Coronavirus

[Dave2002]

Re travel, events and hotels - some hotels are now offering refunds or alternative dates, or vouchers for prepaid stays over the next few weeks. We had intended to go to Glasgow to hear a couple of concerts, but that would involve travel on public transport, plus a stay, for events which may in any case be cancelled. We were thinking that if it came to it, we might take the hit on the prepaid tickets and hotel charges, but it looks as though we may get a refund anyway, and not have to put ourselves at risk. We wlll be very grateful to organisations which operate this way.

Also, although it doesn't affect us immediately, some airlines and cruise lines are already offering refunds with no or very small penalties for cancellations initiated by customers, rather than themselves. We have had emails from several which we use quite frequently informing us of this.

We might still go to the cinema sceening of Fidelio (ROH) on Tuesday, if that takes place.

[Count Boso]

Incidentally , AFAICS, the NHS has already ground to a halt for all practical purposes at GP level

Our surgery has suspended face-to-face appointments. Telephone consultations only (though I suppose they may lead to GP visits if thought necessary).

I take your point about attributing motives - just my cynicism.

[DracoM]

<<< frankly I am not prepared to do is forego my mostly daily walks and cycling journeys, which keep me as healthy as possible in body and mind >>>

Absolutely spot on!!

[Simon B]

Matt Hancock is going to have a real battle on his hands if he expect over-70s who are not suffering symptoms to stay at home for 12 weeks.

What alternative do they favour?

The main alternative (and the one being adopted in most comparable countries) appears to be that everyone stays at home for a lengthy period to the greatest extent possible.

That is also what is being suggested by a lot of the scientific community (e.g. the Harvard Professor of Epidemiology who wrote the Guardian article cited earlier in the thread).


For clarity, I have no idea which is better and am not advocating anything. As a cold-dead-hand-of-rationality type by training and profession I'm trying to weigh up the arguments and the weight that should be attached to their proponents opinions.

[Serial_Apologist]

We might still go to the cinema sceening of Fidelio (ROH) on Tuesday, if that takes place.

As you live not so far away, as far as I know, your could save your time and money by coming round here and watching it on my video. Oh, on second thoughts I am in a high risk category, so that rules that out then!

[Serial_Apologist]

What alternative do they favour?

The main alternative (and the one being adopted in most comparable countries) appears to be that everyone stays at home for a lengthy period to the greatest extent possible.

That is also what is being suggested by a lot of the scientific community (e.g. the Harvard Professor of Epidemiology who wrote the Guardian article cited earlier in the thread).


For clarity, I have no idea which is better and am not advocating anything. As a cold-dead-hand-of-rationality type by training and profession I'm trying to weigh up the arguments and the weight that should be attached to their proponents opinions.

If, as we are being told, we people keep a 1 metre gap between ourselves and another, avoid physical contact with another and getting coughed in the face, avoid touching our own face, and make sure to wash our hands in the prescribed way after handling anything such as shopping which could have been touched by someone with the virus, staying home should ensure we are safe - unless I'm missing something?

[Joseph K]

Stop putting words into my mouth. He has said nothing at all to do about the science of epidemiology. But all to do with his own (Guardian-approved) social/political viewpoint.

Read the article. It's written by an epidemiologist.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/15/epidemiologist-britain-herd-immunity-coronavirus-covid-19?CMP=share_btn_fb&fbclid=IwAR0rzveR_scUcBHHWu0eHILObh_QLbYtvHbuaR_w1YzE4NmoMkPEabPeWFU

[teamsaint]

If, as we are being told, we people keep a 1 metre gap between ourselves and another, avoid physical contact with another and getting coughed in the face, avoid touching our own face, and make sure to wash our hands in the prescribed way after handling anything such as shopping which could have been touched by someone with the virus, staying home should ensure we are safe - unless I'm missing something?

It seems to me that what is being asked for is a form of social contract :
Very broadly ....

Under 60s Keep working, ( those who can) help keep services functioning, and be open to getting the virus.

Over 70’s . Behave in ways that may be restrictive to you personally but which stop everybody getting sick at the same time and which minimises risk to you.

60’s to 70’s . Be good neighbours, I guess ?

[MrGongGong]

https://www.change.org/p/government-self-employed-and-zero-hour-contract-people-to-be-paid-statutory-sick-pay?signed=true

From someone much loved in here via FB

[Count Boso]

Is someone here qualified to clear up this point? There is coronavirus and there is Covid-19 - the illness caused by the virus.

So, are elderly people more likely to carry/become infected by the virus than younger people, or just more likely to become very ill after being infected? If the former, they are no more of a risk to other people than anyone else of any age. But I'm not quite sure about this point.

[Dave2002]

As you live not so far away, as far as I know, your could save your time and money by coming round here and watching it on my video. Oh, on second thoughts I am in a high risk category, so that rules that out then!

Not quite true anymore. We made a surreptitious move to the frozen north. We're both in the high risk category re age, and one of us has had serious health problems in the past.

[Bryn]

Though I would normally take a bus or walk to the shops, today I took the car, parking away from other cars and trying to keep a good distance from other shoppers. I was somewhat taken aback by the laissez faire attitude of many of those in the three shops I visited, Waitrose, Poundland (who actually had toilet rolls) and Tesco. I got home just in time to take delivery of the 4x250 ml hand sanitizer dispensers I ordered a month ago (Amazon Prime next day delivery, that is ).

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Is someone here qualified to clear up this point? There is coronavirus and there is Covid-19 - the illness caused by the virus.
So, are elderly people more likely to carry/become infected by the virus than younger people, or just more likely to become very ill after being infected? If the former, they are no more of a risk to other people than anyone else of any age. But I'm not quite sure about this point.

Apparently Covid-19 is just one of several Coronaviruses, the others having been known for some time.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

<<< frankly I am not prepared to do is forego my mostly daily walks and cycling journeys, which keep me as healthy as possible in body and mind >>>

Absolutely spot on!!

Same here. I will act responsibly, but not as a result of an ill-considered ageist dictat.

[Bryn]

That rare attribute, common sense, must surely be employed. If one is likely to come into close contact with other while out, don't go. I am fortunate in living just a minute's walk from a very little used woodland path. I will not be refraining from using it as the start of isolated walks.