Easing of lockdown restrictions?

[geogphotos]

4 minutes ago, MDM said:

 

Do I really need to answer that?

 

OK. Just this once. Because it is a highly infectious disease and managing it depends on the cooperation of society as a whole. I  am not thinking of myself alone here but of society as a whole. What one person does affects other people. Covid is an extremely serious disease. Less than 50% of the population of the UK has been vaccinated to date and that is just jab 1 so immunity levels are still very low. Even then, there are new variants arising all the time. This is not over. Let it go now and it will be the same thing all over again, as is happening now in Europe. 

 

 

And other people have other opinions. 

 

 

[MDM]

1 hour ago, geogphotos said:

 

 

And other people have other opinions. 

 

 

Sure, there are people who think Covid is just like flu, that vaccines alter their DNA, that the Earth is flat. In fact I met someone who believes all of those things. Some opinions are harmless. I mean who cares if someone believes the Earth is flat? But if they have opinions that may affect the health of or even cause the deaths of other people, then I would argue that their opinions are not just wrong but potentially dangerous. Anyway enough. Take care. 

Edited March 25, 2021 by MDM

[John Mitchell]

In Canada, each province more or less makes its own policies. We've never had a total lock-down in BC. Restaurants and cafes have remained open with limited seating capacity or just for takeout. Masks are required indoors, on public transit, etc., and people follow this rule. That said, there is now concern about new, more contagious variants of the virus, and there is an uptick in cases because of them. I'm hoping to do some domestic travel (to Montreal) in the fall, but who knows if that will pan out. I certainly won't be venturing south of the 49th parallel or doing any other international travel any time soon.

Edited March 25, 2021 by John Mitchell

[Mr Standfast]

I shall be off to take some pictures in my not as local area. Vaccinated but still Very cautious.

 

 

 

[MDM]

2 minutes ago, Mr Standfast said:

I shall be off to take some pictures in my not as local area. Vaccinated but still Very cautious.

 

 

 

 

Yes. Same here. Just one jab to date and maybe some residual immunity from the disease itself.. I am going to meet a couple of friends outdoors next week and will be travelling by car. I am looking forward to it I must say. 
 

But it will be a long time yet before I head into a London on a train which is something I used to do frequently before the pandemic. 

[MizBrown]

58 minutes ago, MDM said:

Sure, there are people who think Covid is just like flu, that vaccines alter their DNA, that the Earth is flat. In fact I met someone who believes all of those things. Some opinions are harmless. I mean who cares if someone believes the Earth is flat? But if they have opinions that may affect the health of or even cause the deaths of other people, then I would argue that their opinions are not just wrong but potentially dangerous. Anyway enough. Take care. 

 

People are using Nicaragua to "prove" that ignoring the virus made it go away or something.  Nicaraguans wore masks at higher rates than in the US because they're grownups.  Friend said he's only seen one mask evader at a store and the security guard with a shot gun escorted him out.   Nicaragua still has the virus and is vaccinating against it.  All government employees wear masks.  Health professionals wear moon suits in clinics and hospitals.  I find the people trying to use Nicaragua as "proof" that the virus wasn't as dangerous as all that to be particularly annoying.

[CAROL SAUNDERS]

I think people need to do what they are comfortable with.  For me I feel fine going to the supermarket - I'm lucky in that my local Sainsburys is a very large Savacentre with huge aisles and never very busy.  I'm guessing it's because more people are having their shopping delivered.  If that's the case it suits me.  I also use one of the handsets where you scan your shopping as you go around and pack it as you go.  Obviously I sanitise the trolly and handset and myself and wear a mask.  Same applies to M & S and Costco.  I've found them all to be very efficient.  However I know someone who lives even closer to these places and hasn't been out of her flat for over a year.  She has no underlying health conditions and prefers to get her shopping delivered.  Horses for courses.  

 

Anyway, I haven't been to Kew Gardens for age so that might be nice.

 

Carol

[Dave Richards]

16 hours ago, MDM said:

Just because it is legal doesn’t mean it is sensible. If everyone takes that attitude, then it will be back to lockdown in no time. 
 

Meeting people outdoors should be fine from Monday but travelling on public transport unnecessarily would seem to me to be very foolish at this point. You can’t socially distance on trains unless they are almost empty. When is that ever the case in central London? 

I would travel on the Metropolitan line avoiding peak times and the trains are virtually empty then. I won't be changing onto other lines and when I get to Baker Street it will be Shanks pony. Risk is very low. Many people have been travelling into work in central London during peak times throughout the lockdown without major issues.

There is probably more risk involved in going to the supermarket. Usually more people there than I will see on a Met line train at 10 a.m. or 3p.m. which are my planned travelling times outward and returning.

We have to get used to the stated scientific view that this virus is always going to be with us.

Edited March 26, 2021 by Dave Richards
added text.

[spacecadet]

14 hours ago, MDM said:

 

That was or is of course during lockdown.  It won’t be the case if everyone decides to go into central London or wherever by public transport from March 29th. Which means further restrictions down the line. Death rates are still close to 100 a day and confirmed cases 5000 a day in the UK. The pandemic continues lockdown or not, like it or not. 
 

 

Some are highly risk- averse, some less so. That does not necessarily mean their opinions are "wrong or dangerous".

Some may have "opinions" about the day I spent in the company of over 100 people recently. Looked at one way through a risk-averse prism it seems a bit hazardous, to say the least. But looked at through the prism of the film industry's 25-page protocol, where everyone is tested twice a week, wears FFP2 masks, where the cast bubble together for the duration of the shoot, hand-sanitisers on entry and exit, boxed catering and designated spaces, it looks different. The production on which I worked has not had a positive test in 8 weeks. En route, at the shoot, and on the train back to Euston, I wore a mask for 13 hours straight ( with breaks- the protocol requires a "breather" every 75 minutes). If you want to work in my business these are the facts of life. I do want to work- and I need to. Everyone I spoke to on set was simply delighted to be able to work again.

And London is not a plague pit. The trains must be some of the cleanest places in the universe. I for one am not about to start treating my fellow citizens as a problem. Any more than I usually do.

Edited March 26, 2021 by spacecadet

[Phil Crean]

27 minutes ago, spacecadet said: But looked at through the prism of the film industry's 25-page protocol, where everyone is tested twice a week, wears FFP2 masks, where the cast bubble together for the duration of the shoot, hand-sanitisers on entry and exit, boxed catering and designated spaces, it looks different. The production on which I worked has not had a positive test in 8 weeks. En route, at the shoot, and on the train back to Euston, I wore a mask for 13 hours straight ( with breaks- the protocol requires a "breather" every 75 minutes). If you want to work in my business these are the facts of life. I do want to work- and I need to. Everyone I spoke to on set was simply delighted to be able to work again.

 

I had a similar experience last week working alongside a TV crew for 3 days. We were a crew of 6; + 3 from the TV company, art director/producers; + 5 talent and management/trainers. All went extremely well and I felt totally at ease the whole time. It is possible with the right controls and attitudes, but unfortunately outside a controlled environment we are dependant on others good behaviour.

Phil

[MDM]

44 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

Some are highly risk- averse, some less so. That does not necessarily mean their opinions are "wrong or dangerous".

Some may have "opinions" about the day I spent in the company of over 100 people recently. Looked at one way through a risk-averse prism it seems a bit hazardous, to say the least. But looked at through the prism of the film industry's 25-page protocol, where everyone is tested twice a week, wears FFP2 masks, where the cast bubble together for the duration of the shoot, hand-sanitisers on entry and exit, boxed catering and designated spaces, it looks different. The production on which I worked has not had a positive test in 8 weeks. En route, at the shoot, and on the train back to Euston, I wore a mask for 13 hours straight ( with breaks- the protocol requires a "breather" every 75 minutes). If you want to work in my business these are the facts of life. I do want to work- and I need to. Everyone I spoke to on set was simply delighted to be able to work again.

And London is not a plague pit. The trains must be some of the cleanest places in the universe. I for one am not about to start treating my fellow citizens as a problem. Any more than I usually do.

 

Just to clarify again. Firstly, I was talking about unnecessary journeys on public transport, not journeys for work. So a lot of what you say does not really apply to this discussion which is about relaxation of the lockdown restrictions and more specifically now about what happens on March 29th. I would have done the same as you. 

 

Secondly, I was not talking specifically about London but about public transport in general. London came up as an example but the same applies everywhere. It is not about cleanliness of the trains or buses either (the fomite thing seems to have been something of a red herring although apparently there is still a risj of transmission from surfaces). It is about being in confined spaces with other people for extended periods of time. 

 

In relation to March 29th, there is no longer a legal requirement to stay local, whatever that means in England. Local has never been defined in England duting the current lockdown as far as I know. The advice appears to have been local means local and we all know what that means (ring any bells🤔?). The main emphasis from Monday is on outdoor activities and there is no mention in the government guidance as to how one should get to the locations where these activities can take place. So it will not be illegal to travel out of your area but the question is: is it ethical and responsible to use public transport to do so? It is my opinion that it is not in general the responsible or ethical thing to do. 

 

So it is not about the risk of me getting Covid again if I travel on public transport. No, it is about society as a whole but it is down to individual decisions. The chances of Dave getting Covid from his journey are probably very small but the chances of Dave getting Covid if 1000 Daves decide to do a journey on public transport next week, that they would not have done up to now during lockdown, are much higher. And that one infected Dave will probably infect another Dave or his wife or mother. And on it goes.

 

Thankfully we still live in a free society and it is up to individuals to decide. Hopefully the vast majority of people will make sensible decisions that take society as a whole into consideration. 

 

 

EDIT - And let's not forget the much higher risk to those who have to travel to work on public transport if (when) the numbers of people travelling for recreational purposes increase shortly.

Edited March 26, 2021 by MDM

[spacecadet]

It's all very well for us with our own vehicles, big houses and gardens, but it's hardly fair to say to someone who has been under virtual house arrest, for most of a year, in a small flat, with no garden and little green space, that their lawful day out on public transport (not in the private car they can't afford) isn't ethical and responsible.

Edited March 26, 2021 by spacecadet

[Ed Rooney]

23 hours ago, Jansos said:

With the potential easing of lockdown restrictions in the UK on the horizon, and with the 17th May listed as the earliest possible date for a foreign holiday, what will be the first thing you want to go out and take a picture of? For me, I plan on spending the day walking around central London. There is always something unexpected to snap!

 

Like you, John, I wander and discover. Although I'll have a mask and be keeping my distance, I'm looking forward to streets with people and alfresco dining -- the simple things. 

[meanderingemu]

2 hours ago, spacecadet said:

It's all very well for us with our own vehicles, big houses and gardens, but it's hardly fair to say to someone who has been under virtual house arrest, for most of a year, in a small flat, with no garden and little green space, that their lawful day out on public transport (not in the private car they can't afford) isn't ethical and responsible.

 

 

though i agree about the inherent discrimination throughout most of the lock-downs towards people with better means ("those with our own vehicles, big houses and gardens"), i do think there is always ethics left even if actions doing what is legal.  Where I am we had easing of restrictions a month ago, and though i am one of those without "own vehicles, big houses and gardens", i still have the ethical and moral dilemma in using public transport for personal needs when others have to use it for essential functions, and this gets more these days as we are now seeing the impact of the easing and daily cases more than doubling over the period.   This is not a judgement, this is actually what ethics is.  

 

 

 

 

Edited March 26, 2021 by meanderingemu

[NYCat]

Living in New York City means I cannot avoid being around people if I leave my apartment. My main approach to this situation is to look after my health with good food, adequate rest, supplements (especially vitamin D3) and just looking after myself with masking and getting some things with "no contact" delivery. I have been breaking one "rule" from the beginning. I have a once a week yoga session with a friend of mine who has a large loft. She also lives alone and takes good care of her health. I can't imagine what it would have been like if I really didn't have any in person contact with another human being. I feel very fortunate in that my finances have not been badly hit and I live in a very comfortable situation.

 

Paulette

[meanderingemu]

2 hours ago, NYCat said:

Living in New York City means I cannot avoid being around people if I leave my apartment. My main approach to this situation is to look after my health with good food, adequate rest, supplements (especially vitamin D3) and just looking after myself with masking and getting some things with "no contact" delivery. I have been breaking one "rule" from the beginning. I have a once a week yoga session with a friend of mine who has a large loft. She also lives alone and takes good care of her health. I can't imagine what it would have been like if I really didn't have any in person contact with another human being. I feel very fortunate in that my finances have not been badly hit and I live in a very comfortable situation.

 

Paulette

 

 

Nicely put.  I do think the "breaking on rule" is important, in the sense you are taking awareness of it.  We all take risks in our lives, and some are more comfortable with them, i think it gets to an issue is when people don't realise they are taking risks.  Our leadership has moved to a lax rules approach people will use their judgement, the issue is I have seen many people confused this with if they are allowing it, it must be safe.  

 

A few weeks ago I was talking to someone in the park who doesn't follow the details of the pandemic and he said one thing that hit me at the time, "I see shops just all reopen, so that most mean everything is now fine".   It never dawned to him that the reasons of actions from leadership could be other than his own safety, he truly believe the government would not make such a decision if it was still risky.  

 

One of the biggest failure of this pandemic to me has been communication.  

[Jansos]

6 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

 

Like you, John, I wander and discover. Although I'll have a mask and be keeping my distance, I'm looking forward to streets with people and alfresco dining -- the simple things. 

👍 - Yup, the bare necessities!

[Betty LaRue]

I have had a few small family gatherings.So far, a total of 4 people together.  My son, recently moved to my area, now oversees 300 people under him in his job.  He visits me weekends. My son-in-law works in the aircraft industry and has contact with others. They could get infected...and then I could.

I’m in my home 99% of the time. I have successfully eaten out twice recently only after the infection rate has shot down, in an almost empty restaurant.  The risk of me infecting anyone is almost non-existent. Some might take issue with “almost”

 

Like Paulette, I live alone. No spouse. If I didn’t have some contact with family occasionally, I’d go mad. And that is from a person who is basically a loner, which has greatly helped me through this. I can’t imagine what the pandemic has done to the mental well-being of those who are social by nature.

We all must realize that the results of this virus isn’t just in our getting it, being mildly to severely ill, dying or having long-Covid or infecting others. It’s taking a toll on mental health from being confined. Children are being especially affected. Abuse has skyrocketed. Suicide is up. Money issues. Shops going out of business, many to never return, and their employees no longer having a job. The country’s economy. And people neglecting important medical exams, first from the shutdown, then fear of infection. Cancers have gone undiagnosed and metastasized because people were unable to see their doctors, or were afraid to. My neighbor is an example of that with caveats.

 

There needs to be a balance somehow, while trying to weigh needs. There are issues beyond our own personal fears and judgments.

I try not to judge, and I try to realize that each of us have different needs. I don’t know what my neighbor has gone through in his personal life that affects his behavior. So if I see him standing close to another neighbor in his yard visiting without a mask, that's perfectly fine with me, and far be it for me to think he’s an idiot.

[Colblimp]

Here in Ireland, the country has been in level 5 lockdown since 30th December.  People aren't allowed to travel beyond 5km from their homes, all non-essential retail is closed, we must work from home if possible, etc, etc.  There is going to be a partial lifting of restrictions on 5th April, allegedly, although case numbers are still very high - yesterday for example there were 20 deaths and 584 new cases, which doesn't seem high, but when one takes into account the population...

 

Of course, none of this affects me as I hold a press pass, although I've been very careful - wearing a mask all the time, trying to keep my distance, sanitising etc, etc. 

[spacecadet]

I have another viewing session booked on the Steenbeck this afternoon. So we have visitors! Exempt from restrictions of course as they are paying, and as anyone old enough to have shot 16mm. film is now old enough to be vaccinated, no worries there. But they will have a squeaky clean loo to themselves.

[MDM]

37 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

and as anyone old enough to have shot 16mm. film is now old enough to be vaccinated, no worries there. 

Presumably you mean that because they have been vaccinated there is no risk of them carrying and transmitting the disease. This is one of the great misconceptions about vaccines. This article on the BBC website is excellent in explaining this. Asymptomatic transmission from vaccinated individuals can still be a very significant risk.  Unless you have received two jabs yourself, your immunity level may still be relatively low and even then no vaccine is 100% effective. There is also the risk of new variants against which the current vaccines are ineffective. 

[MDM]

3 hours ago, Colblimp said:

Here in Ireland, the country has been in level 5 lockdown since 30th December.  People aren't allowed to travel beyond 5km from their homes, all non-essential retail is closed, we must work from home if possible, etc, etc.  There is going to be a partial lifting of restrictions on 5th April, allegedly, although case numbers are still very high - yesterday for example there were 20 deaths and 584 new cases, which doesn't seem high, but when one takes into account the population...

 

Of course, none of this affects me as I hold a press pass, although I've been very careful - wearing a mask all the time, trying to keep my distance, sanitising etc, etc. 

Ireland really screwed up in its management of the pandemic by relaxing the rules for Christmas. The same happened here in England but to a lesser relative extent perhaps because Bojo and his pals decided to heed the expert scientific advice and reversed the earlier decision to relax at the last minute. 
 

Before the relaxation, Ireland had one of the best records in the world on case rates and death rates but it went to the top of the league shortly after Christmas (if only they could pass this trick on to the football team). This was an incredible reversal and it cost the country dearly.  It beats me completely why anyone could ever think that a society could take a holiday from this virus and Ireland has learned a sorry lesson, too late for those who have died or been stricken with long Covid. 

 

It is human nature to let go when people have lived under strict restrictions for so long but this has to be done with great caution. Derestrict too rapidly, bend or break the rules for selfish reasons  and it will almost certainly be the same old story again. 

Edited March 27, 2021 by MDM

[spacecadet]

16 minutes ago, MDM said:

Presumably you mean that because they have been vaccinated there is no risk of them carrying and transmitting the disease. This is one of the great misconceptions about vaccines. This article on the BBC website is excellent in explaining this. Asymptomatic transmission from vaccinated individuals can still be a very significant risk.  Unless you have received two jabs yourself, your immunity level may still be relatively low and even then no vaccine is 100% effective. There is also the risk of new variants against which the current vaccines are ineffective. 

I thought very carefully about using the expression "no worries" as I was expecting this. I decided that I am still allowed to speak colloquially on the forum. Thanks for the lecture but I'm well aware of the arguments and I do have two brain cells to rub together! I have also read the news today about hospital admission after vaccination suggesting a fair amount of protection two weeks after the first dose.

There has to come a time when we can go about our lives and manages the risk and after last year I for one need the income.

Edited March 27, 2021 by spacecadet

[MDM]

 

29 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

I thought very carefully about using the expression "no worries" as I was expecting this. I decided that I am still allowed to speak colloquially on the forum. Thanks for the lecture but I'm well aware of the arguments and I do have two brain cells to rub together! I have also read the news today about hospital admission after vaccination suggesting a fair amount of protection two weeks after the first dose.

There has to come a time when we can go about our lives and manages the risk and after last year I for one need the income.

Apologies if I misinterpreted you. I think the majority if not the vast majority of people think that vaccination means that the recipients are no longer infectious which is why I posted that link. I do not doubt your intelligence. 
 

The vaccines appear to give high levels of protection against severe Covid (hospitalisation level) but there is a huge range beyond that. When I talk about how long Covid has affected my life, it is simply to provide a first hand perspective, as Covid can appear very remote if one has never been directly affected by it. That is really the reason I am so cautious now and trying to caution others. 
 

As I said previously, I agree with you on the need to work so no worries there. I am as keen to move on and get back towards normality as anyone. 

[meanderingemu]

1 hour ago, MDM said:

Presumably you mean that because they have been vaccinated there is no risk of them carrying and transmitting the disease. This is one of the great misconceptions about vaccines. This article on the BBC website is excellent in explaining this. Asymptomatic transmission from vaccinated individuals can still be a very significant risk.  Unless you have received two jabs yourself, your immunity level may still be relatively low and even then no vaccine is 100% effective. There is also the risk of new variants against which the current vaccines are ineffective. 

 

also even if all people in your activity are vaccinated, there is issue of increasing interactions from non-vaccinated to support the activity, and therefore more chance of variants developing, and having to start all over depending how effective vaccines are to said variants. 

 

Yes we will be able to increase our activities, but i still am worried when I see some of the expectations of return to same as before once developed world has been 70% vaccinated....