UKH

How are others affected by the mental impact of Covid?

I'm getting to the point where I can't even be bothered to read the paper or watch the news. Everyday we are drip fed statistics, graphs and data which, if the truth were known, are meaningless to most people. When all this kicked off I saw Whitty and Vallance as figure of authority who would encourage us and help us through the crisis. Now, all they seem to do is indoctrinate us with increasing levels of fear and paranoia.

I think a lot of people, especially the (active) elderly feel they have little to look forward to. Sadly that feeling can, ultimately, have disastrous consequences as people start asking what is the point of life.

😫

youtube.com/watch?v=MPrPtDoaB3s&

If I'm feeling anxious or worried I usually find watch the news just about the least helpful thing I can do.

Seeing constant messages about how bad things are can be pretty damaging to my mental health. Unfortunately the press concentrate on the negative, when there is actually a lot of positive still out there.

Trying to ignore things that I can not control/influence and concentrate on the good things in my life (friends, exercises) is much better for me.

Doom and gloom for me. My mum has leukaemia and we agreed we should not see each other until things get better. Wigan Borough has very high case rate, reporting about 300 new cases a day which made the decision easy. My dad died 13 years ago to the day so she’s feeling worse. One of my brothers lives close to her but they have a positive covid case so are isolating.

I reckon we will be in tier 3+++ soon coz these measures will not have the desired impact. 

I haven’t watched the news or read a paper since well before the whole episode started. Apart from putting a mask on to go to work or shopping, there isn’t a pandemic as far as I’m concerned*. Life is quite normal otherwise, I go climbing, go running, I (try and) stay happy.  
 

If I do want to see how it’s all going then I’ll take a look at Twitter and find one of a few accounts who tweet the raw unbiased data. 
 

*I’m not denying that there isn’t a situation, I’m denying myself the opportunity to be worried by it.. for my own sake.

I'm in Wales I've been feeling really angry and sad for the last week since the ridiculous lockdown was announced (I'm in an area which would be tier 1 if it was in England). 

I feel liked I'm constantly disappointing and letting down my little girl. She asks to see friends...NO, she asks to see nana and grandad...NO, she asks to go swimming...NO, she asks to go to the zoo...NO, she asks to have a picnic at the beach...NO. I feel like a shit mother! I'm sick of telling her everything will be "soon" when I have no idea when soon will be. She is 2yrs 9 months and 7 months of her life has been tainted by lockdown, covid restrictions and social distancing. That is a huge percentage of her life. It's not fair.

We unfortunately live in a world where news is money. Its available 24/7 - and now most of it can seem to be bad news. Probably better to get a bit less of it, get out more, and focus on the good & positive 

It was all getting me VERY down. Stay off social media and don't bother with news is now my policy. Absorbing all this information, getting blasted with news, fake news, bullshit biased arguments etc is in no way helping me to live my life and in fact detracting from it. In the end there is nothing I can reasonably do about any of it, with respect to the virus situation, except ride it out and do what I can to enjoy myself in the meantime.

This is the point of view I've been taking of late.

It's shit.

Are you sugesting that responsible media tell us otherwise?

I can't watch the BBC news any more, all they do is try and find a new angle to report on misery, job losses and people dying, where its Covid or other deaths due to lack of hospital treatment.

I just have a read of this when I want to see how things might be going*

https://www.justgivemepositivenews.com/

* I have not fact checked these so don't know if they are all true but its better than being bombarded with the usual doom and gloom

I have been in local lockdown for a few weeks (5 maybe [RCT]) although the numbers in the valley I live in are low, but the next valley over they are high, all lumped together. Had a bit of a reprieve last weekend when I was on a 4 day water rescue course, but now it is back to the mundane day to day of doing nothing but walking the dog, working and not seeing anyone. I am quite worried about the winter coming, dark days, people isolated and all of the negativity that is currently out there, I fear will be enough to tip lots of people over the edge.

As others have said, try and avoid the news/social media as much as is possible. It feels unrelentingly bad, and did so even before COVID reared its ugly head.

Do a good deed, however small, and make somebody else feel good. Try and engage the childish part of your brain that finds fascination in the simplest things. It's going to be a clear night tonight (at least in the South West), try and get outside to catch a view of the stars. Consider that most of them have planets around them, some of them will harbour life, some might even have someone or something staring back at us across the vastness of spacetime.

Listen to a song that makes you feel good. This is one of my go-tos:
youtube.com/watch?v=pllRW9wETzw&

The short lockdown in Wales may well save you from prolonged misery. As someone in a Tier 3 area, I wish that we had implemented a similar lockdown, even regionally back in September. As a household, we have already had two bouts of imposed isolation, due to potential contact with people who have tested positive.

How long before Grter Manc in proper lockdown? Half term might reduce the increase, but not enough. I reckon an announcement on Wednesday, starting Friday. Oldhams rates are sky high, even after 3 months of extra measures. 

Quite a good article in the Saturday i called 'Survival Guide, How to be Happy'. Double page spread. I've precede it....

'Stay in the moment, as at the moment, we don't have an endpoint (with Coronovirus).

The power of a positive mindset is essential.

MOVE, be active, for your mental health.

Food....include protein for your breakfast (amongst other things).  

The only thing we can control about our the current situation is our response.

Lockdown has shown us that we don't need much to be happy.

Kindness is the thread that binds together the fabric of society. Being kind to yourself is about how you speak to yourself, how you speak about yourself, how you treat yourself.

Carve out fun in your day to day schedule. 

But it's not just 2 weeks, it's 17 days on top of the 2 weeks that we haven't been able to see friends and family, or visit any significant shop due to them being in local lockdown area (and worse for people in South Wales who were in local lockdown for a month prior to the circuit breaker. This is having only had the 5 mile rule lifted in July.

I'm also fed up. The rain isn't helping. 

Having said that... It's not all bad. Probably. 

Met office just released a weather warning for rain on Friday 😭

I'm consciously not engaging too much with covid related news, and trying to focus on my uni course (with it's mostly remote learning), cycling out to the Peak, and seeing my bro here and there. 

Occasionally, I feel that things are sh*t and rather frustrated, but it could be worse, there's people in situations who'd quite like to be in my situation, either the opportunities my course may bring, or being fit and well, or having family to see.

If I looked into covid I might start to think ahead and wonder how long things will be how they currently are, and 'What do I have to do?' seems a helpful distraction.

I guess it goes without saying that covid restrictions are pretty rubbish, and it's basically down to how one goes about coping, framing one's thoughts and perspective...

Interestingly, whilst case numbers in Wales are on average around the same as England (130/100,000). Daily hospital admissions with Covid are significantly higher 1.8/100,000 for England and 3.9/100,000 for Wales (both 23rd October). I'm not sure why, but I am sure it is worrying public health officials in Wales.

I've been cutting back on my news intake: its largely more of the same and not at all helpful.

Instead, I'll specifically search out news on areas I am interested in, that have nowt to do with C19, e.g. space, robotics or the environment (OK, so that's usually even more depressing!) etc.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18821046.moon-news-nasa-make-announceme...

4pm today!!

We're alive, that's always a plus.

Didn't Kate Bush do some great songs? I bet if that video was released now it would be used as evidence by 5G conspiracy nutters!

I was always someone who was very politically engaged, interested in current affairs and pretty hot on on what was going on. Honestly, since the first week of lockdown I have very deliberately avoided the news and politically focused social media as much as possible. It's too much and nothing good can come of it. 

I have focused on spending as much time in nature. Not necessarily big adventures but just exploring my local woods, walks, hill and rivers. 

We need to be kind to ourselves. This pandemic is bloody hard on our mental health. I lost my dad at the start of the year and whilst that was, for sure, the hardest thing I've faced in life, it's also been an important reminder to myself to keep work in perspective. Not easy. 

It really is!!! 

Cheers folks  

Are you feeling any better this evening?

I'm fine, thanks for asking, just pissed off with the entire situation and slightly alarmed at the direction Welsh politics is taking at the moment!!

Not looking forward to the rainpocalypse coming at the end of the week.  But at the moment we are still recovering from last week where, like many others, we crammed in as much fun as we could... 2 trips to the kids farm, soft play, shops (for last minute non-essential items, you know like wellies for my daughter who has just had a growth spurt and activity/story books), garden centre and finally on Friday evening the climbing wall just before it closed.  Lets hope all these places reopen in the future!!

I hope you feel better soon. Must be really hard having small children at the moment. It’s hard enough having older ones!

It helps to gather all the frustration and channel it away from the little ones and in to arguing on the Internet...

You are in control of how much media you watch. If it gets too much STOP. Limit yourself to a reliable source once a week.

Avoid people and sources that are constantly harping on about the negative impact.

Theres lots of positive things to focus on.

Imagine being in WW2 and think about what was happening to them. We are far better off presently.

Google the old lady from ? Rotherham who doesn’t give a shit.

As I’ve said in a previous post, the survivors of this episode, and I don’t mean not being killed by Covid, may be the ones that push the boundaries within the ‘law’ and actually feel better for doing so.

Be positive, stay positive , phone a friend.

That's UKC out then...

I'm not sure that is the best approach for someone struggling with their mental health and circumstances during the current crisis.  People need their feelings validated, not dismissed because someone somewhere in the world at sometime in history had it worse than them.

Part of that is because Wales reports hospital cases as confirmed and suspected covid, while England reports only confirmed. Having said that, confirmed cases in hospital are already at 2/3 of the April peak with no signs of increases slowing and this is what's worrying officials. 

I think there's a lot of stress around at the moment and after the summer and a reduction in covid we are increasingly stressed about it now with increasing transmission and anxiety. There is also a lot of extra strain with the longevity of it all....its an unseen and unpredictable threat which also makes anxiety higher. 

Avoiding media is good in my opinion but isn't easy as the unknown threat is harder to ignore so we are more likely to search out news to try and settle the anxiety....but it won't often help.

I really like the idea someone mentioned up thread about enjoying nature, being outdoors, togetherness and care for and from others. Having something to look forward to is good and I reckon we're all missing trips and making plans.

One day at a time is a good mantra...but being kind to oneself and accepting there will be moments of being overwhelmed and losing it is good.

UKC can help eachother....kindness and humour helps a lot, there will be people on here having a dreadful time, a bit of care goes a long way....

No it doesn't!!!

Where's your evidence??? 

:P

Yes, I'm watching with interest.

Looking at the Scottish numbers is concerning, they don't seem to be moving very much. The rate of increase might be slowing but as far as I can see there's not much change in the worst affected areas.

I'm wondering whether we should be going for stricter but very targeted lockdowns to make a substantial dent in the numbers quickly. Personally I'd rather have more restrictions for a short time than fewer for longer.

I’m finding it a fascinating insight into peoples behaviour.

It’s interesting seeing how people are becoming entrenched into camps based on nothing more than their anecdotal thoughts and beliefs. Particularly what they’ll choose dismiss and what they’ll choose put loads of emphasis on.

My firm belief is that by the middle of next year everyone will be saying it was a fuss over nothing, just like the Y2K bug was, and completely missing the point that lots of people have done huge amounts of work to prevent Armageddon. Such is the nature of human beings - many of whom seem to think that this is a ‘second wave’. 
 

I’m not particularly worried. I just worry about the things I can influence. 
 

I think a lot of people are looking to try and take control over things in their own way, which explains a lot of the behaviour. 
 

And a lot of people want to blame someone for a natural disaster. 

I tend to forget, go out walking and things feel pretty normal, then back to reality So yes, there is an underlying anxiety which surfaces from time to time particularly when I wake up in the small hours. I agree about watching the News, it erodes morale. I'm also fed up with the lack of leadership and indecisiveness of politicians. the callousness of the policy of not treating the elderly revealed by the Sunday Times yesterday was shocking.

I am also disappointed in the way that the countries of the World are not working together to try and beat this virus, but are trying to outdo each other rather than share knowledge and discoveries. The Russians in particular are showing their true colours. They CANNOT be trusted, which is really sad and exposes how little progress we have made since the break up of the old Soviet Union.

Trump terrifies me in that he may become even more irrational if he loses the election. The thought that he has absolute the power to start a nuclear war defies belief in that he is capable of throwing all his toys out of his pram regardless of the consequences. He appears to have serious mental health issues.

It's hard to see light in the World right now.

Hear hear!

Revel in Mick Taylor's wildlife photos. Plus dogs. Plus banter.

Rejoice in Dave the Rave's haphazard approach to posting. 

Soak in Timmd's eternal kindness.

Enjoy GirlyMonkey's exceptional barbed retorts - always in the defence of those least well off.

Admire Wintertree's phenomenal dedication to accurate statistical analysis (maybe don't read the scary bits!).

Trangias wealth of experience and knowledge.

Experience the skill of Jon Stewart's baiting of rightwing snowflakes (yeah, that's a thing).

Absorb Jkarran's reasoned contributions from 'the continent'

Witness DancingOnRock's humour and genuine curiousity.

View TominEdinburgh's dedication to his cause.

The Blue Straggler's contributions to both the forum and preserving a vital part of our shared internet heritage. 

Yanis Nayu's insight in to how the world actually is through a lens of fairness. 

Baron's skill in using discussion as a tool for testing and retesting ideas.

Marsbar's insightful and entertaining posts. Wise and considerate.

TheLemming's excellent discussion starters and updates from the front line in Blackpool. Keep it up, you're ruddy brilliant. 

TWS' soul searching and good natured discussion. I'm glad you come here when you need us. 

ProfitOfDoom's mastery of puns.

Summo's common sense and matter of fact approach to everything.

And so many, many, many more. I'm sorry if I missed you out! And so many others over the years as well.

All these different lives. All In one weird place. All bought together by a bizzare set of shared hobbies. All these experiences and thoughts mixed together. Yeah, we don't always get on. Sometimes it gets a bit forthright and we have a tallest horse competition atleast once a week but, ultimately, it's full of wit, humour and warmth. 

Chin up you lot.

Chin up

BB

Yup, it’s a real danger area of little positivity. Filter it at will

Yes, I would have thought that is what is needed. Full "circuit break" for 2 or 3 weeks, then another in a couple of months or whenever needed. This half hearted approach seems like pain with not much gain to me. 

Hmm, refreshingly, apart from a brief look at the paper this morning I've not watched or listened to any news today. I've been doing a few odd jobs round the house, bit of ironing for Mrs Chopper and pursuing a few projects of interest on the PC

I empathise with your mindset and struggles.

Stay positive. Mental health issues are not a new thing.

Glad to hear it! 

I have been less productive, having achieved a visit to the optician and a quick walk around the a National Trust propeety. That's it. That's all. 

Yes, I think an element of both can sometimes be helpful, that how one is experiencing things is valid, and also there are people in worse situations, as 'a background buffer' of some kind.

The 'mill' of being depressed and struggling is no fun at all, though, and entirely valid, it's only once somewhat out the other side that one can use others being worse off as some kind of solace or prompt to be stoical.

Look at most high streets. They’re full of chain stores. If you shut down all the high streets at the same time you kill cash flow for two weeks for all these shops. If you shut down a few, then they have a lot more cash flow coming in from other towns. 
 

It’s obvious when you look at the whole picture. 

For me it was the latest in a long line of hassle I would have avoided if I could.  It’s not been the biggest hassle for me over the last 5 years and I was very lucky that for me it’s impacts have so far been dealt with by working harder and working longer.  

I know a lot of people who are finding things much harder to cope with mentally.  I think for a lot of them - especially younger adults - it’s their first serious curveball in life.  It won’t be their last.  What’s different and maybe worse maybe better for them is that they’re getting it (the mental load, not the disease) all at the same time.

I have very high hopes for summer 2021 - even without a vaccine it should be better than this year as we’re learning more all the time and improving risk control measures all the time.  We have to get there and for sure this winter isn’t looking great, but winter always passes.

I read very little on the mainstream news now.  I tend to stick to Arstechnica for tech, specialist outlets relating to my work and the obsessive people posting every little thing SpaceX does to reddit.  They’re terrifyingly devoted - to the point of moving house to be able to watch the rockets being built in Texas.  Watching the big bastard launch for Mars in a few years is possibly the only thing that could ever get me to go to Texas or to go back to Florida.

But local or national, do the lockdowns hard and early, rather than late and half hearted.

Well said and thankyou....bang on! Savour the moment....we are lovers of hills and we are here together in a hard time....

Surely if you shut down shops in one location but allow people from that location to travel to other towns to shop then you're more likely to spread the virus?

People have been asked not to. 

Depends what you mean by late and early. And what exactly you’re trying to achieve with a lockdown. 

By early I mean locking down hard at September levels to return us to August levels.  By late I mean what is actually happening.

Minimal deaths and minimal disruption to the NHS and the economy.

Yet you've said on UKC that you would go for a walk even if you're supposed to be self-isolating...
  
 

Yes. What is your point?

That you expect other people to make sacrifices whilst you carry on with your life as if nothing is happening.

Going out for a walk from my house with zero risk of transmission during self-isolation would not be carrying on with my life as if nothing had happened and it would be entirely in keeping with the objective of stopping the spread of the virus.

And even if you can't accept this, it has nothing to do with the government's lockdown strategy.

A lot depends on your assessment of risk. Global statistics show that we as a country are still more probable than most to make it to our 80s to suffer the indignities of chronic illness and pain, with our without covid. Therefore, logically, you should live your life without fear, in the knowledge that the average age of death from covid is older than the UK average age of death. 

But the long term health effects, people cry, yes some are bad, I can personally testify for that. However, there's plenty worse out there, and if you lived in any previous generation in history you could expect to live with more serious health complications for a greater proportion of your life. There's worse out there, and yet people suffering with the long term consequences of worse still manage to live fulfilling lives.

So your risk assessment could be that actually the risk of you not having a good innings is minimal. Maybe we should start asking what it actually means to live, as you have done. In terms of Maslow's hierarchy of needs safety is pretty basic, but we can see that we are still relatively safe, however for many people anything higher up, belonging and self esteem, is impossible with the effects of lockdown. 

So given that the risk is relatively low, the consequences are not anomalously high compared to many afflictions which the human race has endured why allow it to dominate our collective consciousness. Why let a relatively minor illness stop you attaining the higher needs? People throughout history would be laughing at how risk averse we have become at the expense of our own fulfillment. 

We westerners have developed an irrational fear of death, the one thing we cannot yet conquer. This fear is mixed with a fundamentally flawed assumption that we should be able to cure any disease and that nature throws at us and that we will only get better at doing so. What a powerful position of privilege must exist that we decieved ourselves into this belief system. Damn nature for coming along and giving us a slap on the wrist for f*cking up the planet. 

You can’t have both with regular full lockdowns. 

For all the doom and gloom I keep coming across good news.

My sister in law has her own picture framing business. She escaped from her physically and mentally abusive husband a few years ago but has always struggled financially since then.

Well since the start of Covid her business has never been so busy, she has so much work its ridiculous. She reckons its due to people not going on holidays and spending money on their houses.

Made up for her.

Really focusing on the positive stuff always helps.Go after good news.

I don't think we've cracked the minimum NHS and economic disruption policy yet!

Being outside walking in the rain is a lovely experience especially with all the waterproof gear we have these days and grippy footwear to which allows you to concentrate on what is around you more and even have a sit down without getting a soggy bum. Probably because I was a 70s child I have always enjoyed being outside in all weathers, even storms and thunder and lightning in fact we practically had to be dragged indoors. 

I love the drama of proper storms and the peacefulness of still rainy days-sights and sounds, smells, trickling water, gentle raindrops, fast rivers and burns, the lushness, the dampness which also tend to clear popular places of people which is nice if you want your nature less busy. 

Just last week I went out in heavy rain with a pal and her pal to a local park with her wee 3 year old lassie all waterproofed up and she had a great time splashing in all the puddles. Don't let the rain stop you getting out hen it's good fun and a different experience which makes getting back to a cosy house more appreciated also. 

Quite. It’s nonsense to assert that short regular national lockdowns will cause minim impact. If it did we would be doing it. 

Your outlook looks a lot to me like the individualist confusion (as opposed to the collectivist understanding) about the pandemic. Our right-wing/individualist/libertarian pals think they're offering a "valid alternative view" when in fact they're just failing to grasp the relevant facts.

There's a misunderstanding here that what we need to care about is old people dying. I mean, it's something to consider, but it's not the most important thing, since, as you rightly point out, old people do have a habit of dying anyway.

But please understand: those of us who appreciate the need to do something fairly dramatic to cope with the virus do not think so just so that some 82 year olds can die at 83 instead. That is not our chief concern - as you point out, that would be silly, given the disruption to all our lives.

Well yes, again, it's something to consider. I was bit worried about catching covid because I thought it might ruin my life for months, being someone who's very dependent on doing a lot of exercise to stay sane. I'm currently recovering from it, and it's not even the worst virus I've had in the last 2 years so hopefully there won't be lasting effects. So yes, while long term health problems are a worry, again, that's not the chief concern that motivates the position of needing to do something about controlling the virus.

Not the ones who understood the problem. We're not changing our behaviour and making sacrifices because we've misunderstood the risk, we're making those sacrifices because they're the least worst option. We want a normal life with a job and hospitals and schools and all that, and that all depends on the rate of sickness and death being kept below the capacity of our systems. If capacity to deal with the amount of sickness is exceeded, our hierarchy of needs gets a massive smash in the foundations when all the food has disappeared from the shops, there's no ambulance to attend to our broken legs, the roofer won't come out and fix the the house, etc.

If you look at problems with an interconnected society which depends on the functioning of its essential services through an individualist lens, you don't come up with a valid alternative view, you just get it wrong.

We're not bothered about conquering death, we're bothered about meeting our normal needs to carry on living our lives. Far from seeing the picture clearly while the rest of the world is confused, you're just failing to understand how society works, and the fact that if we want to fulfil our basic needs of living normal lives in our families, then we have to cooperate to keep society functioning. I know that's a difficult thing for individualists to understand; and we're facing grave problems, because so many people are falling down at this cognitive hurdle.

I've got to say I'm completely agnostic. I'm intuitively very skeptical of the T3 restrictions which look like they cause a lot pain while not doing an awful lot about the spread of the virus - but I don't have any better suggestions!

You can engage in as much wishful thinking as you want, whether you like it or not, without control over the spread of the virus you end up with hospitals so full of desperate dying people that you wouldn't even be able to move through the corridors.

That's the reality of a "minor" illness when it has the potential to put millions in hospital over the space of a few days.

Once that happens whether you like it or not people will stay locked down in their home.

You talk about being "risk-averse" as if somehow we had control over this situation. This is wishful thinking. For the moment it's the virus dictating what we are doing, and all we can do is mitigate.

We just have to suck it up I'm afraid.

It’s anecdotal but I’ve seen several news reports from doctors and covid wards recently and they all have the same theme - multiple people on the ward from an extended family, or an extended family all coming down with covid at a similar time.

I’ve not seen hard evidence on the routes infection is taking in this rising exponential phase - I think with our current numbers it would be basically impossible to get this level of data together.  Looking at the level of risk control measure and compliance with them out and about in commerce and business, the anecdotal reports and what’s known about transmission, my gut feeling is that the majority of the spread is driven by personal household meetings in the household or outside.  I include outside as one thing the White House rose garden super spreader event shows is that hugging/kissing/close contact trumps the protection of simply being outdoors.

Lockdown worked against this - I think - the first time round because it was stark enough to make it obvious if people were travelling between households, so between running scared and feeling guilty for obvious rule breaking, people didn’t mix households much.

Under T2 or T3, household mixing isn’t so prominent and there isn’t the media coverage of high death rates (yet) so the motivations are gone for those who don’t personally commit to the rules out of whatever motivates us to do so.

I think lockdown and probably even T3 is a sledgehammer to crack a nut.  Short of very heavy handed - borderline jackbooted - state monitoring and legal punishment I don’t know what other options are left.  The one that has been clear from the start is to build an open, trustworthy relationship between government and the people based on clear, consistent communication and messaging.  Some retrospective legal action and employment dismissals against public servants and politicians for their past breaches could kick start that bridge building.  There’s no shortage of people to go after for the greater good.

Otherwise, it’s possible that the high burn rate of cases we’re inevitably approaching is relatively confined to two sub-populations; those who won’t follow the household rules and those whose necessary professional work puts them at heightened risk.  It’s not impossible that - assuming these sub populations are relatively fixed - the sub populations reach a state of (likely temporary) herd immunity by March limiting their ability to drive cases.  This isn’t a solution in my mind because it spreads pain and death from the least worthy (those who won’t follow the rules) to the most worthy (those who can’t follow the rules) and it involves trying to hold at steady state high infection, hospitalisation and death rates with all the massive problems that causes - incapacitating a lot of society similar to lockdown but leaving us one mistake away from healthcare collapse.  

So it’s rock and a hard place unless households get on board.  My next step would be to significantly raise the funding on local public health teams and to look to fold in local community leaders including from the religious communities to urgently work on getting local communities on board for zero non essential household mixing.  That’s the carrot.  The first stick is painting for them a picture of their next six months of this doesn’t happen.  This is all for nothing without a zero tolerance approach for public figures of any variety - SAGE members, SPADs, MPs, sports stars etc.

I do think people would be more willing to comply if they understood more clearly what the facts are.  I'm not sure that these talks of bubbles, tiers, definitions of households, flattening curves and all the rest have been helpful.

Seems to me the basic messages are still being overlooked, which is that

1) The virus is predominantly spread by being close enough to infected people so that you inhale their breath. This almost exclusively occurs indoors.

2) Face masks reduce this (not sure be how much, and can they be made more effective?) and should be compulsory in any indoor public places: shops, public transport, cafes etc. That is surely enforceable. 

3)If you want to go and see granny and grandad, it's fine to meet them in a park (I think). If you want to meet them indoors, then get tested first, wear a mask, or both.

4) If young people are living with granny or grandad, and alternative arrangements can't be made, then those young people have to keep their distance and wear masks. 

5) If handwashing makes a difference before and after shopping then insist on it. Again, that would be relatively easy to enforce, but it's not happening here in Wales.  

Seems to me that if the basics of infection control were more clearly defined and enforced, there would be much less need for all these bureaucratic rules - such as how far you can travel for exercise, where you can travel to and so on  - and people would be more responsive and responsible. 

It is a pertinent question - I have occasionally wondered if a dose of Covid and a quick death is really a worse outcome than living in the socially paranoid, face mask wearing "new normal" some people with a platform seem to be revelling in mapping out for us.  They can shove it (once the health is reduced that is) as far as I am concerned.

Actually I am hopeful when I think about coming out the other side. You need sh!t times to make the good times feel better, its like cycling in the rain when the ideal is riding around Mallorca in 30 deg. The 90's were a great time because quite a lot of "bad" stuff had finished and people felt positive again. 

I dont really feel sorry for the elderly as by definition when you get old you exist on the richness of your memories not the time you have left, mostly I feel sorry for the younger generation who are bearing the brunt of this both socially and economically.

I don't get this reaction to masks.

•  If I go out of my house naked I'm not going to make it perhaps half a mile before a police car picks me up for a chat.  There's absolutely nothing wrong with the naked human form, and I am harming nobody by going out so dressed, but we have repressive rules that have the effect of shaping the whole nation's view on "shame" and "disgust" and that criminalise our natural form in the majority of settings.  Being what we are is regarded as criminal behaviour.  This is to me a clear example of restricting freedoms in a repressive way.  It's not one I get at all riled up about, it doesn't bother me, but at it's core I see it as repressive state action.  It's so normalised that many people share the fundamentally unhealthy view that someone going about their business naked is somehow a pervert or a risk.  It results in children growing up in a world full of mystery over their bodies which leads to all sorts of body image problems and makes them more vulnerable to creeps who exploit the effects of that fetishisation and secrecy.
• Requiring an individual to wear a mask for a limited subset of settings (public transport, going in to a shop, some workplaces etc) is far less controlling than the approach to nudity in the UK.  It applies to far fewer places, and it applies clothing to a far smaller part of your body.   Beyond that it has an actual purpose rooted in the public interest - allowing the places you go to remain open without your presence in them being able to contribute to the functional collapse of healthcare.

Although not known for my patience or mild-mannered demeanour I have found myself quite stoical about Covid so far. Although very much of an age where contracting it could easily be fatal I don't seem to worry about it. There are probably many reasons for this. For a start, I don't have a job to lose, or a mortgage to pay, and my income is enough to meet my standards of a comfortable life. I don't live in an urban area, or, worse, in a high-rise block. I have quite a large garden which is a great source of solace and remain fit enough to get out walking or cycling (or even climbing, weather permitting). So it is easy for me to say this, but if I do get a bit depressed I count my blessings, though I understand that apart from my age I am one of the lucky ones. Unfortunately, though, my age makes me unwilling to take risks over infection so I don't feel in a position to offer much help to anyone else, though I have done a bit of shopping for some less able neighbours. If younger, I think I would want to help pass the time if not working by volunteering for something to help others less fortunate. It cheered me up a bit yesterday to send a cheque to the local foodbank, and I think it is incumbent on people in my position (where the pandemic actually saves me a lot of money) to recycle some of it, and I am in the process of doubling up on what charitable giving I make. I hope this doesn't sound too boastful, just pointing out the old adage that it is better to give than receive. There is a cheering effect in doing this (but only, of course, if you can afford it).

This doesn't alter the fact that there are many downs in this year of trouble. Not going to theatre or concerts, not inviting friends for meals, not seeing family and specially grandchildren, and missing out on foreign holidays. The thing which depresses me most of all, and I think about far too often for comfort, is that at my age I may never again be able to enjoy touring around France or the Alps. But then I count my blessings. If I die next week I can have no complaints.

I went to a party once where we all had to wear a mask and nothing else.

Actually, the lady I met there was oddly repressive as well....

She must've been in government. 

Maybe its symbolism. I wasnt keen on face masks back at the start as they remind me a bit too much of oppressive Eastern regimes. I am no more keen on them now as face-mask non-usage has become the principle whinge of the pro-control lobby, despite widespread usage seemingly having little or no effect on stemming outbreaks anywhere. Its no big deal to wear one in a shop or whatever but I would be happier if the government could lay down the criteria where we can all burn them for good (I am bit disappointed it looks like Nov 5th will be premature for this).

Are they having little effect?  

The news is very negative on outbreaks here and outbreaks there, but the key measure of spread - the time it takes for the number of deaths to double - is about 4 times longer than it was back in March/April.  This is a massive improvement in our situation, it's hard to over-state the importance of this difference.  Masks are one of many risk control measures that have helped to push this doubling time up to something no longer catastrophic.  I don't know how much mask wearing is contributing to this, but I've got no interest in finding out by stopping it.  

Yes, this is a really important point.  If the government set out milestones for the end of regional and national risk control measures, it would give people concrete goals to work towards.  That's one of the easily fixable differences I see between the ever changing approach in the UK and the "Team of 5 million" approach that's consistently underpinned the response in NZ.

As if things were not bad enough, in the last 24 hours we have had sixteen scam phone calls. We have answered none of them but it's very disturbing especially when, like us, you have hospitalised or vulnerable relatives.

I do wonder if any of them are covid scammers

What on earth makes you think dying of covid would be a quick death? You really have misunderstood a lot about the disease! OK it's not like a long drawn out cancer, but dying of breathing difficulties and/or organ failure comes no where my top 100 ways to die. But each to their own.

I agree. I think we'll appreciate the things we took for granted.

What do you mean by elderly? My parents are in their 70s, they do loads of stuff they enjoy and don't just sit around reminiscing. They both do a lot of travelling, walking, playing music, socialising, etc, etc. They're not just about to die, but my dad's had cancer and pneumonia so if he caught covid he'd be at risk. Do you think you've made a fair assessment of the value of his life, or are you being utterly thoughtless?

Can you find a way to string them along and bait them (without of course giving them anything they want)? I've seen a few very inventive scam baiters on YouTube. It must be quite entertaining and satisfying to reduce them to apoplexy, one way to cheer yourself up I suppose. It depends how much time you have on your hands.

A bit like the way not smearing shit all over public toilet cubicles is a "principle whinge" of the "pro sanitation lobby". Or that not robbing local shops is a "principle whinge" of the "pro rule of law lobby". 

You live in a society, with social norms that are there for a reason. Leave the toilet cubicle as you found it, don't rob shop, and wear a f*cking mask.

Really? Your grasp on the evidence is better than all of the world's public health authorities? Don't believe you, because you're talking crap. When you talk about science, you're opinion isn't valid just because you think it is. It's valid when it corresponds with the best available evidence. When what you say is contrary to the scientific consensus, you are, by definition, talking complete crap.

How would the government know that? Should they take your approach and just make something up that they like the sound of?

Just been talking to a friend of mine who, seven years ago, went through nearly twelve months of tests, biopsies, scans and chemo for cancer. Thankfully he got throught it. He would not wish that on anyone and it was not a pleasant time for him but what he did say was that,looking back, it was actually more tolerable than what we're going through now. He knew there was every liklihood of him pulling through and there was light at the end of the tunnel. This helped him stay positive and make plans for the future. 

I went through 4 years of it. Including several weeks in a isolation room where anyone coming in had to adhere to full barrier nursing. Gowns, masks, wash hands etc. 
 

It’s given me a completely different outlook. 
 

Get your heads down and do what you’re told. It’s for 6 months max. 

Neither you nor I know that.

Yes, this.  Cummings *still* has to go; we haven't forgotten.

Even if it’s for 4 years! Just get your head down. 

The vaccine results will be announced in the next week or so.

I was not being wholly serious when saying death is preferable, but people need a future to look forwards to

My parents are in their 70s too, I don't want them to die either, but comparatively their lives have been hit a lot less hard than most 16-24 year olds this summer. They still have a pension and a nice retirement, they are not seeing their future prospects go up in dust

Many pensioners have neither a decent pension nor a nice retirement.

They might be living their final days, months or years in isolation.

While some, but by no means all, younger people might be hard hit the idea that their lives  will be forever blighted is a bit hysterical to say the least.

You can choose to believe everything you are told, or you can question it, it's a choice we are free to make. I wear a mask but I am not compelled to like or agree with it. My opinion is hardened by the single use plastic waste generated. Point me to any real world evidence if you have it available (i.e not lab scenarios) - but a quick glance at infection rates you will see that have shot up since mask rules were tightened across Europe

I don't think I've watched a live news broadcast since it all kicked off in March, or a press conference. I browse the BBC news site and Guardian from time to time, but not watching stuff helps my mental health.

I have my first Face2Face class with students tomorrow morning and am very much looking forward to it. I was on the water course with Josh last weekend and it was great to do something relatively normal. I get excited when the 'pager' goes off because it means I may get to travel to the hills.

There is pretty good evidence from earlier recessions that the earning ability will be permanently reduced for those entering the job market during them.

For those kids starting uni now. I remember when I did even with a tad more exposure than others it did hit hard living away from home. So to do so and then for many to get locked down is going to screw with their heads.

Then we have the younger kids whose education will be interrupted and the even younger ones whose initial socialisation will be interrupted. 

They will then be getting all the bills which the older generations palmed off onto them. So yeah I have a lot of sympathy for them.

There’s certainly going to be hardship and disturbance and those affected have my sympathy as well.

However, previous generations have endured their own hardships and managed to enjoy success. 

Yeah you can believe what you like. When it comes to science, it's not like which flavour of ice cream you prefer, your beliefs will be either wrong or right. There's no validity to beliefs that aren't true, they're just crap beliefs.

You're right, you're not compelled to like it. Whether or not you agree with the policy should be a matter of what reasons you give to support your view (unless you actually don't believe in reason, in which case, don't bother having a conversation with anyone, it's pointless). If your reasons are supported by evidence and lead to good outcomes (i.e. less suffering), then you've got good reasons that are worth listening to. If your reasons aren't supported by evidence and lead to bad outcomes, then no one will gain anything from listening - your view will be worthless.

I get the impression that you're wheeling out an excuse that isn't the genuine concern you're making out, but it's a valid disadvantage.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8 (references at the bottom)

If you think that's evidence about the efficacy of masks, can I suggest that you go back to school?

Excellent I am sure they will be happy with the sympathy.

Some did, some have mostly claimed the hardships of those who came before them and pretended that they werent in an age where they benefited massively before they set fire to the ladders which had helped them up.

I think different people have been hit in lots of different ways and it's not helpful to think in terms of young and old. Some old people will have been completely isolated from their families and had everything they love taken away from them. Some won't have batted an eyelid and just carried on living a comfortable life, and maybe wondered why they didn't do online grocery shopping before. Similarly, some youngsters will have had their exciting new business ripped to shreds whereas for others, it won't have made any difference to how much time they've spent in their room gaming and masturbating.

It's affected us all in different ways, and I suspect it's people who haven't got much money have lost out the most, not the old or the young.

Before the last general election and Brexit wasn't a done deal I was totally psyched to get home and watch the ten o'clock news followed by Newsnight for the next thrilling twists and turns. After the election I definitely felt quite bereft of this and covid has undoubtedly gone some way to filling the gap - for me there has been a real fascination, almost a perverse thrill, with living through and following what is probably the biggest global event since WW2. I don't think following the news has been bad for my mental health or well-being; what has affected me at times have been the direct personal impacts of not getting out to the hills or climbing for a while and losing the social contact of going to the wall.

..and to jail if he lied about second Durham trip:  https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/30/dossier-alleges-cummings-m...

The media should be trying to raise morale like they did in World War Two. Instead they constantly go on about how bad it all is. I only watch the last few minutes of the news to avoid it all, nearly half an hour of news is devoted to it. Then the local tv news does the same. Then the one show starts afterwards and guess what they talk about!. Its on everywhere.

And don't mention the papers..

Well that would need Durham Constabulary to investigate the multiple reports of the alleged second visit, which to date they seem to be resisting.

Then again DC lied over his first trip, as it turned out to be a “second home” and not his dad’s farm, as claimed.  Which is a critical distinction in terms of the rules.

That’s because we have political commentators reporting on science subjects. And people with agendas are hijacking a serious pandemic for ideological reasons.

It might work for some but if I turned on the TV to get a load of Ed sheeran singing Vera Lynn classics or whatever, it would not have the desired effect. 

the evidence would be in the national ANPR database for his trip back to London that day which will now be looked at/ has been looked at/deleted?

third home as he's now paying 2 extra council taxes

I really do not want the media to be defining the mood of the country.  Rarely ends well when a bunch of journos and their puppet masters are allowed too much influence.

As we are seeing right now.

Are you serious? It is bad, really bad. If you don't want to know about it by all means avoid the serious news sources, but it would be outrageous if the BBC or whatever were being dishonest about events in order to "raise morale" with fake news.

You obviously need to read the Daily Express; apparently Boris has been doing a fantastic job and it's all going to be over by Christmas with nobody dead and the economy booming.

I read this from time to time: https://www.justgivemepositivenews.com/

Works a treat 😊

On the face of it quite uplifting but how do we know that such things ARE going ahead?

Then there's always people like you to  tell those who don't agree with you that they have the wrong view and are confused about the pandemic. That doesn't help.

Like all the other experts on here I doubt you have much experience of handling a pandemic unless you count the now disgraced  N Ferguson who 'cured' the country of Foot 'N Mouth by ordering the slaughter of 6,000,000 farm animals.

I didn't vote for the country to be run by a bunch of medical nerds, some of whom are simply number crunching epidemical specialists.  

Whack a Mole, lockdown, whack a mole, lockdown.  With no end in sight it isn't conducive to good health or morale.  Our population isn't plummeting down, its continued to grow even now.  

We are borrowing money like there's no tomorrow  and giving it away like sweeties in the hope it will keep companies going until we ?????????????   Squash the mole?  Well there isn't a tomorrow for many businesses as they won't and cannot stand yet another lockdown.

As for protecting the NHS.  Clearly the NHS hasn't been funded well enough if it is being 'overwhelmed by what amounts to relatively small numbers of admissions.  We've now got  people dying from a combination of undiagnosed illness and untreated diseases because they can't get the treatment they need because the hospitals are too busy dealing with other matters. 

So I'm really sorry that there are people who don't agree with what the government are doing and therefore we are confused about the pandemic - but luckily we've got plenty of experts here to point out the errors of our opinion.  That really helps.  Thanks. 

Do tell us your experience of handling a pandemic.  That will at least cheer me up. 

I accept the opinions of those who have formed the consensus on the best science and policies.

The burden to provide their credentials falls on those who take a different view. 

As always there is a balance. 
 

I don’t think that balance is being represented. There’s an over abundance of political reporting and an abundance of fear-mongering and in particular there is lots of ideology being presented as fact. 
 

The only ‘science’ we see are the graphs being presented by what amounts to another political organisation. SAGE are independent, but there’s no querying of their presentations by science journalists. 

That is bullshit, you are comparing the wrong things. I leave you to work out what the relevant comparison would be to test the efficacy of masks.

Anyway, we have sufficient data from the first wave around April, when case numbers were first rising exponentially that prove that the most effective single intervention for lowering R is masks. Conversely, hand sanitization seems to be less crucial.

The German federal and local devolution of health matters provided a great laboratory setting for testing this: There were rules on distancing, limitin gcontacts and travel, and hand hygiene in place state wide, but some municipalities in addition mandated masks two weeks ahead of everybody else. These were the same areas where infection rates, hospitalisations, and deaths started dropping two weeks earlier than in other, comparable municipalities. In Jena in Thuringia, infections jumping between different clusters (read families, largely) stopped almost immediately when mask became mandatory in shops and public transport. Obvious difference, no one wears a mask at home.

Mask were also the reason why the Czech republic came through the first wave rather unscathed, again they were mandating mask wearing weeks ahead of their neighbours in Austria and Bavaria, while all other regulations were pretty similar. No idea what went wrong since, the second wave over there is a disaster.

I agree about chucking disposable masks on the ground, that is environmental arseholery of the first order.

CB

I suggest you try reading the OP's opening statement.  If you can't be bothered here it is:-

"How are others affected by the mental impact of Covid?

I'm getting to the point where I can't even be bothered to read the paper or watch the news. Everyday we are drip fed statistics, graphs and data which, if the truth were known, are meaningless to most people. When all this kicked off I saw Whitty and Vallance as figure of authority who would encourage us and help us through the crisis. Now, all they seem to do is indoctrinate us with increasing levels of fear and paranoia.

I think a lot of people, especially the (active) elderly feel they have little to look forward to. Sadly that feeling can, ultimately, have disastrous consequences as people start asking what is the point of life".

Like the OP I wasn't asking what you thought about my opinion and to be quite honest I really don't care about your superior manner  - the OP, like me, and others,  are saying what they/we/I think and feel about the current situation.  Unlike you  I don't need to provide proof of how I feel or what I think.  If you and some  others cannot accept that then perhaps you are  somewhat lacking in empathy, sympathy & understanding.

Enjoy the next month. 

Its not bullshit, it is a fact - infection rates have gone up since mask rules have been tightened. It may be bullshit to say one has caused the other, but the correlation exists. The reason I mentioned it is that a few months ago one of the main pieces of "evidence" for introducing masks was the suggestion that case rates were lower in Asian countries where mask wearing is more normal. The fact that people in these same countries are much less likely to be fat for example was ignored. Why are we prepared to jump on such flimsy evidence to introduce restrictions, but dismiss the similarly flimsy evidence that points the opposite way? Worst case it is detrimental as we end up with rafts of restrictions and no idea which ones are actually working.

Really? I dont remember seeing anyone wearing face masks in April. You dont think the social distancing of lockdown had the bigger influence? Even that is questionable as the virus looks highly seasonal and the advent of warm sunny weather may have flattered the impact lockdown had.

They jumped to the conclusion that mask wearing was the reason for their small first wave when the actual reason was probably something else?

Loads of research has been done. I posted a summary with references.

People train for years to do science. They don't just guess. Look at the research if you want to know the answers.

The way this works is that lots of trained people work really hard to work out the way things work, as best they can. It's not foolproof, but it's the best human beings can do. The research is reviewed in a process called meta-analysis, from which public health officials draw up simple advice about things we can practically do. Sometimes governments will legislate to make this advice law.

People who don't know anything chipping in with guesses isn't part of this process. It doesn't have any value.

Relatively small compared to what? Compared to normal admissions for any particular cause they're massive.

The relatively small percentage  of people who catch Covid go on to be admitted to hospital.

Relatively small  percentage compared  to the numbers admitted to hospital for SARS, Bird Flu/chicken flu and/or Ebola. Life threatening cancers, Heart diseases and so on.,  

It also makes me wonder how we would have coped during the cold war if ever they'd been a nuclear explosion in the UK.

Everyone on here pretty much is an armchair expert. Are we allowed to debate or must we stick to toeing the line of an echo chamber?

You dont have to do too much research to find out that the "experts" are far from agreed themselves.

You can say that vaccines cause autism or that climate change is a hoax. It's not a debate though, it just means you're scientifically illiterate. The points you've made are untrue,  e.g. "a few months ago one of the main pieces of "evidence" for introducing masks was the suggestion that case rates were lower in Asian countries where mask wearing is more normal. The fact that people in these same countries are much less likely to be fat for example was ignored." That's scientifically illiterate, it doesn't reflect the evidence.

A debate is worthwhile we there isn't a right answer, e.g. does cutting taxes stimulate the economy and increase opportunities, or should we pay more taxes to improve services? There's no scientific answer to that question, it's up for debate.

An echo chamber is where people's *opinions* are all aligned, and they're reinforcing those opinions among each other. This is relevant where it's a political issue with no right answer. When you're talking about science, the best informed assessment of the evidence is correct - it doesn't matter if people on an internet forum agree or disagree, because it's a matter of scientific fact, not opinion. 

You seem to be completely confused about the difference between a political opinion and a scientific fact.

Much like anti-vax and climate denial, there are cranks. When you deny the established scientific consensus and choose instead to support the cranks, you're not making valid points in a "debate"- you're just factually wrong.

When you find yourself saying that "you're entitled to hold a different view" without giving any reasons why anyone should believe in your position, when the issue is one that has been answered by scientific research, it means that you've lost. You either have the best informed assessment of the evidence, or you're wrong. It's not a matter of opinion.

Actually science is mostly advanced because people "just guess".

You then  work to test, prove or disprove your guess / theory.

Indeed. Cases are rising and our hospitals are very likely to be overwhelmed if we don’t do anything, that is fact. 
 

What we do about it is, I’m afraid, very much up for debate.

Absolute nonsense. Science advances by people understanding the best available evidence in a specific area - they then ask extremely well-constructed questions that they don't know the answer to and might make testable hypotheses on the basis of deep expertise, for which they seek empirical support or refutation.

That is not guessing, it is scientific investigation.

Absolutely. And what we do about it must be debated on the basis of the best informed assessment of the evidence.

No. Someone acts on it given the evidence. 
 

Everyone keeps putting Sweden up there. They have strong government and complaint population. Their government told everyone to reduce contact. 90% of their population changed their behaviour overnight. This isn’t something that suddenly happened this is due to years and years of good governance and trust. 
 

Look at the U.K.  The government proposes a 4 week lockdown - everyone asks if they can be excepted because of their mental health and the well being of the children, or the importance of their own personal business, and because for their activity the incidence is very low. 
 

What people don’t see is cumulative effect of all those very low incidences. But in reality they don’t want to see it, because they’re selfish and ignorant. 
 

What we don’t need is debates, what we need is someone to make a decision and for people to follow it. 
 

But we live in a democracy and it will be our undoing. Some things should just not be up for debate. 

I'm not saying we should hold a referendum on covid measures, or that a "public debate" on social media has any value whatsoever.

Are you saying that there should be advisors and just a single decision maker? What I would most like to see is a competent cabinet who I trusted to act in the national interest - so that the cases for, health, education, business, etc could be made in some sort of structured way. I'm kind of agnostic about whether Parliament should have a vote. Too many people with irrelevant motivations and no relevant knowledge involved in the decision making process that way. But it I guess it provides some check and balance for a batshit/corrupt cabinet.

You seem to be confusing scientific fact from scientific probability. We know masks have an effect under lab conditions, to say its a fact that they are slowing outbreaks in the real world alongside a whole host of other mechanisms are is not correct. It may be to true to degree but it is not proven.

Initially the "best informed assessment" for dexamethasone was initially that it would do more harm than good. It was only one lone trial that pushed the boat against the weight of the majority opinion that found it had a strong benefit. 

Science never proves anything. It is only capable of making statements that are overwhelmingly likely to be true. When we don't have good enough to evidence to be sure, we can say "the jury's out", as more evidence is gathered we can increase our confidence to the point where we can be justified in using words like "fact" or "true", with the implicit understanding that this is probabilistic and not deductive. 

So no, I am not confused.

When we don't have good enough to evidence to be sure, we can say "the jury's out", as more evidence is gathered we can increase our confidence to the point where we can be justified in using words like "fact" or "true".

Why would that be any different in the real world. The problem with masks is the general public only come across them when doing DIY to protect themselves or in medical setting when they incorrectly assume the doctors are wearing them to protect themselves from sick people.

And with masks it’s not a black a white issue is it? Do they ‘work’ in a lab setting? They reduce, not eliminate. That’s always been known to be the case. What wasn’t clear was how much they reduced.  

When the studies were looked at they found that they were overdosing people and also not giving them at the right time. We need to be a bit more careful how we rely on trails that have been rushed and done on small case numbers in specific settings. 

Which is a political viewpoint. What you see as the national interest is different to what I see. Very few people are looking at national interest. They’re looking at whether they can go down the pub or play football. That’s not something you fix by having a few years of a competent cabinet. 

I'm still not clear -are you saying that there should be advisors and just a single decision maker?

True. If you extend the idea out to the wider democracy, I'm saying that the best situation is where there is a cabinet perceived as acting in the national interest across the population. In a situation like a pandemic, that shouldn't be unrealistic - but it has fallen down, because we voted in people who clearly cannot be trusted to act in the national interest.

I don't really care what the we, the public, think are the best covid measures. The government should have sufficient authority (and I would rather that came from trust rather than threats of punishment or troops on the streets) to make decisions about how to deal with a pandemic that are implemented effectively. If people think "I don't like these cvoid measures because I like going to the football" but they implicitly understand that the policy is made in good faith in the national interest, then that's a very different situation to where they just think they're being screwed for no good reason. The current gvt is so bad at maintaining trust that they'll probably end up doing it with troops...

"Actually science is mostly advanced because people "just guess".  You then  work to test, prove or disprove your guess / theory."

Is that not the same thing with frilly knickers on ?

Science advances by people (who are really clever and know their stuff) who make (extremely well constructed and good) hypotheses (guesses) (because they are well informed, respected, and saying the right things). They then seek to test, to prove or disprove.

I’m saying that whoever the decision maker is, should be free to make that decision without every man and his dog questioning every detailed aspect. We seem to have a generally stupid electorate who can’t follow simple rules. People in this country have no self-discipline and everything is everyone else’s fault. We have no science journalists, and even if we did, the public are generally STEM illiterate. 
 

We have a free press who have no interest in what is the National Interest, most of them aren’t even British owned and judging by some of the absolute tosh they defend as important news, they’re only interested in selling copy and advertising. 
 

While the press are interested in dividing the country for their own means, even a competent government won’t be listened to. 
 

Case in point, Boris had everything ready for an announcement on Monday. It was leaked to the press on Saturday and we then get a load of rumours and half truths resulting in a rushed presentation and damage limitation exercise on Saturday evening before he’s had a chance to talk about it in Parliament. Which make them look even worse. 
 

We are all being played. 

Why not? Seems like you want a dictatorship in the original sense of the word.

Those simple rules government ministers have frequently had difficulty explaining?

Case in point he clearly didnt judging from the poor presentation.

A further case in point he wasted several weeks and caused a more serious lockdown. Are you saying it would have been best if no one could have questioned that?

There was no difficulty in explaining or understanding the rules. Unless you wanted to deliberately misunderstand them or paint government ministers as stupid, by devising ridiculous scenarios. 
 

Let’s look at Sweden. Lots of people like to look at Sweden. They had no rules - they had a single statement. Reduce social contact. Let’s look at the U.K. we have some nice guidelines to follow. How is it that Swedish people could work that out for themselves and yet the British people completely failed to work it out, even with guidelines. 
 

Are you one of those people who had difficulty understanding what we were supposed to be doing? 

Has he?

No they were very simple questions. That the government ministers appear stupid I would suggest is more down to them being chosen for loyalty to the glorious leader over actual talent.

Hmm not sure I would use Sweden as the basis for great advice to be honest but lets roll with it.

See that is crap since it doesnt give any obvious levels eg so I just go down the pub once a week instead of every night and dont take the kids down the playground?

Well we had a proposal of a 2 week lockdown which could have included schools and so had more bang for its buck.

Now we need a 5 week one.

Obviously the former could have failed and needed lengthening but then so could the latter and I suspect its more likely in that case.

If you like. Why do you need levels? Avoid social contact with other people. Is going down the pub avoiding people?

I think you’re demonstrating why we have the type of government we have.  

So not definite then? 

Of course its not certain. However judging from the track record of cracking down early vs late its a good bet.

No I am simply pointing out the flaws in "single statement" approach which can be supported by seeing how they performed against their peers.

If I'm given a choice of listening to someone

a) who understands the best available evidence in a specific area - they then ask extremely well-constructed questions that they don't know the answer to and might make testable hypotheses on the basis of deep expertise

or 

b) just guesses

I think I'll go for a), regardless of their choice of undergarments.

So a) Is really clever and makes testable guesses, because they know loads.

and b) Is stupid, knows nothing, and just proposes things at random that can't be tested.

You apply a) or b) to someone on your judgement of it being right or not ?

I find it incredible that you use this as an argument.

Correlation, as any good scientist will tell you, is not causation.

Are you seriously suggesting that all the masks those surgeons wear are useless?

Or that increased testing has not affected the case numbers?

Anyway back to the basic facts. At the start of April there wasn't a whole deal of evidence to prove that masks had any effect since then various studies have been done

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8

Initially: In hospitals and other health-care facilities, the use of medical-grade masks clearly cuts down transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. But for the variety of masks in use by the public, the data are messy, disparate and often hastily assembled.

A preprint study4 posted in early August (and not yet peer reviewed), found that weekly increases in per-capita mortality were four times lower in places where masks were the norm or recommended by the government, compared with other regions.

Although scientists can’t control many confounding variables in human populations, they can in animal studies. Researchers led by microbiologist Kwok-Yung Yuen at the University of Hong Kong housed infected and healthy hamsters in adjoining cages, with surgical-mask partitions separating some of the animals. Without a barrier, about two-thirds of the uninfected animals caught SARS-CoV-2, according to the paper7 published in May. But only about 25% of the animals protected by mask material got infected, and those that did were less sick than their mask-free neighbours (as measured by clinical scores and tissue changes).

Inevitably it is hard to do an accurate study in humans as there are so many variables, (are masks being worn correctly, are they of sufficient quality, population density, etc, etc.) but there is enough evidence out there to confidently say that wearing a mask makes a difference.

Finally from Nature:

The findings provide justification for the emerging consensus that mask use protects the wearer as well as other people. The work also points to another potentially game-changing idea: “Masking may not only protect you from infection but also from severe illness,” says Monica Gandhi, an infectious-disease physician at the University of California, San Francisco.

Actually, while experts may disagree that String theory is valid or not, in regard to the current pandemic generally they are in agreement over a) its existence b) use of masks and most of the broadly accepted information. There is still debate over how likely it is to re-infect and how effect a vaccine may be in the long term. Information on infection is growing everyday, for instance early on it was thought to be via moisture droplets now that is swinging towards aerosol droplets as more evidence comes in, also lack of smell and taste has been added to the list of symptoms.

Just to clarify: David Icke is not an expert

That’s always been the case. The problem is trying to explain to the general public the relative importance of those two methods and the specific conditions where they become a factor. In particular the use of the word ‘airborne’ which scientists don’t even agree on in normal times. 
 

The main issue, as I see it, is determining an infectious dose. Until we have a cure, we can’t test that ethically. If we get a vaccine, we won’t need to. 
 

I seem to remember people washing their weekly shop as well. 
 

Isnt that what I said?

I think it was this bit that made me think you were weighing towards correlation

A bit like saying "yes it MAY be bullshit. But the correlation EXISTS" The implication being that the correlation is significant. Apologies if I got that wrong

Well let me ask you this, if all European countries had seen rapid drop-offs in infection rates since mask rules were tightened, would you (or anyone else here) refrain from citing that particular correlation as an argument to wear them?

We're talking about a real world example here. 

On the one hand we have Lynne Peeples, summarising the research on masks. On other the we have Richard Horn who is guessing having understood nothing about the subject.

I'm saying very simply that there good reasons to listen to Lynne Peeples and equally good reasons to ignore Richard Horn. Are you suggesting that I should consider their views on masks to be equally valid? That would be stupid, wouldn't it?

I wouldn't cite it as a correlation as it is too vague. Like saying cases have gone up because people bought more toilet paper or drank more at home. Testing has improved since the first lockdown hence more cases recorded, plus pubs, schools, shops etc have been open so masks or no masks I would still expect to see more cases. So no I wouldn't use it in an argument for overall infections

To clarify.

If there had been a massive drop off and you could compare that to places that hadn't and the main difference had been the wearing of masks then yes it would be a good working hypothesis to say that masks had helped. However you would have to take into account other factors that might be significant. Stronger lockdown at the start (Hi New Zealand), social distancing, population density etc.

The confers argument is that without mask wearing the cases might be higher now than they already are. Therefore a simple numbers going up or down is related to mask use is not necessarily a cause and effect

I'm not saying don't report it. But its all they talk about. Its on for 25 mins of a half hour news bulletin, followed by more on the local news, then on topical programs  after that. 

Its affecting people mental health.

Haha!

You see it works.

hee hee!, 

That is a different matter from suggesting the BBC should be churning out morale boosting propaganda.