Omicron could be the Covid end game.....

[Lucan Unlordly]

In fact I can remember the moment when I realised I had to work for myself was when a colleague of mine who was by common consent rather useless but was an infamous CBL (Creepy Bum Lick) was promoted over me, whereas I told it how it was even if it was not what the bosses wanted to hear.

There's a marked difference in speaking out when you KNOW something is wrong, based on personal experience, knowledge and qualifications and the situation we face now, whether we are business people or not, and that's our lack of actual understanding of virology!

 

[Justin Smith]

We are going to have to agree to disagree you are your own boss and you won't see all the stakeholders involved your business as I do.
That very statement "I am my own boss" in my opinion is the problem that causes so many people to start their own business with unrealistic expectations. People who perhaps should not do so go ahead with these dreams of world domination from watching Dragons Den and so on.

Right from the start my number one motivation for working for myself was so nobody else was telling me what to do. And I can honestly say it's panned out very well in that direction.
Do I run a successful business ? Well I don't make a huge amount but we are still here over 25 years later, we are one of the last specialist aerial retailers still going and our Google reviews are pretty much all 5 stars, so we must be doing something right. The fact is I like going to work, I look forward to it, I don't actually work that hard, and we all have a laugh. But, as I said, the best thing is nobody tells me what to do, though, ironically, I actually want to do what my customers want me to do, but it is my choice.
The bottom line is that if I shut my business the wife would make me get a real job, so that is never going to happen !

Just because some people do not use masks properly does not mean that all masks are a waste of time. The more people wear masks, the less the virus is transmitted. The more people are vaccinated, the less virus goes around. The more people help each other by doing these simple things the better off we are.

It didn't make any difference in Wales and Scotland, different areas of the same country. They actually did worse than England on their Covid stats.

There's a marked difference in speaking out when you KNOW something is wrong, based on personal experience, knowledge and qualifications and the situation we face now, whether we are business people or not, and that's our lack of actual understanding of virology!

That is to miss the point entirely. You misunderstand where these "experts" are coming from. Whitty and the rest are only really bothered about Covid stats, but that is their job so you cannot blame them for being so blinkered. They are not bothered about the economy or the damage to society or the effect on people's enjoyment of life. It is also that they don't want to be blamed if there is a big wave, and as they are not on the hook for the collateral damage of restrictions, so they obviously recommend harsh actions. It's not the scientists who are to blame though it is the government. They should not be saying "we will be led by the science" because, by definition, that will mean we will always be over reacting to Covid. And that is why we are where we are.

 

[Justin Smith]

I think I understand where you are heading now. To line up all the old and infirm people in front of a firing squad and be done with it, after all a few bullets might miss yes?

I only just saw this, it is rather contemptible is it not ?
The fact is that people who are vaccinated, or healthy and under 40, are so much more likely to die of something other than Covid that it is irrational to significantly change their lives to slightly lower their chances of catching it, because that is about the best they can hope for.

Whether we like it or not, we the public and the media ripped the Government to pieces over inaction and taking risks at the start of the pandemic. Some would argue we've got what we asked for now, an abundance of caution.

I certainly never asked for an abundance of caution, and if we keep that "can't be too careful" strategy up we will be in this for years, possibly forever. People are coming to think of the totally abnormal as normal and it is exceptionally worrying. This story really brings it home :

Bloodstock: Heavy metal fans emotional at festival's return

Bloodstock: Heavy metal fans emotional at festival's return

Last year's edition had to take place online, but head-bangers are enjoying the big comeback.

www.bbc.co.uk

"I think the whole rock community realises how privileged they are to have a festival this year."

Let's get this right, they feel "privileged" to be allowed to do something they have never been banned from doing ever before in the history of the world. If that doesn't make people think, then they don't understand what is actually going on....

 

[Justin Smith]

Lockdown will happen just after Christmas and well into the new year.

Sadly I am beginning to think you could be right. The one positive is the number of Tory MPs who rebelled at bringing in "Plan B", Johnson will still get it through with supine Labours support, but it will look very bad and his future as PM will be decidedly temporary because the Tories will get rid of him.
Not that I will lockdown anyway, I will do my utmost to keep living my life as normally as possible and one can only hope many pother people do so too. But the local swimming pool will probably shut and that will make me very angry indeed.

So you think that news story about The Bloodstock Festival is not in the least worrying ?
If you do not I would respectfully suggest you do not understand what is happening to the world......

 

[Ozzy]

So you think that news story about The Bloodstock Festival is not in the least worrying ?

Nope, not in the way you do.

If you do not I would respectfully suggest you do not understand what is happening to the world.....

Something else we shall have differing opinions on.

 

[Justin Smith]

To get this thread back on track, I still think Omicron will be the end game. If it is as infectious as they say then we cannot stop it so :
1 - If we cannot stop it why are we continuing to try and suppress society when we are basically just ****ing in the wind?
2 - It won't be long before everyone has had it which means two things (A) greater immunity, but also, possibly more important, (B) more confidence. All these people clamouring to shut down society to protect them won't be quite so keen on being stopped from going to the cinema (or where ever) if they have already had it and therefore do not fear it as much.

I can remember making a post on the Diamond Princess Covid outbreak and commenting that either Covid must be less deadly than they say, or it really can't be as infectious as they say it is. Well it would seem that for the Alpha variant the latter is certainly true, certainly compared with Omicron it would seem.

 

[fisicx]

Regarding your point 1: you have totally missed the point (again)
And point 2: nobody is clamouring to shut down society.

 

[MarkOnline]

@Justin Smith
You have a rather strange view of the world around you. When you worked for someone (before you found total freedom self employed) were they out to get you too?
Sometimes individuals have to do things they may not normally do for the benefit of the society of which they are a part. Do you not think the strong should try to protect the weak, even if it means a certain level of sacrifice to do so?

 

[Justin Smith]

@Justin Smith
You have a rather strange view of the world around you. When you worked for someone (before you found total freedom self employed) were they out to get you too?
Sometimes individuals have to do things they may not normally do for the benefit of the society of which they are a part. Do you not think the strong should try to protect the weak, even if it means a certain level of sacrifice to do so?

I'm in my mid 50s and I didn't want any of this suppression of society even before I was jabbed and my chances of the chop from a Covid infection were probably about 1 in 200. NOW, after pretty much all those vulnerable to Covid have been jabbed, there really aren't that many people with a risk greater then the one I was prepared to accept for myself. So any argument about the strong protecting the weak is fatuous, they simply don't need protecting anymore. It's now more about those with high risk aversion telling the rest of us (who want to get on with our lives) what draconian measures they think we should be forced to adhere to.
Ballcox to that, they can stay behind their sofas if they want (though they really do not need to).

Funny (not) how this huge anti lockdown protest march wasn't on the Beeb ? How can anyone say they are an unbiased news organisation ? I've gone right of the BBC, scrap the licence fee I say, get rid of them (and I used to be a BBC fan).

https://twitter.com/x/status/1472318737181200395

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

I have a relative who works at the local hospital, one floor down from the Covid Wards which are allegedly filling up with Anti-Vaxers, those who haven't got round to it yet, those who didn't get the second jab.

 

[Ozzy]

You have a rather strange view of the world around you.

It does take all sorts to make the world go round, or spin as it's probably flat.

Ballcox to that, they can stay behind their sofas if they want

I'll give my mother a call now and tell her that's what she should do because someone thinks it's all a big conspiracy to control the population. She'll understand.

 

[MikeJ]

Good news source - Darren Grimes
Bad news source - BBC

 

[Ozzy]

Every news source is run by people who cannot help but have their own opinion.
I'd say always read a range of news sources and then somewhere in the middle you'll find a closer version to the truth.
Except Facebook. Facebook is filled with flat Earther's and conspiracy theorists who think the vaccine contains nano bots to control our minds.

 

[MikeJ]

Just tested positive on a lateral flow test.

Merry Christmas everyone

 

[simon field]

Just tested positive on a lateral flow test.

Merry Christmas everyone

Unlucky! However, most people seem to bend the rules when it suits them. Are you one of those?

Hope you brush it off.

 

[Ian J]

Lockdown will happen just after Christmas and well into the new year.

And who is going to pay for yet another round of expensive furlough

 

[UKSBD]

And who is going to pay for yet another round of expensive furlough

The government are hoping for self imposed shut down.

Make enough people too worried to go out and it’s not practical for hospitality to stay open.

If it’s an official lockdown the government will have to provide financial support, if hospitality chooses to shutdown, then no support.

 

[Ozzy]

UKBF, along with the FSB and other organisations, is pushing the message for financial support for business which is getting media coverage. Message along with comments from several UKBF members also gone to a number of supportive MP's last week too.

 

[Paul Norman]

Lockdown will happen just after Christmas and well into the new year.

I suspect this is correct. And it will not be confined to the UK.

And there will not be the level of financial help we saw before. It's reality time.

 

[cjd]

Does government have a routine social security role for businesses now?

We spend most of our time telling government to back off and leave business to get on with it. 'Light touch, low tax' was the chant. Then when stuff like this happens we want mummy to protect us.

It's a bit of a conundrum, how can you have low taxation, low regulation but expect payment for being unproductive? How can every industry be a special case?

 

[simon field]

Does government have a routine social security role for businesses now?

We spend most of our time telling government to back off and leave business to get on with it. 'Light touch, low tax' was the chant. Then when stuff like this happens we want mummy to protect us.

It's a bit of a conundrum, how can you have low taxation, low regulation but expect payment for being unproductive? How can every industry be a special case?

Surely if the government decides to restrict (or close) perfectly good businesses, then the should compensate them?

 

[Ozzy]

how can you have low taxation, low regulation but expect payment for being unproductive?

I feel the difference is between businesses which are perfectly viable but become unviable through a decision made by Government (irrespective of people's opinion on whether it was right or wrong to make), and businesses which were not viable in the first place. Taking some hospitality venues for example, I'm supposed to be attending a wedding on the 28th with hundreds of guests. That venue will lose a lot of income if a lockdown is called - that sort business I'd say would need support.

Plenty of other business maybe not so.

 

[cjd]

I feel the difference is between businesses which are perfectly viable but become unviable through a decision made by Government (irrespective of people's opinion on whether it was right or wrong to make), and businesses which were not viable in the first place. Taking some hospitality venues for example, I'm supposed to be attending a wedding on the 28th with hundreds of guests. That venue will lose a lot of income if a lockdown is called - that sort business I'd say would need support.

Plenty of other business maybe not so.

If government intervenes to prevent trading, then the business needs to be compensated, but if punters are just making their own decisions about what they feel safe doing - as is the case now - I think it's less obvious.

 

[IanSuth]

Speaking as an ex motorbiker I'd have thought the increase in risk of death from not wearing a helmet whilst riding would be huge, plus 25% or even more ? So we have a massive increase in one's chances of avoiding death for a pretty small change in ones life (wearing a helmet).

Actually no

As a until recently active paid up MAG member i read a lot of the research. Generally speaking you should read about "Risk Aversion Theory", the general concept is that everyone has an inherent level of perceived risk they are happy with (it is not constant and can change), if you feel safer due to your helmet and leathers you are more likely to ride in a riskier way because subconsciously you brain is basically saying "I am happy with x% chance of a injury today", the same theory has been used to say a spike in the centre of every steering wheel would do as much for road safety as an airbag. (PS I can happily ride without a lid in summer but cant even go a few yards without gloves - likely as a mate skinned his hand when we were 17)

How is this relevant to this debate

Well when everyone thought they might die or at least kill their granny the perceived risk of breaking the rules was higher than the perceived risks from sitting at home doing nothing. Now having had loads of media stories about both how effective the jab has been and how damaging lockdown was to people, for many people the risk seesaw has moved. In reality until Omicron came along there was no difference in the risks of either side of the balance other than increasing vaccination making risk of death gradually decreasing and govt finances (less covid support) + darker days (SAD) making risk of lockdown worse.
Omicron does change things materially and measurably but the govt is struggling to persuade people so it is not really making a perceptual difference and so people just don't feel at risk from it OTHER than in how it might affect their social and sporting life

If there are suddenly loads of pictures and stories of full wards, ventilators etc like we had before and that perception could quickly switch

 

[Nyx004]

business needs some support, economical stability is low, lockdown will make things even worst in this scenario, anyway , after lockdown it will be the same . people should wear masks and try not to see many people, be precautious and take into consideration all recommendations, otherwise it will be even harder.

 

[MikeJ]

Unlucky! However, most people seem to bend the rules when it suits them. Are you one of those?

Hope you brush it off.

Follow the rules all the time. Mask wearing, hand washing, social distancing and regular testing. It was the regular test that picked it up, I was feeling a bit rough but none of the symptoms of Covid that you are warned about (loss of taste, fever, continuous cough). I'd put the feeling rough thing down to having had my booster the day before.

 

[Bob Morgan]

It seems to be mainly the unvaccinated who are ending up in hospital so I don't know why HMG and NHS aren't making a much bigger song and dance about it.

What it needs is a couple of Premiership footballers to end up in hospital to persuade people to get the vaccination as they have more influence than politicians

'Celebrity Deaths' will be plastered all over the Daily Fail - Given the published infection rates! - So good to see that the UKBF Armchair Epidemiologists are back on form!

 

[Justin Smith]

I'll give my mother a call now and tell her that's what she should do because someone thinks it's all a big conspiracy to control the population. She'll understand.

I assume your mum is vaccinated ?
My Mum is 95, and vaccinated, triple jabbed actually. Do I think she should be taking any precautions ? No I do not, she should be living her life as she will not be here much longer, and, more to the point, she is far far more likely to die of something other than Covid.
It's a matter of proportionality.

PS : last Dec my Dad had Covid, as did my sister who was helping to look after them both, but my Mum never caught it. It is poss she is one of the 10% who don't seem susceptible to it ?

Good news source - Darren Grimes
Bad news source - BBC

You miss the point entirely, Darren Grimes Twitter was purely hosting the video. Unless you are saying the video was all CGI ?

UKBF, along with the FSB and other organisations, is pushing the message for financial support for business which is getting media coverage. Message along with comments from several UKBF members also gone to a number of supportive MP's last week too.

I am not wanting any furlough to be restarted, because once we go down that route we'll be under these draconian restrictions for months, and possibly every year for years.
I accept that is very hard on the hospitality businesses in particular, but perhaps it might put off some people from answering "yes" when asked "should we continue with these suppression policies".
We should not, and cannot, keep doing this.

Actually no

As a until recently active paid up MAG member i read a lot of the research. Generally speaking you should read about "Risk Aversion Theory", the general concept is that everyone has an inherent level of perceived risk they are happy with (it is not constant and can change), if you feel safer due to your helmet and leathers you are more likely to ride in a riskier way because subconsciously you brain is basically saying "I am happy with x% chance of a injury today", the same theory has been used to say a spike in the centre of every steering wheel would do as much for road safety as an airbag. (PS I can happily ride without a lid in summer but cant even go a few yards without gloves - likely as a mate skinned his hand when we were 17)

How is this relevant to this debate

Well when everyone thought they might die or at least kill their granny the perceived risk of breaking the rules was higher than the perceived risks from sitting at home doing nothing. Now having had loads of media stories about both how effective the jab has been and how damaging lockdown was to people, for many people the risk seesaw has moved. In reality until Omicron came along there was no difference in the risks of either side of the balance other than increasing vaccination making risk of death gradually decreasing and govt finances (less covid support) + darker days (SAD) making risk of lockdown worse.
Omicron does change things materially and measurably but the govt is struggling to persuade people so it is not really making a perceptual difference and so people just don't feel at risk from it OTHER than in how it might affect their social and sporting life

If there are suddenly loads of pictures and stories of full wards, ventilators etc like we had before and that perception could quickly switch

I used to have bikes and despite wearing a helmet I was always very aware how vulnerable I was. When I see who some people ride I cannot see who you can be right, either that of those people have had a lobotomy. I was in a Q of traffic moving about 20mph the other week and a biker came up the middle of the two lanes doing about 40. Either he is mad, or his risk perception is massively inaccurate. Interestingly, if a car changed lanes and he went into them I'll bet he'd blame them, when, in actual fact, it would be entirely his own fault.
Even more interesting he had a very loud exhaust (the anti social ****) but I did not hear it until he was more or less level with me, this proving all these bikers who think their loud exhaust will clear a path for them are living on fantasy island.

If there are suddenly loads of pictures and stories of full wards, ventilators etc like we had before and that perception could quickly switch

I think you mean let's keep trying to scare everyone to ensure compliance. The government have been doing that right from the start, I'm surprised the great British public keep falling for it.
Just two examples :

Government radio advert Jan 2021 : "That person passing you in the park is highly likely to have Covid"
At the time it was about 1 in 50, which is not highly likely by any reasonable definition of the word. Neither is it at all likely that anyone would catch Covid outdoors from someone passing them in the park.
https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/arti...states-joggers-highly-likely-covid-19/1705305

And (the best one) :

It is going to be a "difficult summer" with Covid cases in the UK possibly reaching 200,000 a day - Neil Ferguson - 18 Jul 21
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57877033

Why do people take any notice of these people ?

 

[thetiger2015]

If government intervenes to prevent trading, then the business needs to be compensated, but if punters are just making their own decisions about what they feel safe doing - as is the case now - I think it's less obvious.

...but the negative messages are coming from the media, with the help of government.

This is a lockdown but not officially. Retail shops are starting to struggle now, restaurants are getting lots of cancellations because people 'think' another lockdown will happen. That has been spun out by the media and the government are just sitting on the fence. Maybe, maybe not, depends on the numbers, or maybe not, depends if Boris wants a lockdown, or maybe he doesn't.

They're leaving people to interpret unclear guidance. This has been a theme through-out. Confuse, deny, move the goal posts every few weeks. Always releasing information to the media before discussing with MPs.

Even the speaker of the house has said this is not right. They cannot announce policy changes to the media without bringing data to the house first.

All of this only serves to create more conspiracy theories, because it lacks any coherent logic.

Also, if this is so scary and the most deadly virus ever seen. Why are MPs still having parties and ignoring social distancing and mask wearing completely? They, apparently, have all the scientific data to hand. They've been to lots of meetings to discuss it all. You'd think they would be petrified and living in a bunker? They're not. They're still enjoying nibbles and drinks with friends and family, they have done for the last 2 years. Why no fear?

 

[Ozzy]

They're leaving people to interpret unclear guidance. This has been a theme through-out. Confuse, deny, move the goal posts every few weeks. Always releasing information to the media before discussing with MPs.

Even the speaker of the house has said this is not right. They cannot announce policy changes to the media without bringing data to the house first.

All of this only serves to create more conspiracy theories, because it lacks any coherent logic.

A big +1 to what you say here.

 

[MBE2017]

It shows how easily the general public are, I took my family for a meal the other night, and due to ominous warnings on the news regarding covid variants, warnings to mix carefully, rumours of a lockdown, the end result was my booking was the only one honoured that evening, 80% did not turn up. I had a party of eight.

Apart from approx ten people as walk in bookings on the night, a 150 odd restaurant had a mere 18 clients all evening, normally they would hope for two lots of covers, so 18 out of a potential 300 covers.

I felt truly sorry for the new owners, staff etc who took over around three months ago, now beginning to wonder what next year will bring them. Even if all 18 tipped at my level, it will not replace the lost earnings.

 

[IanSuth]

I assume your mum is vaccinated ?
My Mum is 95, and vaccinated, triple jabbed actually. Do I think she should be taking any precautions ? No I do not, she should be living her life as she will not be here much longer, and, more to the point, she is far far more likely to die of something other than Covid.
It's a matter of proportionality.

PS : last Dec my Dad had Covid, as did my sister who was helping to look after them both, but my Mum never caught it. It is poss she is one of the 10% who don't seem susceptible to it ?


You miss the point entirely, Darren Grimes Twitter was purely hosting the video. Unless you are saying the video was all CGI ?


I am not wanting any furlough to be restarted, because once we go down that route we'll be under these draconian restrictions for months, and possibly every year for years.
I accept that is very hard on the hospitality businesses in particular, but perhaps it might put off some people from answering "yes" when asked "should we continue with these suppression policies".
We should not, and cannot, keep doing this.


I used to have bikes and despite wearing a helmet I was always very aware how vulnerable I was. When I see who some people ride I cannot see who you can be right, either that of those people have had a lobotomy. I was in a Q of traffic moving about 20mph the other week and a biker came up the middle of the two lanes doing about 40. Either he is mad, or his risk perception is massively inaccurate. Interestingly, if a car changed lanes and he went into them I'll bet he'd blame them, when, in actual fact, it would be entirely his own fault.
Even more interesting he had a very loud exhaust (the anti social ****) but I did not hear it until he was more or less level with me, this proving all these bikers who think their loud exhaust will clear a path for them are living on fantasy island.


I think you mean let's keep trying to scare everyone to ensure compliance. The government have been doing that right from the start, I'm surprised the great British public keep falling for it.
Just two examples :

Government radio advert Jan 2021 : "That person passing you in the park is highly likely to have Covid"
At the time it was about 1 in 50, which is not highly likely by any reasonable definition of the word. Neither is it at all likely that anyone would catch Covid outdoors from someone passing them in the park.
https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/arti...states-joggers-highly-likely-covid-19/1705305

And (the best one) :

It is going to be a "difficult summer" with Covid cases in the UK possibly reaching 200,000 a day - Neil Ferguson - 18 Jul 21
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57877033

Why do people take any notice of these people ?

Without wanting to take away from the covid argument you are not willing to open your eyes and think.

With regard to your filtering biker as an example, he was actually about at the limit of what Roadcraft (the Police biker handbook) says is safe for filtering which is Don't filter in traffic doing over 20mph and not at 20mph more than the traffic. But to you that looked scary & dangerous as hell, and despite highway code 211 saying you must specifically look for filtering motorcycles when changing lane you think it would be his fault.

The point was not that YOU feel vulnerable on a bike even with a lid or that bikes was acting recklessly or not, it is that everyone has their own personal perception of risk and personal level of risk they are prepared to take in their everyday life. Personal experiences' and life situationchange that equation which includes what we see in the world around us and the media.

That media message that the person you run past is likely to have covid would have made some people perceive the risk of passing someone and catching covid was greater than the health benefit of the run.

So yes in some ways those are messages designed to Scare people into compliance - but the alternative to scaring people into sensible steps (the definition of those is up for debate) is to legislate people into compliance

Which do you want, voluntary compliance or legislation ?

At this point given the usual winter peaks etc the option of "just let it run it's course, not that many who wouldnt have died anyway will die" is not an option (not least as it ignores long covid which does exist and has an economic cost itself) because the NHS can not take a huge spike in admissions in Jan at the same time as huge staff absence - we already are looking at over a 4hr wait around here for any ambulance call below a cardiac arrest

 

[IanSuth]

It shows how easily the general public are, I took my family for a meal the other night, and due to ominous warnings on the news regarding covid variants, warnings to mix carefully, rumours of a lockdown, the end result was my booking was the only one honoured that evening, 80% did not turn up. I had a party of eight.

Apart from approx ten people as walk in bookings on the night, a 150 odd restaurant had a mere 18 clients all evening, normally they would hope for two lots of covers, so 18 out of a potential 300 covers.

I felt truly sorry for the new owners, staff etc who took over around three months ago, now beginning to wonder what next year will bring them. Even if all 18 tipped at my level, it will not replace the lost earnings.

And this is the point

This time around the govt is DELIBERATELY scaring enough people to stay home to slow the spread without making it official so they don't have to pay anyone out.

They could very easily have put a proviso in their legislation similar to those sued before that IF the govt makes you shut up shop then you get a degree of compensation, if not you are on your own. But then been up front and honest with people as to the real risks of certain activities in certain locations and set a danger level at which places have to shut. Would mean a open plan 150 covers restaurant could open and trade but an old vaulted cellar restaurant with little ventilation wouldnt and would have base costs covered.

The current mishmash just means a lot of hospitality companies will go under and that means someone is going to be taking a hit, be it landlords, HMRC (us) the owners personally via guarantees or their suppliers.

The govt not giving compensation doesnt save the economy anything in the long run it just shifts who pays what where and when, so if the govt wants us not to mix in venues do it officially

 

[cjd]

...but the negative messages are coming from the media, with the help of government.

"negative messages"? or information?

This is a lockdown but not officially.

Then it's not a lockdown, because, well, we're not locked down. People are making their own decisions.

Retail shops are starting to struggle now, restaurants are getting lots of cancellations because people 'think' another lockdown will happen. That has been spun out by the media and the government are just sitting on the fence. Maybe, maybe not, depends on the numbers, or maybe not, depends if Boris wants a lockdown, or maybe he doesn't.

They're leaving people to interpret unclear guidance. This has been a theme through-out. Confuse, deny, move the goal posts every few weeks. Always releasing information to the media before discussing with MPs.

Even the speaker of the house has said this is not right. They cannot announce policy changes to the media without bringing data to the house first.

All of this only serves to create more conspiracy theories, because it lacks any coherent logic.

What conspiracy do you think is happening. No omicron? No 4th wave what?

Also, if this is so scary and the most deadly virus ever seen.

Why would anyone think that? It certainly isn't the most deadly virus ever. Thankfully.

Why are MPs still having parties and ignoring social distancing and mask wearing completely? They, apparently, have all the scientific data to hand. They've been to lots of meetings to discuss it all. You'd think they would be petrified and living in a bunker? They're not. They're still enjoying nibbles and drinks with friends and family, they have done for the last 2 years. Why no fear?

They're doing it because they're bell-ends. Just like all the other bell-ends that aren't in government that broke the rules or took risks.

 

[Justin Smith]

South African Eyewitness News journalist Ray White has just been on the radio saying, if anything, their Covid deaths are going down and the Worldometer graph of Deaths in SA backs this up. Remember The first Omicron cases were discovered there in the first week of November, i.e. about 6 weeks ago. White thinks we're over reacting, as do I.
You have to remember there are a lot of people to whom it would be embarrassing if things turned out well, and I'm not talking keyboard warriors, I'm talking "media star experts" and overcautious politicians.
We will see won't we.....

PS I'm still saying that, one way or the other, Omicron could the end game for this Pandemic.

 

[Ian J]

Reading this thread makes me feel that I'm stuck in a time loop

 

[Justin Smith]

Without wanting to take away from the covid argument you are not willing to open your eyes and think.

With regard to your filtering biker as an example, he was actually about at the limit of what Roadcraft (the Police biker handbook) says is safe for filtering which is Don't filter in traffic doing over 20mph and not at 20mph more than the traffic. But to you that looked scary & dangerous as hell, and despite highway code 211 saying you must specifically look for filtering motorcycles when changing lane you think it would be his fault.

I never filtered if traffic was moving, it is obvious to anyone that if the traffic is moving vehicles can change lanes easily, and the faster the traffic is moving the quicker they can do that. Even filtering in stationary traffic is risky, how do you know someone isnt going to let a passenger off who opens their door straight in front of you?
Quite apart from anything else, over taking on the inside and is overtaking more than one vehicle at a time. are both bad driving, and, by definition anyone filtering down the middle of two lanes of traffic is doing both of those things. No, that biker filtering at 20mph more than the traffic was an idiot, some would say his having an accident would be Darwinism in action.

And the HC agrees with me :

Rule 88
Manoeuvring. You should be aware of what is behind and to the sides before manoeuvring. Look behind you; use mirrors if they are fitted. When in traffic queues look out for pedestrians crossing between vehicles and vehicles emerging from junctions or changing lanes. Position yourself so that drivers in front can see you in their mirrors. Additionally, when filtering in slow-moving traffic, take care and keep your speed low.

40mph is not a low speed, a biker could quite easily get killed at that speed. He certainly could not be "looking for pedestrians crossing between vehicles", not so he could easily stop anyway.

Reading this thread makes me feel that I'm stuck in a time loop

Hopefully nobody will be doing this any more within a few months, even better weeks.

You do have to remember this is history in the making. Not the virus, that is not "unprecedented" as some people (who know sweet FA about history) keep repeating, no, it's the reaction to it that is truly historic and unprecedented.

 

[The Byre]

Over the weekend, the latest Sage document arrived with some blood-curdling figures on what could await us if we fail to lockdown. The omicron wave could be the deadliest yet, we’re told, killing up to 6,000 of us in a single day.

The 6,000 is the top of a rather long range of "scenarios", not predictions. The bottom is 600 deaths a day,

Telegraph journalist Fraser Nelson went to his Twitter feed and up popped the chairman of the Sage modelling committee Prof. Graham Medley from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), which last weekend published some grim omicron scenarios.

Every LSHTM scenario assumed that omicron was just as deadly as Delta. But evidence from South Africa suggests that omicron infections are milder. Adjust for this and Covid hospital numbers end up at just one-third of the January peak.

Nelson asked Prof Medley: why not say so? When giving his scenarios, why couldn’t he say what JP Morgan had said: that if it’s as mild as the South Africans seem to think there could be no real problem and no need for a lockdown? “What would be the point of that?” he replied.

"So that we might be able to live with Covid and carry on as usual without lockdown? Why not include that as a possible scenario?"

“You know the answer,” he replied. “Decision-makers are generally only interested in situations where decisions have to be made.”

Nelson - "But isn’t it just as vital to be told if action is not needed? So you exclusively model bad outcomes that require restrictions and omit just-as-likely outcomes that would not require restrictions?”

“We generally model what we are asked to model,” came the reply. “There is a dialogue in which policy teams discuss with the modellers what they need to inform them with their policy.”

So Prof Medley suggests the scientists are doing what they are “asked” during a “dialogue” with a pre-existing "policy".

At this point, the conversation was interrupted by "Reg". “This entire exchange has left me open-mouthed,” he Tweeted. “To think of the livelihoods at stake here, mainly because they don’t see the need to model accurate outcomes as it will not make the government take any action. Scandalous.” Prof Medley gave "Reg" the same cryptic reply. “We model the scenarios that are useful to decisions.”

(He then left and started to respond to others who asked him if he’d model in his Speedos if asked.)

Does this bizarre exchange suggest that we all going to be locked down again based not on evidence-based policymaking, but policy-based evidence-making? Since that Twitter exchange went viral Nelson was reportedly contacted by a few government ministers saying they were alarmed to think Sage modellers are not giving the probability of various outcomes, but have been cooking up gloomy scenarios to order.

 

[IanSuth]

I never filtered if traffic was moving, it is obvious to anyone that if the traffic is moving vehicles can change lanes easily, and the faster the traffic is moving the quicker they can do that. Even filtering in stationary traffic is risky, how do you know someone isnt going to let a passenger off who opens their door straight in front of you?
Quite apart from anything else, over taking on the inside and is overtaking more than one vehicle at a time. are both bad driving, and, by definition anyone filtering down the middle of two lanes of traffic is doing both of those things. No, that biker filtering at 20mph more than the traffic was an idiot, some would say his having an accident would be Darwinism in action.

And the HC agrees with me :

Rule 88
Manoeuvring. You should be aware of what is behind and to the sides before manoeuvring. Look behind you; use mirrors if they are fitted. When in traffic queues look out for pedestrians crossing between vehicles and vehicles emerging from junctions or changing lanes. Position yourself so that drivers in front can see you in their mirrors. Additionally, when filtering in slow-moving traffic, take care and keep your speed low.

40mph is not a low speed, a biker could quite easily get killed at that speed. He certainly could not be "looking for pedestrians crossing between vehicles", not so he could easily stop anyway.

I am not going to get involved in a pointless debate about filtering on here - but suffice to say you would have to be incredibly unlucky if you were wearing full leathers and helmet to be killed at 40mph, a speed hit my many cyclists in lycra and a tiny helmet downhill every weekend

I have had a bike as my main means of transport since i was 16, i didnt get a car licence until i was 28 and a few months from becoming a father, i have done hundreds of thousands of miles, do not consider myself a particularly safe or dangerous rider but consider filtering in town to be one of the least dangerous elements of riding (and yes that can mean speeds of up to 40 where legal to but i try not to exceed that). Biggest danger on my old commute was cars nipping early into a certain bus lane to turn left and just glancing in their mirror for a double decker bus rather than a bike or cycle especially as evening rush hour the setting sun was in their mirrors. I had 3 near misses in 10 years, there were at least 5 fatalities i knew of (and another life changing moped/van accident only 10 days ago).
Also If a car is doing 20mph and you are filtering at 40mph, the relative closing speed is 20mph and few 40mph limit roads have random pedestrians crossing through traffic (or they wouldnt be a 40)

 

[Alan]

Just to quote my 92 year old dad.

"One good thing about this pandemic is it will raise the average IQ of humanity"

Mind you he also once said

"The best way to improve safer driving is do away with the driver seat belt and put a large metal spike in the middle of the steering wheel"