Clear as.
You Stay safe now. (Behind your keyboard)
Where as you are where exactly ?RingoMcCartney wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 10:08 pmClear as.
You Stay safe now. (Behind your keyboard)
It's one big mess.martin_p wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 10:13 pmI think those expecting any significant relaxation of the current measures are going to be disappointed. Until there is some sort of vaccine or treatment normal life will not return. As it stands, for example, I’ll be surprised if I get on another football match in 2020.
martin_p wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 10:13 pmI think those expecting any significant relaxation of the current measures are going to be disappointed. Until there is some sort of vaccine or treatment normal life will not return. As it stands, for example, I’ll be surprised if I get on another football match in 2020.
That shouldnt come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying proper attention throughout.FactualFrank wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 7:30 amCoronavirus: Social restrictions 'to remain for rest of year'
The UK will have to live with some disruptive social measures for at least the rest of the year, the government's chief medical adviser has said.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52389285
The above won't come as a surprise, but it's just a reminder that it's unlikely we'll be back to near normality before 2021.
Are you sure you're posting from the right account?
Reading the usual childish carry on between the usuals in the exchanges last night you could be fooled into thinking it was all over. Hopefully action can be taken once the posts are viewed.FactualFrank wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 7:30 amCoronavirus: Social restrictions 'to remain for rest of year'
The UK will have to live with some disruptive social measures for at least the rest of the year, the government's chief medical adviser has said.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52389285
The above won't come as a surprise, but it's just a reminder that it's unlikely we'll be back to near normality before 2021.
In most countries the modellers have I think got it about correct. In the UK they were saying somewhere between 250,000 and 500,000 deaths if we did nothing.Elizabeth wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 9:09 pmThe reasons given for the lockdown were to slow the rate that the virus was spreading and to protect the NHS.
As things stand, with talk of the peak having been reached and reports that the 'new hospitals' are being under-used, why would there not be some relaxation?
I think the public would be entitled to ask that question
How do you mean. I mistakenly used my wife’s account after she had logged in first thing in the morning.
paulatky wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 7:57 amHow do you mean. I mistakenly used my wife’s account after she had logged in first thing in the morning.
That doesnt alter the validity of what I think.
Interesting that the government has now admitted that social distancing restictions will be in place until at least 2021. Wonder who has said that many times before.
By the way do you think the number of deaths may have peaked yet or do you think nobody knows
I did say when the lock down was extended that it would continue for another 5-6 weeks , however the data has plateaued faster than the data was suggesting it would.martin_p wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 10:13 pmI think those expecting any significant relaxation of the current measures are going to be disappointed. Until there is some sort of vaccine or treatment normal life will not return. As it stands, for example, I’ll be surprised if I get on another football match in 2020.
It weekly death registrations, simply that. No distinction of why death occurred. I think they said all the dots on each week were the deaths from 1970 something to 2019.
There's no reason why places like B and Q and garden centres can't be open already, easy to keep your distance from people in places like that.
It depends who the two golfers are
But public gatherings are a long way off and a lot of families will not be prepared to take the risk of being together like before. Being able to wave through the window or chat from the end of the drive is no comparison ti being able to cuddle your grandchildren or sit down to Christmas lunch together.
That's not relevant to whether they should be allowed to. If the law changes to allow grandparents to cuddle their grandchildren before they die, and some people choose not to take advantage, that needn't stop the rest of them from carrying on.paulatky wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 9:08 amBut public gatherings are a long way off and a lot of families will not be prepared to take the risk of being together like before. Being able to wave through the window or chat from the end of the drive is no comparison ti being able to cuddle your grandchildren or sit down to Christmas lunch together.
That's fine, each family and individual can weigh up that risk. If anyone who feels vulnerable wants to remain isolated then they'd be free to do so - and supported - for as long as they felt it was required.paulatky wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 9:08 amBut public gatherings are a long way off and a lot of families will not be prepared to take the risk of being together like before. Being able to wave through the window or chat from the end of the drive is no comparison ti being able to cuddle your grandchildren or sit down to Christmas lunch together.
There has been a big campaign online to reopen fisheries. I agree you are social distancing but they would be packed with everyone at home.
There was plenty on Amazon a couple of weeks ago, I suggest get in early before it’s another toilet roll fiasco.Zlatan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 9:23 amA relaxation in lockdown should be accompanied with an enforcement of wearing face masks IMO. It is an altruistic approach. If we are forced to wear a face mask in public, whilst our individual protection is not increased, the populations protection as a whole is increased. However this is dependant upon availability of face masks for everyone, and the supply problems for PPE is currently dictating the governments advice.
Apparently face masks are not going to be compulsory.Zlatan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 9:23 amA relaxation in lockdown should be accompanied with an enforcement of wearing face masks IMO. It is an altruistic approach. If we are forced to wear a face mask in public, whilst our individual protection is not increased, the populations protection as a whole is increased. However this is dependant upon availability of face masks for everyone, and the supply problems for PPE is currently dictating the governments advice.
Probably not, but all the evidence is pointing to it being very sensible.
Why wait to be told? If you feel its beneficial to wear one, then wear one!! Surely we don't have to wait to be told.Zlatan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 9:23 amA relaxation in lockdown should be accompanied with an enforcement of wearing face masks IMO. It is an altruistic approach. If we are forced to wear a face mask in public, whilst our individual protection is not increased, the populations protection as a whole is increased. However this is dependant upon availability of face masks for everyone, and the supply problems for PPE is currently dictating the governments advice.
For a lockdown to be effective it needs to look and feel like a lockdown to people so they go along with the rest of society.
Would hate it if face masks were to become compulsory (or even commonplace) in this country, even if it means being in lockdown for longer.
Places where social distancing isn't always possible they do evidently have some benefit, so shops, buses etc. Walking round outside at a safe distance they are of no use.
Weather is a huge factor I imagine, I've been cycling nearly every other day (for long term health/medical reasons!) and when it's sunny it's busy.