the rules. I know that there are thousand jobs still working but giving people the wrong message that it's OK to swan about for a drive with no real cause is irresponsible. There's even a government advert on the TV saying "going for a walk miles from home - NOT ESSENTIAL" If your car breaks down or has an accident with.... Whatever... Someone has to then go out that didn't need to. 

[tolf]

Enjoy