Reports: UK to enter second nation-wide lockdown next week

First topic message reminder :

Summarizing from several sources I've read tonight, Boris Johnson is expected to announce Monday a second national UK lockdown, starting Wednesday and lasting until December 1. It will likely leave only essential shops and educational environments open.

I never thought, back in March, that there would still be no end in sight!

The projections of deaths that were wheeled out by Whitty/Valance/SAGE a few weeks ago said that there could be 1000 deaths a day by now... That's 7000 a week... It was 761 last week...

Be patient, tommy.

The predicted tsunami turned out to be a trickle...

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but when people compare this virus to the flu virus, when the facts and figures show very clearly that Covid19 is far more dangerous, infects and kills  hundreds of thousands more people than the flu virus does ...and obviously there is no vaccine available to help prevent the spread, it amazes me that some people keep believing that governments throughout the world are over reacting.

Covid is more dangerous. The point is, the flu is a danger, as it kills people. What should be done by the individual or the government to lower the risk of infection and possible death?

Well to lower the risk of being infected by the flu there is a seasonal vaccine offered free to many and available for a small charge to others.

To lower the risk of Cocid19 it's the same advice as has been offered since March, wash your hands and social distance...they added wear a mask a few weeks ago.

I believe the way so many people have totally ignored the advice is the main reason the virus is building rapidly again, and it's because of this a 2nd lockdown is coming in on Thursday.

Original Quill wrote:Be patient, tommy.

Tommy will be proved right even if it kills him.



















Must add hopefully it wont. x

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Covid is more dangerous. The point is, the flu is a danger, as it kills people. What should be done by the individual or the government to lower the risk of infection and possible death?

Well to lower the risk of being infected by the flu there is a seasonal vaccine offered free to many and available for a small charge to others.

To lower the risk of Cocid19 it's the same advice as has been offered since March, wash your hands and social distance...they added wear a mask a few weeks ago.

I believe the way so many people have totally ignored the advice is the main reason the virus is building rapidly again, and it's because of this a 2nd lockdown is coming in on Thursday.

But you can still die from the flu, even with the vaccine.

We all accept risk of death by many of our behaviors. It's all about where you draw the line.

When someone says better safe than sorry they really mean better safer but still at some risk than sorry.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:Be patient, tommy.

Tommy will be proved right even if it kills him.



















Must add hopefully it wont. x

Tommy is young and healthy. He's more likely to get shanked by someone for sharing the wrong cartoon.

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:

Well to lower the risk of being infected by the flu there is a seasonal vaccine offered free to many and available for a small charge to others.

To lower the risk of Cocid19 it's the same advice as has been offered since March, wash your hands and social distance...they added wear a mask a few weeks ago.

I believe the way so many people have totally ignored the advice is the main reason the virus is building rapidly again, and it's because of this a 2nd lockdown is coming in on Thursday.

But you can still die from the flu, even with the vaccine.  

We all accept risk of death by many of our behaviors.  It's all about where you draw the line.  

When someone says better safe than sorry they really mean better safer but still at some risk than sorry.  

You can die from sneezing, or crossing the road, or looking at someone the wrong way..

I'm glad I'm not the one who has to decide how risky something is before action is called to curtail it....thankfully we have scientists, experts and researchers who can do that for us, and then oftentimes it's a gamble.

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:

But you can still die from the flu, even with the vaccine.  

We all accept risk of death by many of our behaviors.  It's all about where you draw the line.  

When someone says better safe than sorry they really mean better safer but still at some risk than sorry.  

You can die from sneezing, or crossing the road, or looking at someone the wrong way..

I'm glad I'm not the one who has to decide how risky something is before action is called to curtail it....thankfully we have scientists, experts and researchers who can do that for us, and then oftentimes it's a gamble.

You do make those choices though.

I know a woman who wears a mask when she pumps fuel and on other days with high pollution.

She would tell you she is being safe.

Personally I think she's bat shit crazy, but she is limiting her exposure to something potentially dangerous.

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:

You can die from sneezing, or crossing the road, or looking at someone the wrong way..

I'm glad I'm not the one who has to decide how risky something is before action is called to curtail it....thankfully we have scientists, experts and researchers who can do that for us, and then oftentimes it's a gamble.

You do make those choices though.  

I know a woman who wears a mask when she pumps fuel and on other days with high pollution.

She would tell you she is being safe.

Personally I think she's bat shit crazy, but she is limiting her exposure to something potentially dangerous.

Yes we make individual choices, till the governments usurp our free choice and make things mandatory....as has happened now.

Look at China, everyone there seemed to wear a mask voluntarily long before Covid19 came on the scene.

Maybe some people will continue wearing their masks in the UK and US long after this virus has gone, though I doubt it.

Most of the mask wearing by the Chinese is down to protection against air pollution.

So how do masks protect you from pollution, the particles can be microscopic but not from viruses?

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:

You do make those choices though.  

I know a woman who wears a mask when she pumps fuel and on other days with high pollution.

She would tell you she is being safe.

Personally I think she's bat shit crazy, but she is limiting her exposure to something potentially dangerous.

Yes we make individual choices, till the governments usurp our free choice and make things mandatory....as has happened now.

Look at China, everyone there seemed to wear a mask voluntarily  long before Covid19 came on the scene.

Maybe some people will continue wearing their masks in the UK and US long after this virus has gone, though I doubt it.

Quill wrote:A prudent person would say, better safe than sorry.

This is what started this. Will prudent people continue to wear masks to protect them from things that can kill them?

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:

Yes we make individual choices, till the governments usurp our free choice and make things mandatory....as has happened now.

Look at China, everyone there seemed to wear a mask voluntarily  long before Covid19 came on the scene.

Maybe some people will continue wearing their masks in the UK and US long after this virus has gone, though I doubt it.

Quill wrote:A prudent person would say, better safe than sorry.

This is what started this. Will prudent people continue to wear masks to protect them from things that can kill them?

Who knows.
Maybe people will be more aware of catching lurgies after all this.
I have gone on about the norovirus I caught in January,  I will continue to carry an anti viral foam around in my bag after the coronavirus has gone because i dont want that again.

Masks prevent you spreading germs to others rather than you receiving the germs...so I doubt well people will continue to wear them.

People have the common notion of catch a bug...I feel sick...go to bed, take two aspirin and get some rest...notion about the Covid-10 virus.

That is not the danger.  It is the spread.  It is a widely spread virus, with killer effects on some people. Others are asymptomatic.  The masks are not to protect you from catching it, they are to protect others from spread should you have it and not know it.

On the diamond Princess cruise liner, it stayed offshore with all of the occupants kept on board for weeks... Plenty of close proximity contact going on between all those on board... But only less than 20% of them contracted this virus...


Same goes for the USS navy ship population...

The people on the ships were isolated to their own cabins weren't they.
So didn't interact freely, therefore if the crew were careful when delivering food to the cabins, its not suprising rates of infection were low.

Tommy Monk wrote:


Most of the mask wearing by the Chinese is down to protection against air pollution.

We have lot's of Chinese residents and visitors in Manchester, it's not uncommon for them to wear the masks here also.

Vintage wrote:The people on the ships were isolated to their own cabins weren't they.
So didn't interact freely, therefore if the crew were careful when delivering food to the cabins, its not suprising rates of infection were low.

Not initially, and the virus had already gone round before that.

There was also a period of time when they were all allowed to walk around the decks too.

It's obvious, depending on whether you believe the scientists, experts and researchers who say coronavirus is a real threat, or whether you think it's just like flu and is grossly exaggerated by the media, you will believe the news reports that back up your own viewpoint.

I believe the voice of reason from thousands of medical professionals.

Syl wrote:It's obvious, depending on whether you believe the scientists, experts and researchers who say coronavirus is a real threat, or whether you think it's just like flu and is grossly exaggerated by the media, you will believe the news reports that back up your own viewpoint.

I think there are countless real threats and its interesting how we react to them. There never seems to be consistency based on it's real threat to us.

This is off topic in a way, but the number of people afraid to fly far outnumber those afraid to ride in a car, yet the latter activity is a much bigger threat.

Many people just believe what makes them comfortable, despite the facts and figures.

Vintage wrote:Many people just believe what makes them comfortable, despite the facts and figures.

Exactly that.

Tommy Monk wrote:


I believe the voice of reason from thousands of medical professionals.

You cherry pick which medical professionals you believe, and the ones who suit your own opinion will always win.

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:It's obvious, depending on whether you believe the scientists, experts and researchers who say coronavirus is a real threat, or whether you think it's just like flu and is grossly exaggerated by the media, you will believe the news reports that back up your own viewpoint.

I think there are countless real threats and its interesting how we react to them.  There never seems to be consistency based on it's real threat to us.  

This is off topic in a way, but the number of people afraid to fly far outnumber those afraid to ride in a car, yet the latter activity is a much bigger threat.

But it's a choice whether to fly or even drive, it's not a choice who we may come into contact with and be infected by a virus.

There are countless real threats in everyones life, and we negotiate round them applying logic and common sense.

Take AIDS, when that first appeared it scared many sexually active people to death. Some totally over reacted and blamed gays, refused to use a cup any had drunk from, shunned kids if they had a parent who had it.

Others listened to the science, took precautions to keep them safe, and carried on as normal.

There are thousands of eminent medical professionals saying what I say.

I've shown you the figures on current deaths... It was 10x higher in march/April... And even back then the nightingale hospitals weren't even needed...

The daily infection rate is staying around the same lately.

The current measures are already showing results.

Also... It is being reported that a quarter of pubs may now close for good, costing 300,000 jobs.

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I think there are countless real threats and its interesting how we react to them.  There never seems to be consistency based on it's real threat to us.  

This is off topic in a way, but the number of people afraid to fly far outnumber those afraid to ride in a car, yet the latter activity is a much bigger threat.

But it's a choice whether to fly or even drive, it's not a choice who we may come into contact with and be infected by a virus.

There are countless real threats in everyones life, and we negotiate round them applying logic and common sense.

Take AIDS, when that first appeared it scared  many sexually active people to death. Some totally over reacted and blamed gays, refused to use a cup any had drunk from, shunned kids if they had a parent who had it.

Others listened to the science, took precautions to keep them safe, and carried on as normal.

I would say most reactions are irrational. Fear makes people act silly.

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:

But it's a choice whether to fly or even drive, it's not a choice who we may come into contact with and be infected by a virus.

There are countless real threats in everyones life, and we negotiate round them applying logic and common sense.

Take AIDS, when that first appeared it scared  many sexually active people to death. Some totally over reacted and blamed gays, refused to use a cup any had drunk from, shunned kids if they had a parent who had it.

Others listened to the science, took precautions to keep them safe, and carried on as normal.

I would say most reactions are irrational. Fear makes people act silly.  

Trying to keep safe from an infectious virus that is once more gaining momentum here, another 397 today, is more common sense than fear, especially when you are over 60, which I am.

Tommy Monk wrote:

There are thousands of eminent medical professionals saying what I say.

I've shown you the figures on current deaths... It was 10x higher in march/April... And even back then the nightingale hospitals weren't even needed...

The daily infection rate is staying around the same lately.

The current measures are already showing results.

Also... It is being reported that a quarter of pubs may now close for good, costing 300,000 jobs.

You are in denial Tommy.
Deaths in the UK due to coronavirus were a handful a day a few short weeks ago, now they are 300 plus again, and that will rise alarmingly day by day if the lockdown isn't implemented now.

Yes it's sad about the pubs, and all the other businesses that wont survive, but it's better than seeing hundreds of people die a week surely.

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I would say most reactions are irrational. Fear makes people act silly.  

Trying to keep safe from an infectious virus that is once more gaining momentum here, another 397 today, is more common sense than fear, especially when you are over 60, which I am.

Yes... And everybody else should be allowed to carry on as normal...

No question we are going through a resurgence of the virus worldwide. Too much wishful thinking, causing people to reopen just when they were winning.

In a war, who lays down arms and goes home right off the field of battle? The enemy will just pick up its swords and chase after you. That’s what the virus did.

There was a lot of securing the gains to do, and that’s where we dropped the ball with this virus.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Syl wrote:
Trying to keep safe from an infectious virus that is once more gaining momentum here, another 397 today, is more common sense than fear, especially when you are over 60, which I am.

Yes... And everybody else should be allowed to carry on as normal...

Carrying on as normal is exactly how this virus spreads.

Viruses grow into pandemics by finding a host with habit patterns compatible with their own particular adaptive feature. Covid-19 grows with hosts in close proximity of one another, so that it may spread.

One way of looking at a pandemic is as a colony-creature, not a single microbe. Like bees and wasps, they attack in colonies, and that is where they do most of their damage.

With Covid, for the bug to be successful, the host must do the damage for the parasite…spread. The colony cannot jump from host to host unless the host him/herself mingles among other hosts, so that the microbe can leap from one to the next.

In actuality, Republicans and Tories are the compatible feature of this parasite, viewed as a colony-creature. They have made it a political point to get out and be social, disparaging masks, proper distancing, and other safety measures. Those are the host-habits most compatible with the parasite.

In a way, it's prophetic: didn't Republicans get into bed with another enemy parasite, the former communist Vladimir Putin? They seem bound to recklessness.

But...if it's about money, a capitalist cannot resist. Here, again, it's all about money: get the economy open so that the guys on top don’t lose their investments. And we all know that Republicans and Tories are married to capitalist money-making. They are the vulnerability of the host.

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:



Yes... And everybody else should be allowed to carry on as normal...

Carrying on as normal is exactly how this virus spreads.

And those with a very low chance of getting seriously ill from it, and an even lower chance of dying from it should be able to carry on as normal...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Syl wrote:

Carrying on as normal is exactly how this virus spreads.

And those with a very low chance of getting seriously ill from it, and an even lower chance of dying from it should be able to carry on as normal...

That's equally true about rape/killings, and even beheadings, too.  Do you subscribe?  In the past you have drawn a line on those, but survivors should also "be able to carry on as normal." Is that an acceptable answer?

If not, why the contradiction, toms?

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I would say most reactions are irrational. Fear makes people act silly.  

Trying to keep safe from an infectious virus that is once more gaining momentum here, another 397 today, is more common sense than fear, especially when you are over 60, which I am.

As Tommy says, at some point, you have to tailor you're response to your level of threat. It's why we have different rules for daycares and nursing homes.

I get the whole overwhelming the hospitals argument. If that's truly the case, something has to be done. Either expand the amount of beds, or do something that fills fewer of them.

Original Quill wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

And those with a very low chance of getting seriously ill from it, and an even lower chance of dying from it should be able to carry on as normal...

That's equally true about rape/killings, and even beheadings, too.  Do you subscribe?  In the past you have drawn a line on those, but survivors should also "be able to carry on as normal."  Is that an acceptable answer?

If not, why the contradiction, toms?

Are you drunk?

Maybe everyone over 60 should stay home, not mix with anyone under 60 and wait for the virus to pass.

That seems to be Tommys view.

Unfortunately for him, this country would grind to an even bigger halt if that happened.
Millions of 60's and over are still working, minding kids to enable the younger generation to work....not to mention the NHS and the government  would be in even bigger trouble if older medics and politicians  were locked up at home.

Tommy Monk wrote:

There are thousands of eminent medical professionals saying what I say.

I've shown you the figures on current deaths... It was 10x higher in march/April... And even back then the nightingale hospitals weren't even needed...

The daily infection rate is staying around the same lately.

The current measures are already showing results.

Almost 500 dead in the UK from coronavirus in the last 24 hours.

The daily infection rate from positive test results is still below 10% of number of tests carried out...


It has been in and around the low 20,000s for quite a while now... A few days ago it dropped to 18,500 approx and yesterday it was around 25,000... It is showing fluctuations per day but overall staying around 20,000...


And Syl... Schools and universities are not being closed during this new 'lockdown'... So it seems that what I suggested is already happening to a certain extent...


And let's face it... You are probably going to be staying in and avoiding contact and taking your precautions anyway, and probably have already been doing so over last few months... So why should it matter to you if other people are happy to carry on as normal?


Because the situation is, that huge numbers of people of various ages have been having to carry on as normal over the last 6 months anyway, going to work and traveling about etc, so that many others can stay indoors and take it easy, with the lights staying on and the TV to watch and the food to eat and the water coming in through the taps and the internet carrying on working and all the other various services carrying on etc...


Plenty of people are more than happy to carry on as normal... So why should they all be prevented from doing so and forced to sit indoors, just because you choose to do so yourself?


If you are doing that anyway... what difference does it make to you if others are happy to carry on doing what they want and doing a bit more mingling in a more regular normal way?

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That's equally true about rape/killings, and even beheadings, too.  Do you subscribe?  In the past you have drawn a line on those, but survivors should also "be able to carry on as normal."  Is that an acceptable answer?

If not, why the contradiction, toms?

Are you drunk?

It's not about me, Redneck. The issue is the easiness with which some people take life, as long as it's not them. The same people who are so cavalier about 1.1-million lives lost, get overly-incensed over one life.

To me, that seems like a contradiction.

Tommy Monk wrote:


The daily infection rate from positive test results is still below 10% of number of tests carried out...


It has been in and around the low 20,000s for quite a while now... A few days ago it dropped to 18,500 approx and yesterday it was around 25,000... It is showing fluctuations per day but overall staying around 20,000...


And Syl... Schools and universities are not being closed during this new 'lockdown'... So it seems that what I suggested is already happening to a certain extent...


And let's face it... You are probably going to be staying in and avoiding contact and taking your precautions anyway, and probably have already been doing so over last few months... So why should it matter to you if other people are happy to carry on as normal?


Because the situation is, that huge numbers of people of various ages have been having to carry on as normal over the last 6 months anyway, going to work and traveling about etc, so that many others can stay indoors and take it easy, with the lights staying on and the TV to watch and the food to eat and the water coming in through the taps and the internet carrying on working and all the other various services carrying on etc...


Plenty of people are more than happy to carry on as normal... So why should they all be prevented from doing so and forced to sit indoors, just because you choose to do so yourself?


If you are doing that anyway... what difference does it make to you if others are happy to carry on doing what they want and doing a bit more mingling in a more regular normal way?

Well for a start Tommy, over the last 3 months after the initial lockdown was eased we were getting out, so the fact that now so many places have had to close again will certainly make a difference to my life.
We have been in tier 2 then 3 for ages, so visiting family and friends wont make much difference.

But...it's not about me, or you come to that.
It's about saving lives.

It is a FACT that this virus thrives on human contact, the less contact the less it will be fed.

Tommy Monk wrote:

The projections of deaths that were wheeled out by Whitty/Valance/SAGE a few weeks ago said that there could be 1000 deaths a day by now... That's 7000 a week... It was 761 last week...

You wrote this only a couple of days ago....how many deaths do you think there will be next week Tommy?
In the last 2 days the number has risen by more than 761 coronavirus deaths.....if you cant see how this is building up again you are deliberately ignoring the facts.

Some local hospitals here are saying there are now less ICU beds available now than there were at the height of the pandemic.

People in greater Manchester were told over the weekend to not ring 999 unless it was a matter of life or death as they were under so much pressure they couldn't cope.

The first lockdown curbed the virus t dramatically, sadly, and partly because people wont follow the rules, it;s building up again, and the predictions are without a 2nd lockdown the second wave will be worse than the first.

500,000 people die in UK every year... And a virus going around is not a new thing... Let the younger and less vulnerable groups carry on as normal and not only will this ensure that millions are not plunged into serious economic hardship and mental strain, but will also lead to herd immunity quite quickly and result in a lower death number overall...

Tommy Monk wrote:


500,000 people die in UK every year... And a virus going around is not a new thing... Let the younger and less vulnerable groups carry on as normal and not only will this ensure that millions are not plunged into serious economic hardship and mental strain, but will also lead to herd immunity quite quickly and result in a lower death number overall...

The death figures quoted throughout are extra deaths caused from the coronavirus.....so add them on to your expected annual death total.

It's already been said that that the evidence now is people can be reinfected as immunity only lasts a few months, so that put's paid to your herd immunity theory.

Its not just about the death rate though is it. Its also about hospitals being inundated by sick people with people with other health issues not being treated, its about medical workers getting ill and not able to work, its about other workers not being able to do their jobs, factories closed because some people have the , transport in general. This virus passes so easily if left alone it could do as much damage as a lockdown.
Do you know for sure that you and all the other people you want to carry on as normal don't have underlying health problems, are you sure it wouldn't be so bad if you caught it

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


500,000 people die in UK every year... And a virus going around is not a new thing... Let the younger and less vulnerable groups carry on as normal and not only will this ensure that millions are not plunged into serious economic hardship and mental strain, but will also lead to herd immunity quite quickly and result in a lower death number overall...

The death figures quoted throughout are extra deaths caused from the coronavirus.....so add them on to your expected annual death total.

It's already been said that that the evidence now is people can be reinfected as immunity only lasts a few months, so that put's paid to your herd immunity theory.

No... Antibody levels may well drop a bit a few months after infection, nothing unusual in that, but that doesn't mean you no longer have any resistance to it, plus immune system is still primed to deal with it as it has fought it off before .. and there have only been a handful of suspected reinfection cases, most likely already quite ill people with very low immune systems or testing errors...


There are millions of people in UK suffering from lockdowns... The cure cannot be allowed to be worse than the disease ..

Vintage wrote:Its not just about the death rate though is it. Its also about hospitals being inundated by sick people with people with other health issues not being treated, its about medical workers getting ill and not able to work, its about other workers not being able to do their jobs, factories closed because some people have the , transport in general. This virus passes so easily if left alone it could do as much damage as a lockdown.
Do you know for sure that you and all the other people you want to carry on as normal don't have underlying health problems, are you sure it wouldn't be so bad if you caught it

I have already had it... As have an estimated 25% of the UK population...


I don't get any furlough hand outs and I don't get any other self employed hand outs either, and millions of others don't either!!!

Is that what's it about furlough and handouts? I don't get handouts or furlough either but it doesn't stop me carrying out my obligations to my fellow citizens and the health service, life gets a bit tough when the obligations that come along with the rights are expected to be carried out now and again. .