Jump to content

Responsible or Irresponsible Tier 3 Cruising?


PD1964

Featured Posts

46 minutes ago, Tam & Di said:

 We did look at that but could never get a delivery slot. Also we like food - the idea of someone stuffing things in a box, choosing what you will have if they don't have exactly what you asked for, not being able to look at the vegetables and selecting exactly what we want - anathema to self-indulgent foodies like me and Di.  ??️

We find our Asda are pretty good at selecting fresh produce and subs also. You can hand subs back to the driver to get an instant refund. Also you can submit an 'item poor quality' request on your order page and up to a certain limit they process a refund immediately. Above a certain limit they are processed manually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Athy said:

I have no idea - perhaps you did not understand that if the doorman at a supermarket ensures that there are, say, not more than 40 customers in there at once, it doesn't matter if some of them are in couples (I almost said "coupled" but that would conjure up a different mental image), there are still only 40. of them. Additionally, as has been pointed out above, a couple will do their shopping much more quickly than one person who's shopping for two.

   That's the theory. In practice, Mrs. Athy and I went to the local Morrison's last week and I stayed in the car while she shopped, though it was only a two-minute dash to get a couple of items which we hadn't got in stock. If we're doing a bigger shop (which we haven't done since about November), one will push the trolley methodically up and down each aisle while the other makes sorties to other aisles and returns to put the bread, biscuits, cheese, whatever, in the trolley. So we finish quite quickly.

   I mentioned that I'd been in a shop yesterday; it was the butcher's next door to us, which allows only one customer in at a time. I put a mask on, the lady behind the counter wore a face shield, I touched only the items which I bought and I paid by contactless card. When I got home I washed my hands thoroughly. So I think I was doing as much as I could to keep myself and other people safe.

How many people are in there at any one time is only part of the issue, as I explained earlier.  Total numbers of people over the day matters too.

 

Darting around the aisles as you describe in your second paragraph seems to go against the recommendation to follow a one way system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LadyG said:

You are not prepared to be persuaded by scientific argument above, ie two people are exhaling twice as many aerosols , which contain twice as many virus particles.

You think big sheds will dilute the aerosols, but really  you don't want to alter your behaviours because you think it won't make any difference.

There are a lot of people who ignore the science based advice because they think it does not matter. That is why the disease is spreading, and until individuals change their behaviours we all have to suffer lockdown. This is not a normal situation where if you act selfishly eg leaving a battery in a canal, panic buying of toilet paper, sending re-cycleable wastes to landfill, exporting contaminated wastes to third world countries, it won't makes any difference to you as an individual, it is others who suffer, but you are not affected.

Supermarkets are not designed for forced ventilation, unlike animal housing. The forced ventilation of animal housing requires them to be designed especially. Forced ventilation, big fans, big ducts, is used to remove contaminated aerosols and has to be replaced by clean air via large intake vents.  The mass of animals and the air exchange rate is calculated. Many farm animals would die of pneumonia (a respiratory disease) if they were herded together in to a building designed like a supermarket shed.

I don't know if you've noticed, but cafe's, pubs, and most shops are now closed, this is to stop people congregating, mixing, leaving their home. Essential shopping is for food and pharmacy, these shopping locations are disease transmission hubs.

When you next have a surgical operation, would you expect the surgeon operate on you without a mask and gloves? Should he invite his wife into the operating theatre, would you be happy if he decided to operate on the next patient with the same mask and gown on the basis that he 'thought' it would be unlikely that patient to patient disease transmission would occur?

 

There is a danger that you may stray into a common mistake with statistics: ignoring the absolute base level when comparing percentage risks -

 

If a risk is 0.1% and i9ncreases to 0.2% that is 100% increase in risk. By comparison, a 25% risk increases to 37% risk that is a 50% risk. Which would you prefer to take, the one with a 100% increase or the one with 50% increase? or even one that starts and ends at 25% ie no increase?

 

In your context, much depends on the efficacy of the ventilation system, and shoppers' behaviours, to determine which of the above examples is the nearer to reality.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, David Schweizer said:

Has anyone else noticed that this thread is becoming dominated by two paranoid zealots?

Has anyone else noticed that this country has one of the worst covid-19 death rates in the world, and by far the worst of any island nation?

 

Imagine if we had responded in a similar way to Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan...

2 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

There is a danger that you may stray into a common mistake with statistics: ignoring the absolute base level when comparing percentage risks -

 

If a risk is 0.1% and i9ncreases to 0.2% that is 100% increase in risk. By comparison, a 25% risk increases to 37% risk that is a 50% risk. Which would you prefer to take, the one with a 100% increase or the one with 50% increase? or even one that starts and ends at 25% ie no increase?

 

In your context, much depends on the efficacy of the ventilation system, and shoppers' behaviours, to determine which of the above examples is the nearer to reality.

You're right but the statistics are still misleading.  That change in an individual risk from 0.1% to 0.2% seems insignificant, but when that higher risk is replicated millions (billions?) of times around the country, it becomes sufficient to push the R0 above 1.  This is what has happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LadyG said:

I think you will find most elderly are staying at home, the supermarket shop is not a social gathering. The reason pubs are closed is to prevent social gathering.

I assume you mean elderly couples who live in one household, they are very vulnerable, and that is why everyone using supermarkets should minimise their trips, and sanitise, and not go around touching surfaces, lifting goods and replacing them.

The delivery of groceries has increased dramatically, and nearly eveyone can use technology to shop, but there are some people who can't cope with that method, and may well be confused.

If couple go to the supermarket together once a week (and perhaps need to to support their less good memories and decision making) is that better or worse than one of them going three times a week, perhaps to correct the mistakes made last time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, doratheexplorer said:

Has anyone else noticed that this country has one of the worst covid-19 death rates in the world, and by far the worst of any island nation?

 

Imagine if we had responded in a similar way to Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan...

Oh so now you are also an expert on what it is like in countries on the other side of the world? My son lives, and farms, in Australia so please do not try and lecture me on how it is there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Has anyone else noticed that this country has one of the worst covid-19 death rates in the world, and by far the worst of any island nation?

 

Imagine if we had responded in a similar way to Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan...

You're right but the statistics are still misleading.  That change in an individual risk from 0.1% to 0.2% seems insignificant, but when that higher risk is replicated millions (billions?) of times around the country, it becomes sufficient to push the R0 above 1.  This is what has happened.

I think you are doing some dodgy stats . . . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, David Schweizer said:

Oh so now you are also an expert on what it is like in countries on the other side of the world? My son lives, and farms, in Australia so please do not try and lecture me on how it is there.

I'm not lecturing you.  But it is a fact that Australia has taken a far harder line than the UK, and had a far better outcome both medically and economically.  If you don't believe me, go and check.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, David Schweizer said:

Has anyone else noticed that this thread is becoming dominated by two opinionated, paranoid, zealots?

 

 

....or "People who take thorough precautions", as they are better known.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Athy said:

....or "People who take thorough precautions", as they are better known.

Taking what you describe as thorough precautions is one thing, but lecturing us to the point of evangelism is tedious, and counter productive.

12 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

I'm not lecturing you.  But it is a fact that Australia has taken a far harder line than the UK, and had a far better outcome both medically and economically.  If you don't believe me, go and check.

If you had read my post you would not make that pompous statement. You read all you like, I listen to people who actually live there, and it is not the same as the press would have you believe.

 

 

Edited by David Schweizer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Athy said:

She'd usually say "Meet you at the beer in 45 minutes" so that I would have something interesting to look at while I was waiting for her to arrive.

I've even been allowed to add off-list things that take my fancy now - though I do then get the occasional "What on earth made you get that!".

One thing that would be useful would be for some sort of badge, like e.g. an old car tax or CRT licence sticker, to show if and when a person had been inoculated. At least some of those being called out on this thread may come into that category and not causing hazard as claimed.

 

Tam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, David Schweizer said:

Taking what you describe as thorough precautions is one, but lecturing us to the point of evangelism is tedious, and counter productive.

If you had read my post you would not make that pompous statement. You read all you like, I listen to people who actually live there, and it is not the same as the press would have you believe.

 

 

Well we live here (Australia) and whilst I can't comment on wherever your son farms, for us there is precious little difference now to pre-covid days.  The only real hassle is getting across the border between states.  Granted there are some industries that have suffered and if your son is in the supply chain to the hospitality sector I can understand he will be affected but similarly some sectors have done well.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Has anyone else noticed that this country has one of the worst covid-19 death rates in the world, and by far the worst of any island nation?

 

Imagine if we had responded in a similar way to Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan...

 

Yes there were over 60K new cases and over 1000 deaths the other day the highest since April, We are never going to get back to normal when you have people like “Foxes afloat” paying little to the advise of essential travel only. They’ve now put for the first time “This was filmed before lockdown” on a new Vlog. Obviously getting asked more why are you moving? But they are all about themselves so will carry on regardless.

Yes we should of closed our borders and been more strict, but instead sent planes to bring 1000’s of people back from Asia. Then again you would of got protests from people I imagine like yourself saying it’s against their human rights, let them in and we can’t stop the freedom of movement.

  No one of us have been perfect in abiding by the rules but most have tried their best unlike certain narrowboat Vloggers.

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Tam & Di said:

I've even been allowed to add off-list things that take my fancy now - though I do then get the occasional "What on earth made you get that!".

One thing that would be useful would be for some sort of badge, like e.g. an old car tax or CRT licence sticker, to show if and when a person had been inoculated. At least some of those being called out on this thread may come into that category and not causing hazard as claimed.

 

Tam

I understand that being innoculated stops you getting C19, but you can still act as a carrier and can infect others

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, David Schweizer said:

Taking what you describe as thorough precautions is one thing, but lecturing us to the point of evangelism is tedious, and counter productive.

If you had read my post you would not make that pompous statement. You read all you like, I listen to people who actually live there, and it is not the same as the press would have you believe.

 

 

So you're saying that the Australian government's figures are wrong then?  There's people that think that about our government too, and then come up with their own figures based on their own wishful thinking.  But perhaps a farmer in Australia knows more than the government?  Seems unlikely, but you're welcome to think what you like.  I'm just basing my opinions on the government's official figures, whereas you are basing yours on "people who actually live there", perhaps these people are all epidemiologists?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tam & Di said:

I guess that might be possible Alan, but I've not seen it mentioned and certainly not as a proven fact.

 

Tam

It was announced as being 'highly possible' and was mentioned by one of the 'specialists' at the daily briefings. He said that it can still 'lurk' about in the back of your nose and throat and will not be affected by your immune system, but you can still exhale / spread it, howver, the UK Government appear to have now backtracked a bit and are now saying :

 

 

Can you give COVID-19 to anyone if you have had the vaccine?

The vaccine cannot give you COVID-19 infection, and a full course will reduce your chance of becoming seriously ill. We do not yet know whether it will stop you from catching and passing on the virus, but we do expect it to reduce this risk. So, it is still important to follow the guidance in your local area to protect those around you.

To protect yourself and your family, friends and colleagues you still need to:

  • practice social distancing
  • wear a face mask
  • wash your hands carefully and frequently
  • follow the current guidance
Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I understand that being innoculated stops you getting C19, but you can still act as a carrier and can infect others

The first part of that it partly true.  It stops a proportion of people getting it and reduces severity in those who do.

 

The second part is still not known.  It is likely that some transmission will occur from vaccinated people, but less so than from unvaccinated people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things I hate most about this whole pandemic is how judgemental and intolerant of each other we've all become.

 

Regardless of vaccinations, those guys have already had the virus, so are highly unlikely to be spreading it, whatever they do. Just cruising round a canal is unlikely to be spreading the virus. Outdoor transmission is extremely rare anyway. They can cruise all they like for all I care (and I hope they do!).

 

Anyway, it seems unlikely that those vaccinated (or indeed recovered from the virus) will be able to carry & spread it (at least not to a significant degree) given that a lot of scientists now thing asymptomatic transmission isn't really a thing (as opposed to pre-symptomatic, which is).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, JJPHG said:

Well we live here (Australia) and whilst I can't comment on wherever your son farms, for us there is precious little difference now to pre-covid days.  The only real hassle is getting across the border between states.  Granted there are some industries that have suffered and if your son is in the supply chain to the hospitality sector I can understand he will be affected but similarly some sectors have done well.

North Eastern Victoria and, as you suggest, the border with New South Wales can be a challenge, although slightly relaxed for the farming community. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

It was announced as being 'highly possible' but the UK Government appear to have now backtracked a bit and are now saying :

 

 

Can you give COVID-19 to anyone if you have had the vaccine?

The vaccine cannot give you COVID-19 infection, and a full course will reduce your chance of becoming seriously ill. We do not yet know whether it will stop you from catching and passing on the virus, but we do expect it to reduce this risk. So, it is still important to follow the guidance in your local area to protect those around you.

To protect yourself and your family, friends and colleagues you still need to:

  • practice social distancing
  • wear a face mask
  • wash your hands carefully and frequently
  • follow the current guidance

All our family who have been vaccinated (1st doses) have been told this.

 

ie they still need to practice social distancing etc etc.

 

Work is still ongoing regarding the risk of passing it on after being vaccinated and won't be conclusive until a lot more people have been vaccinated.

Edited by The Happy Nomad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:

All our family who have been vaccinated (1st does) have been told this.

 

ie they still need to practice social distancing etc etc.

 

Work is still ongoing regarding the risk of passing it on after being vaccinated and won't be conclusive until a lot more people have been vaccinated.

More to the point level of protection after 1st dose isn't that well understood & takes a few weeks to kick in so best be careful for now... I'd think its more important for their own sake not to catch it rather than the risk of them passing it on so much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.