Yeah, sorry - I do try not to get involved in the political side (mainly because it will go on all day and there are plenty of other forums available for those discussions (bit being a safe haven of sorts), but also because I agree with varying parts of the argument from many of the different sides so I'd end up either being called contradictory or clueless, which isn't the case, it's just difficult to prove without a seven page back-and-forth) so reading that quote just kind of got my goat a bit. Off-topic, I think I did one of those quizzes once about which policies one agrees with and ended up confusing the actual questionnaire itself. It probably said "just stay away from the polling booths" or something. Although I think our politics may differ, I completely agree with your explanation re: the reportage aspect and the general ineptness of the DM. Jesus, my Dad gets the paper because the sport coverage is half decent and my Mum keeps giving me cuttings from it to explain how the internet is evil and spreading viruses. In fact, the next ones she gives me, Corona-related or otherwise, I'll post on here because that now makes it topical. But yes, back on point - I have a real issue with that front page and the fish sandwich clown (that being the more family-friendly c-word option). I'm unable to re-tweet anything, but I'll quote from a response to the same tweet you posted (I might even be able to do this properly formatted): FFS. That pretty much sums it up.
Even Pret themselves are trying to distance themselves from Metcalfe's comments - Tweet— Twitter API (@user) date
So the rates are increasing dramatically worldwide, some countries that were being touted as offering a better way of managing the crisis are now seeing increasing rates too. Does anyone see any alternative to further national lockdowns? Considering we aren't even in the peak of flu season, I can't see many other options for us here in the UK. Local lockdowns are great in principle but it seems to be creating confusion on what we can and can't do. Then there are those who choose to ignore all advice and rules...
Some countries were touted as managing it better because they had lower death rates, they still do. We're up to the hundreds of dead again every day and that is basically locked in for at least another two weeks whilst the effect of local lockdowns does whatever it does, keep in mind that the scientists advising government said tier 3 was insufficient. Local lockdowns seem consistent with the government's message of inconsistency.
South Korea and New Zealand are doing ok, as examples. Going hard quickly seems to help along with good quarantine procedures, a working test and trace and restricting air travel. Kiwi mate texted some photos of her and her kids at a concert the other day, no masks and in a crowd.
I did that one quite near the beginning of lockdown. The result not being individually accurate enough to give a result you should change your actions according to doesn't mean the data collected isn't statistically useful for what they are researching or trying to achieve.
So it seems the internationally accepted strategy is now to shut down your country periodically until a vaccine makes it all go away but not worry about the consequences as we can all get paid by our governments and leave the bill with our kids. "Saving Christmas" doesn't make any sense. Are we supposed to shut down for weeks just to have a week off work infecting relatives? How bad is the situation exactly? Does it really matter if the virus runs rife in the university halls if they mostly aren't getting that ill. Is this about managing the disease or the infection statistics?
In July and August we had daily hospital admissions down to double digits in England, currently we are back up to over 1000. Sauce: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/healthcare
Because they haven't been briefed, they heard from a mate of a friend who sells dogs down at his local boozer who overheard it from the chips shop aunt. What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.
"Mostly" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. How many deaths would you deem acceptable? How many people with long-term respiratory and cardiac complications? What about the staff, who are considerably more likely to have a severe case requiring hospitalisation? What about when our darling little plaguebearers pop to the shops, or go to the pub, or go home to family?
I dunno, how about you ask the affected families of the ~1 million dead people who, without COVID, probably wouldn't have died alone and in agony as they drown in their own blood.
Doing things early and thoroughly with a working track and trace system and quarantine procedure helps. In other news, simple humour still exists thankfully. Tweet— Twitter API (@user) date
