Be “jolly careful” at Christmas. Restrictions until March. Hoping most of those who need protection will be vaccinated by Easter. Some mixed metaphors about hearing the cavalry coming and seeing the oasis on the horizon?
My worry: With the certainty of post Christmas lockdowns/restrictions and possibility of vaccines not being widespread until Easter, will people “go mad” over the Christmas freedom days?
The problem with all this assessment of risk stuff, is not only are we very bad at it, but more importantly, many people don't think, or, if they do, only think of themselves. Christmas will be an ideal excuse to meet lots of folks, putting others at risk, but who cares about them. Several colleagues and I who have been providing expertise to the Government, have today resigned, because what is planned for Christmas, is clearly unsafe, and is just rampant populism. A very sensible journalist today suggested we scrap Christmas and had a week long extra holiday next summer.
How can you lie there and think of England When you don't even know who's in the team
I am sorry to hear that you have resigned @punkdoc but at the same time thank you for making a stand. I value your opinion and information, and this has helped me cement my belief that un-locking is a bad idea.
From what I've read, part of the reason that the government have decided to relax the rules over Christmas is based on the widespread (and personally I think correct) assumption that if they don't a large proportion of the population will just ignore the rules - including a lot of people who have followed the rules so far. This has the knock on effect that these people, having ignored the rules for the first time for them, will then be more likely to ignore rules again in the future. If this is correct then, if they don't relax the rules, the infection rate will increase anyway over Christmas and it will be more difficult to control subsequently.
@Dovefromabove I wasn’t referring to illegal activities. There are laws to make things safer but there are a great many activities which are potentially dangerous which we take part in every day, we assess the risk and decide we will take it. We drive cars and motorbikes despite the high risk of fatality if we crash, people use guns for sport or sharp knives to cook, people continue to smoke cigarettes. Every day someone has an accident while doing diy, we swim in the sea where we know there are sharks and jump out of aeroplanes and climb mountains for fun. My point is we have a choice and our choices are being taken from us. We are being given our information from a government many people see as corrupt and dishonest so obviously many people don’t believe what they are being told and the lockdown goes against our basic human desires, to see the people we care about and to enjoy life.
The risk from the virus is small - 600,000 people in the UK die annually anyway - 1% of the population dies of something. Even if another 600,000 died of Covid that only doubles the risk. My risk goes from 1 in 100 to a 1 in 50 chance of dying of something. The current rate of Covid death hardly changes the figures. Fine.
I am are not unduly worried by that per se because I still check when I cross the road as I don't want to be hit by a bus, I don't tamper with electrics or gas if I don't know what I'm doing, I have a flu jab, I have a stroke check up...I manage the risks I 'see'. We all do.
My problem (and this is only my way of looking at it) - is that I don't have a safe guard against Covid. Like crossing the road when the cars are all electric and invisible - so no sight or sound - I have to take a random guess when to cross. But I can be safe - if the rest of the world abides by the rules - if I cross at a regulated crossing. The quiet, invisible cars stop on red, I cross, and all is well in the world. There may not be a car there when I cross, but it doesn't matter does it?
Even if Christmas is 'just another' day - which it is - my perception of the 'invisible risk' rises because of that day's perceived importance. I know I will go to a supermarket that is busier, the goods will have been touched more. I know people around me will have gone to pubs more. I know some will have kids who have come back from Uni and travelled on public transport. I know people are bored with lockdown and don't care as much anymore. More people will get the virus because of the day called 'Christmas' - which is just another day.
Again, I know the risk to me is small - BUT - I do the lottery. I know the chance of winning is minuscule, but weirdly, somebody wins it. It happens - randomly. I see a car crash and I know my chances of being involved in an accident are small - but it happened to that person. They didn't expect to be in an accident either. People are catching Covid - even though the numbers say their risk is minimal - and they never expected to catch it.
@steveTu no, honestly, I do understand where your line of thinking is, and I hear variations on the logic all the time. Unfortunately I haven't got enough time now to articulate a short but clear enough response/paradigm. You do have safeguards against covid, you just choose not to apply them because the cost of mitigation is too high (I could provide a strategy to eliminate covid from the UK within 28 days, for no additional direct cost, but the requirement to execute would be unacceptable to the majority of the population). You play the lottery because your perception of winning sufficiently outweighs the cost of £1 entry, even though you know you're more likely to [insert incredibly unlikely scenario here]. The fallacy of "well somebody wins/gets the virus/whatever" is a misinterpretation of statistics and maths, and that misunderstanding has been well documented (and exploited for years by insurance companies, casinos, magicians and so on). Derren Brown uses it extensively.
@punkdoc the issue is, as @Singing Gardener says, this country is policed by consent. Vast numbers of people will simply disobey an instruction to stay apart on Christmas day. The psychological impact of that makes the rule easier to break in future, with mass civil disobedience having significant effect on everything. Better to accept the lesser of 2 evils, enabling at least some measure of control, than to try and King Canute our way through it.
Disappointed to hear you've resigned, as we need all the expertise we can get.
I totally agree that the numbers say I won't (? very unlikely to) catch the virus. My chance of even knowing anyone where I live who has been officially recognised to have the virus is remote. The stats tell me that. The stats also told that person who died in hospital that - but the numbers don't given you a magical amulet. I'm not misinterpreting the stats - I see and know the stats.
The hospitals will fill this winter. More people will die than normal (it doesn't really matter of what does it?). Irrespective of what the stats on Covid say - we have limits on resource. Moving people around the country (Unis closing), opening hospitality - and then without having time to see the effect of that - opening up family mixing at Christmas - is just such bad timing and it will, however unlikely, cause loads of people to catch the virus.
Christmas to the vast majority is just a term. We are not pre-dominantly a 'religious' Christian country any more - we are more Masonic and 'speculative'. So why not incentivise Christmas holiday in June? - we're having extra holiday for Queenie, so we could have done the same and moved the festivities. But I would guess the move to open Christmas as much as possible isn't 'religious' either, but more about business and the economy.
Posts
Be “jolly careful” at Christmas.
Restrictions until March.
Hoping most of those who need protection will be vaccinated by Easter.
Some mixed metaphors about hearing the cavalry coming and seeing the oasis on the horizon?
My worry:
With the certainty of post Christmas lockdowns/restrictions and possibility of vaccines not being widespread until Easter, will people “go mad” over the Christmas freedom days?
Christmas will be an ideal excuse to meet lots of folks, putting others at risk, but who cares about them.
Several colleagues and I who have been providing expertise to the Government, have today resigned, because what is planned for Christmas, is clearly unsafe, and is just rampant populism.
A very sensible journalist today suggested we scrap Christmas and had a week long extra holiday next summer.
When you don't even know who's in the team
S.Yorkshire/Derbyshire border
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
@punkdoc the issue is, as @Singing Gardener says, this country is policed by consent. Vast numbers of people will simply disobey an instruction to stay apart on Christmas day. The psychological impact of that makes the rule easier to break in future, with mass civil disobedience having significant effect on everything. Better to accept the lesser of 2 evils, enabling at least some measure of control, than to try and King Canute our way through it.
Disappointed to hear you've resigned, as we need all the expertise we can get.