By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Ok, so watching the newsnight interview (thx whoever suggested watching it) and it seems we are taking the approach of wanting the population to develop immunity.
A few thoughts / questions.
Is this actually our policy or was it just an opinion from an informed advisor?
If CV could kill you, why does it matter if you get it now or in say the autumn?
If there is an overall benefit from herd immunity, why are we emcouraging people of wash hands etc. We should surely be solely nessaging to isolate the vulnerable and encouraging preventative measures for those in contact with the vulnerable? (If we want herd immunity)
Dissenting voices would be all over the media - they already are.
I mean in terms of any experts with connections to the government. They aren't the ones number 10 will be wheeling out at press conferences. For all that expert advice is playing a role, the decisions being taken are ultimately political ones.
I mean in terms of any experts with connections to the government. They aren't the ones number 10 will be wheeling out at press conferences. For all that expert advice is playing a role, the decisions being taken are ultimately political ones.
Not every decision made by a politician is for political reasons.
I mean in terms of any experts with connections to the government. They aren't the ones number 10 will be wheeling out at press conferences. For all that expert advice is playing a role, the decisions being taken are ultimately political ones.
They'd just resign, then be free to say what they liked.
All decisions have to be balanced by practicality. If Johnson and his senior advisers emerged waving their hands in the air screaming "We're all going to die!" before retreating to a secret bunker, the country would dissolve pretty quickly.
Countries that have slowed transmission but still have >95% uninfected will just get a surge in infections when they inevitably lift measures, so you can the logic behind the govt thoughts.
The advice seems remarkably inconsistent to me. If one person in a family develops just one of the symptoms (but you can't be sure as they won't test) they have to self-isolate. Yet the others are free to carry on as normal. How is that effective in either slowing the spread or encouraging herd immunity? It's doesn't focus on either.
The advice seems remarkably inconsistent to me. If one person in a family develops just one of the symptoms (but you can't be sure as they won't test) they have to self-isolate. Yet the others are free to carry on as normal. How is that effective in either slowing the spread or encouraging herd immunity? It's doesn't focus on either.
The family member affected is supposed to go and live in the loft or the shed at the bottom of the garden, so they don't get too close to other family members.
No, I don't know how it's supposed to work, either.
The family member affected is supposed to go and live in the loft or the shed at the bottom of the garden, so they don't get too close to other family members.
No, I don't know how it's supposed to work, either.
What amused me is they said they should use separate bathrooms.
Lucky enough if you have 2 toilets, let alone two whole bathrooms.
My partner and I could maybe do the rest of it, but can't really get away from sharing the bathroom.
What amused me is they said they should use separate bathrooms.
Lucky enough if you have 2 toilets, let alone two whole bathrooms.
My partner and I could maybe do the rest of it, but can't really get away from sharing the bathroom.
Almost as if all these politicians and experts live in a parallel universe....see also grandparents live in a different part of the country so only see the kids if schools close!
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."