I just cannot see the logic behind this. Forget about the fact that I, personally might have had Covid-19 and no longer infectious and also would not go out anyway.
Scenario 1. I meet my daughter, on her own, only in a park, keeping the to the distancing rules. She returns home to her husband and son and a week later, before showing symptoms, infects them also.
Scenario 2. In the distance is my grandson, waiting for his turn to see me, on his own. He returns home and a week later, before showing symptoms, infects the family.
Scenario 3. I meet all 3 of them together in a park, keeping the to the distancing rules. Somehow they all get infected.
The outcome is exactly the same. Am I missing something here, I do not quite understand the logic, scientific or otherwise. Yet with returning to work, the chances of getting infected will be multiplied exponentially.
In actual fact my son in law is classed as a key worker and continued to work in the container docks anyway. But he could be a health worker, a bus driver, any of the other key workers.
Do the gov. and their advisors really know what they are doing?
Written by
2greys
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
No I don’t think they do 2greys. I believe they all think they’re doing their best and I’d certainly not want to be in the position they find themselves in. This is completely new for everyone including those in power, medical and science professionals but we struggle to fight what we cannot see.
Testing, tracing, isolating is what should have happened right at the beginning but it didn’t.
We’re now left to use our common sense, stay 2 metres apart, stay home and stay alert. God help us all.
Front line workers have been taking risks to keep the country going (heroes all), the death rates from the virus are just starting to fall so our government wants us all mixing again. If they open their eyes and ears they will see that other countries who have relaxed restrictions have an increase in the number of deaths.
I do understand opening garden centres and DIY/hardware stores, if distancing is managed, people stuck at home could be doing some jobs around their house and garden. Good for their morale, saves properties falling apart and is just a small boost to the countries economy.
Opening senior schools for children with exams looming, if the school has the staff and resources to cope, may be an idea.
However, people rushing off to spread germs to family/friends from other houses, putting tiny children back into classrooms and expecting them to stay in one corner of a room while their friends are in another corner? Daft. Children should be safe at home. The school staff are doing a great job looking after key worker's children and doing distance learning with others. Keeping in touch by email, telephone with the families of the other pupils.
I believe we should be like the Welsh and Scots, stay in lock down.
Yep, I'm following Welsh and Scottish guidelines. 'Stay alert'! What the heck is that supposed to mean. Those of us not shielded were being extremely alert and still will be. P
I'm following the Welsh guidelines too. I just read in my local paper, The Basingstoke Gazette, that we have one of the highest rates of covid in the UK!
At least my youngest three grandchildren wont be in school as they live in Wales.
Welcome back, and I'm glad that you and your wife have recovered from what must have been a very traumatic experience.
Well, where do I start!? The simple answer to your question is that the new advice avoids the need for the Govt to alter the regulation on gatherings (Reg 7 of SI 2020/350). But this also comes down to an interpretation of what a gathering is (which is not defined in the Regs).
Having spent 36 years enforcing 100s of Regulations, I am all too aware of the difficulty of trying to match the requirements to the risk you are trying to mitigate. Reg 7 restricts gatherings to no more than 2 people but, if the 2m "rule" (which is advice and not law) is designed to mitigate the risk, then it could be argued that standing more than 2m from anyone does not constitute a gathering. It's all about what you are trying to achieve, and this often gets lost in the detail.
I spent most of yesterday evening on The Times forum arguing the point, and one of the most interesting responses I received was as follows:
'Confusion arises because the government rules refer to individuals as being the unit of measure for a "gathering", when really the "household" should be regarded as the unit measure.' If you follow that logic, then an entire household should be able to visit another household, which is actually what is proposed in Step 2 of the Plan. It would seem that the advice to meet one person only is pre-empting Step 2, but keeping within the existing legal framework; it is not actually in the official "OUR PLAN TO REBUILD".
The danger I see in this off-the-cuff new advice, is that some people will see it as an opportunity to embrace an otherwise isolated family member when, in fact, the official guidance still advises 2m social distancing. A more sensible approach would be for the Govt to state that people standing 2m apart does not constitute a gathering, and therefore households can visit each other within that criterion; the risk is no different, and probably less, than shopping in a supermarket!
The police have stated publicly that they cannot enforce this new "advice" (which is a contradiction in itself, as advice is not enforceable), so keeping 2m from other friend and family groups should be acceptable, both legally and in terms of risk. But ultimately it is for the Courts to decide what constitutes a gathering, and the 100s of parties which Manchester Police had to break up last weekend seems a much more important issue than a couple of family groups meeting 2m apart in a park!
Thank you, as I thought there is no difference. 2 M is 2 M, two family groups 2 M apart is no different to 2 groups of strangers, sitting in a park or come to that on a beach, which is in keeping with the rules. All as clear as mud and how would 2 family groups 2M apart be enforceable, the police would would not be able to know. My surname is different to my son in law's, obviously, hence also daughter and grandson. I have not quite recovered from the damage done. In fact my breathing got worse yesterday maybe I overdid things the day before, I had two panic attacks, for the first time in four years.
Sorry to learn you've suffered 2 panic attacks yesterday and you were very busy reading and posting all and everything you came across, that we gratefully read. I'm not saying that in a disrespectable way, rather one of agreement that you maybe pushed yourself too far. To totally recover from COVID19 will take a lot of time so go gently on yourself. 🐿🌈💕
The distancing measures could be enforced.A bus driver can easily restrict the amount of passengers that are allowed on.Face masks have been proved to have a small benefit so should be worn on public transport and a driver can deter those who do not.
More public information films giving clear and concise instructions,Sometimes it can be beneficial to state whats obvious to some but not to others to get the point across e.g. most pavements are 2 metres wide....so one person needs to take a wide berth. Simple, but I see from my window daily those who just walk where they want with total disregard.
I have read that you can be shot in the Phillipines for not conforming to the virus rules.That is very harsh .Lets see how fast there infected numbers increase 👮♂️😯 xx
The problem with TfL buses is that both boarding and and disembarking is done via the center doors only. Very difficult for the driver, at the front, to regulate those getting on.
As 2greys said, most buses are not using the front entrance but if they did and drivers did as you suggest, they run the risk of facing abuse from members of the public not inclined to follow guidelines. I don't know where you live but pavements in my area are certainly not 2 metres wide.
I would not want to be a bus driver at the moment that's for sure.We are a bit behind here, only have single door buses .I would say the pavements outside where I live are that width but they must vary in different areas.I have only been used to staring longingly at mine for the last 8 weeks so have forgotten what the rest of the town is like !! xx
I know the feeling of staring longingly. Knowing that you don't have the option of going out if you want to stay safe just seems to make the longing stronger. xx
The trouble is that someone else's commonsense is never the same as your own commonsense. ! Most in government are not living in the real world , dont know how the majority exist. Entered the world of work as interns to the existing MPs .
We were told yesterday that we were not to expect "lavish holidays abroad". The majority of holidays abroad were in large hotels in extensive resorts with cheap flights and were cheaper than holidays in this country . My own trips abroad to greek islands did not involve these type of holidays but were still cheaper than similar holidays here. That word lavish was a big mistake.
I have noted that in tonight's gov. briefing it the wording has now changed from rule to advise, an important change of tack after this has been discussed widely in the media and the English police have no power to enforce any distancing. Obviously Johnson's cabinet have been pulling the face mask over our eyes with "We'll let them believe ............."
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
xx
xx
advice please coping with relative with severe emphysema
My 4 year old awaiting sleep study for suspected OSA diagnosis
Bronchiectasis update
Sunday’s Poem - Somebody’s Mother
