Lockdown easing?

[RustyBin5]

“.....started educating people here.....”

Genuine lol.

I know. actually cringed a bit reading that

[Chinnock]

As I see it, there are only two ways out of this (both actually amounting to the same thing). Either we get enough herd immunity for Covid to become a relatively minor problem, or we all get vaccinated and Covid becomes a relatively minor problem. We definitely aren’t going to put Covid back in the box and sooner or later most of us are probably going to get it. One thing’s for sure, locking down the economy will kill it stone dead in a matter of months. We cannot lock down indefinitely and while we do, any idea of achieving herd immunity is escaping over the horizon.

So the question is can we hold out for a vaccine? The economy may not survive if we lock down until it arrives since there is a fair chance that a vaccine may only be partially successful or it may never arrive at all. The other option is to try and control the infection rates so that while we’re haemorrhaging the country’s gold, hamstringing the economy and piling up the bodies, we are actually building something in return: herd immunity. That will cost lives. But so will the alternative.

Pay now or pay later, but one way or another, nature will be paid.

Nicely put.

I'm clearly a proponent of getting the least vulnerable back to work as economies appear to do badly without workers, however I still don't understand why we are not being considerably tougher on isolating the extremely vulnerable (care homes, underlying medical issues etc) and throw better spent money in giving them the protection and support they clearly need!

Seeing the age, condition and clearly possessing recognised "underlying" medical issues in relation to Covid-19 "high risk", out jogging / walking, cycling, driving and or shopping, looks like another ticking time bomb to me.

Protecting these extremely vulnerable from the start would have "flattened" the curve more effectively and protected the NHS (IMHO).

[robert75]

A Doctor friend's viewpoint btw.

"The risk to children is negligible. Many more children’s lives have been saved during the lockdown from reduced road and other accidents than would have died from covid.
We need to continue shielding for vulnerable people but everyone else should take their chances. We accept a risk of death every time we get out of bed".

A doctor may have said that in passing but I seriously doubt he would put his name to such a crass comment.

[Carnut]

Excuse my ignorance here and please also excuse me if I have missed the answer whilst scanning various threads/media. I've been busy trying to make the best of our family and business lives in this turmoil.

My question is; what has happened to testing, in particular the testing that would enable us not know how many people have already had the virus?

Seems to me rather simplistic but at the same time obvious that none of the scientists nor the government, let alone a member of the general public are capable of making any reasonable decisions unless we know the harm this virus can really deliver. Surely to know that, we need an 'accurate' count of the people that have already had it, we can then compare that to the deaths, those in ICU etc. Once that is done we can all move forward in a much more agreed fashion.

Some seem suggest that the virus might bring a death toll similar to flu at .01%, some suggest the figure is 10x or more higher. Whatever it is, once we know, we can make sound decisions to which we will all largely agree with. As I say maybe I've simply missed the answer somewhere?

[Saint-Just]

Excuse my ignorance here and please also excuse me if I have missed the answer whilst scanning various threads/media. I've been busy trying to make the best of our family and business lives in this turmoil.

My question is; what has happened to testing, in particular the testing that would enable us not know how many people have already had the virus?

Seems to me rather simplistic but at the same time obvious that none of the scientists nor the government, let alone a member of the general public are capable of making any reasonable decisions unless we know the harm this virus can really deliver. Surely to know that, we need an 'accurate' count of the people that have already had it, we can then compare that to the deaths, those in ICU etc. Once that is done we can all move forward in a much more agreed fashion.

Some seem suggest that the virus might bring a death toll similar to flu at .01%, some suggest the figure is 10x or more higher. Whatever it is, once we know, we can make sound decisions to which we will all largely agree with. As I say maybe I've simply missed the answer somewhere?

1) Forget about flu. It's not a good model for what is happening and distracts the attention as people believe they understand the analogy.
2) Testing at the moment tests for the virus. The testing you're alluding to is testing for antibodies. I am not sure we have a reliable antibodies test yet.

[Carnut]

1) Forget about flu. It's not a good model for what is happening and distracts the attention as people believe they understand the analogy.
2) Testing at the moment tests for the virus. The testing you're alluding to is testing for antibodies. I am not sure we have a reliable antibodies test yet.

Thank you, still a bit of a pipe dream that we can really judge accurately just how deadly it is then

[TBKBABAB]

Excuse my ignorance here and please also excuse me if I have missed the answer whilst scanning various threads/media. I've been busy trying to make the best of our family and business lives in this turmoil.

My question is; what has happened to testing, in particular the testing that would enable us not know how many people have already had the virus?

Seems to me rather simplistic but at the same time obvious that none of the scientists nor the government, let alone a member of the general public are capable of making any reasonable decisions unless we know the harm this virus can really deliver. Surely to know that, we need an 'accurate' count of the people that have already had it, we can then compare that to the deaths, those in ICU etc. Once that is done we can all move forward in a much more agreed fashion.

Some seem suggest that the virus might bring a death toll similar to flu at .01%, some suggest the figure is 10x or more higher. Whatever it is, once we know, we can make sound decisions to which we will all largely agree with. As I say maybe I've simply missed the answer somewhere?

Its not possible to test every single person for the virus or antibodies, there is an ongoing random testing program for
both but because of privacy the results aren’t allowed to be published, it’s part of how the R0 figure is calculated.
There hasn’t been any change in the information that for most people it is a fairly mild illness but underlying health issues
and age have a major factor in outcomes.
Problem is it’s a new virus so it will take time before actual figures you would like will be known.

Not sure want post this as I earlier said we should be looking forward but it’s public info and might help you
https://assets.publishing.service.go...port_6_May.pdf

[TheFlyingBanana]

A very quick update from a school's point of view.

I spent the morning surveying and measuring classrooms.

I was surprised at the result. Even in relatively spacious classrooms the maximum number of children that can be accommodated if social distancing is employed is five plus one teacher. In my head I thought it would probably be ten. It isn't.

So any notion of social distancing is out. Such small groups cannot be staffed or accommodated.

Therefore all planning is now predicated on the Government's notion (that they have taken from Denmark) of isolated "bubbles" of no more than fifteen children and one teacher who remains with them throughout.

The more I write the plan and risk assessments to do this, the more challenges and problems that are thrown up. I am nearly there though, but to say it will be difficult and challenging for the children is the understatement of the century, and it will be extremely demanding of staff - and I am very conscious of their health and wellbeing too.

Of course if the Government's statement that it would like all primary children back fully for a month before the end of term is enacted then every element of the plan goes out the window after just two weeks, as no social distancing or realistic mitigation measures can be used that will matter or make any difference. So schools will simply have to operate as they did before the pandemic. Perhaps with a bit more hand washing. Nothing else will be practically possible.

[oldoakknives]

No. Kids need an education for their future prospects. Adults (apart from I guess yourself judging by your bizarre comparisons) don't.

Nice. You've been posting every silly rumour and misread statistic for months, and then have the nerve to say that!

Well done for manipulating my words.

I meant among children. Of that 40k the figures for children are virtually non existent. Anyway its fine to disagree. Everyone makes their own decisions based on their view of the world.

I didn't manipulate your words. I quoted them as you wrote them.

[oldoakknives]

... until one of his immediate family will become sick, then it's all back about how the government failed the country etc.

Quite.

[ryanb741]

A doctor may have said that in passing but I seriously doubt he would put his name to such a crass comment.

Actually he openly posted it on facebook in response to a question asked by a science journalist friend, and predominately answered by scientists and medics

[Carnut]

Its not possible to test every single person for the virus or antibodies, there is an ongoing random testing program for
both but because of privacy the results aren’t allowed to be published, it’s part of how the R0 figure is calculated.
There hasn’t been any change in the information that for most people it is a fairly mild illness but underlying health issues
and age have a major factor in outcomes.
Problem is it’s a new virus so it will take time before actual figures you would like will be known.

Not sure want post this as I earlier said we should be looking forward but it’s public info and might help you
https://assets.publishing.service.go...port_6_May.pdf

Thank you, but am I missing something once again? It appears to me that surely those figures in your link, are the figures thrown out at the daily briefing that are actually fairly misleading, the tests carried out being mainly key workers, those that are thinking they have symptoms wanting to go back to or maybe avoid going back to work. Hence you are testing a slew to start with. As naturally that means testing is only carried out on people who think they have it and needed to work, completely ignoring all those that have it without knowing or indeed those not needing to be tested even if they do have it but do not need to work. I appreciate that we cannot test everyone. But we do need to test a large enough segment to get a clearer picture. That also means testing for those that have previously had it, too in this test group. For example I suspect there is a large, huge (maybe a millions) amount of people like myself, utterly convinced that we have had the virus, in our case back in February in our household, yet we will not appear in any figure anywhere. If that is true ( and it's only an if) then that changes the seriously ill death rate.

Also the way the R0 figure is being presented by the government currently, is in my opinion just a red herring, the Ro figure simply changes depending on how much contact we all have with each other, nothing changes that figure apart from our contact and maybe properly worn/used PPE. All this talk of releasing the public when the Ro is figure is low enough is ridiculous, if only because the amount of effected people in society will (we don't really know because of the lack of testing) at any given point this year in all likelihood be higher than it was in January. Therefore on that basis 'only' how can it be better to release people now when the affected total in the general public is possibly far higher than it was on the 23rd March. I suspect the answer is the economy demands we release now, I'm not arguing with that decision, just wanting to know and understand the real risk.

[robert75]

Actually he openly posted it on facebook in response to a question asked by a science journalist friend, and predominately answered by scientists and medics

Then he is an idiot. Sorry no doctor in his or her right mind should post something as crass and insensitive at a time like this.

I appreciate he may be a friend but if he were my GP I would be changing surgeries. Now is really not the time for crass arrogance.

***edit***

I should say I am grateful his/her details are omitted I have the upmost respect for the medical profession and reiterate, this is G&D. Here for friendly chat and nothing more.

[Saint-Just]

Ryan, do you have any evidence that young children cannot be asymptomatic carriers?

Because this is the real reason, isn't it? Children cannot live alone and in isolation, so they will come back every day into a home full of people who can be affected, some lethally so. And every day they will mix with other kids who come from different places, and have travelled across the city, sometimes in public transport, to get there.If only one child becomes a carrier, it will spread like wildfire.

Any softening of the lockdown MUST be associated with extensive test, track and trace. Otherwise the £billions that have been spent for the lockdown will have been wasted, and everything will have to start again.

[M4tt]

Ryan, do you have any evidence that young children cannot be asymptomatic carriers?

Because this is the real reason, isn't it? Children cannot live alone and in isolation, so they will come back every day into a home full of people who can be affected, some lethally so. And every day they will mix with other kids who come from different places, and have travelled across the city, sometimes in public transport, to get there.If only one child becomes a carrier, it will spread like wildfire.

Any softening of the lockdown MUST be associated with extensive test, track and trace. Otherwise the £billions that have been spent for the lockdown will have been wasted, and everything will have to start again.

Track, trace, test and isolate! In a household setting, getting someone to self isolate at home with their family is, with the virulence of this virus, simply increasing their personal R to the size of their family. A family that will have to go to the supermarket for food and so on, thus sending whoever feels well enough out into the general population.

We need to be putting these Nightingales to use - and anywhere else where a lot of people with no real need beyond not infecting others can hang around until they are not infectious.

[ryanb741]

Ryan, do you have any evidence that young children cannot be asymptomatic carriers?

Because this is the real reason, isn't it? Children cannot live alone and in isolation, so they will come back every day into a home full of people who can be affected, some lethally so. And every day they will mix with other kids who come from different places, and have travelled across the city, sometimes in public transport, to get there.If only one child becomes a carrier, it will spread like wildfire.

Any softening of the lockdown MUST be associated with extensive test, track and trace. Otherwise the £billions that have been spent for the lockdown will have been wasted, and everything will have to start again.

I don't, and to be honest nobody does. The Swiss seem to think they do.

Anyway look, this raises a valid point, we live in an information void. NOBODY knows the actual truth, certainly not myself and I delved into researching Covid and sharing information partly because I felt the level of fear in the community was excessive compared to the actual risk of the virus, but partly to engage my mind in what is a stressful time. It is clear that it is bordering on obsession and that's not healthy all round so I think it best I give it a break. I hope I'm right btw and that this is something scary but not horrendously so and I believe that will be borne out. But I may be wrong. So I wish everyone the best of luck with it all I really do and of course once concrete, proven information comes out and is shared I'd love to participate once more but it is clear that providing unproven (albeit from respectable sources) information just leads to inflammatory arguments and creating enemies on a watch forum where we all share the same passion and that in itself is poisonous and against the intentions of Eddie when he set the forum up in the first place. And it is actually the diametric opposite of what I am like in real life.

I'll stick to talking about watches for a while :)

[TheFlyingBanana]

The Chief Scientific Adviser to the DfE has admitted he hasn't assessed the Government's school opening plans:

"Current plans to return children to school could risk spreading the coronavirus, the Department of Education's top scientific adviser has admitted.

Addressing the science and technology committee this afternoon, Osama Rahman said there is a "low degree of confidence" that children transmit Covid-19 less than adults.
Asked if this means "we are potentially putting together hundreds of potential vectors that can then go and transmit [the virus]", Mr Rahman said: "Possibly. Depending on school sizes."


Full story here:

https://www.tes.com/news/dfe-adviser...k-virus-spread

[Saint-Just]

Ryan, I was asking you if you had come across such evidence, not challenging you. I may have worded it poorly. I am sorry that things are so difficult for you at the moment and I wish you get the respite that you need.

[RobDad]

difference is here the kid will chuck the mask on the floor before kicking the teacher in the shin.

That’s such a staged video it’s hilarious! Curious what the cloud of vapour he does a little twirl in actually comprises of, and what’s with the little robot he puts his hands under and opens his mouth to?! - coming to a primary school near you, R2D2 the Covid control ‘bot! - I assume if his temperature is too high, or he has bad breath he gets tasered by the T1000 just out of shot, and sent home for 14 days in a plastic bubble?!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RobDad]

I don't, and to be honest nobody does. The Swiss seem to think they do.

Anyway look, this raises a valid point, we live in an information void. NOBODY knows the actual truth, certainly not myself and I delved into researching Covid and sharing information partly because I felt the level of fear in the community was excessive compared to the actual risk of the virus, but partly to engage my mind in what is a stressful time. It is clear that it is bordering on obsession and that's not healthy all round so I think it best I give it a break. I hope I'm right btw and that this is something scary but not horrendously so and I believe that will be borne out. But I may be wrong. So I wish everyone the best of luck with it all I really do and of course once concrete, proven information comes out and is shared I'd love to participate once more but it is clear that providing unproven (albeit from respectable sources) information just leads to inflammatory arguments and creating enemies on a watch forum where we all share the same passion and that in itself is poisonous and against the intentions of Eddie when he set the forum up in the first place. And it is actually the diametric opposite of what I am like in real life.

I'll stick to talking about watches for a while :)

Just read this Ryan - totally understand your feelings, it certainly is a stressful time - I have to say I’ve avoided a lot of information as I remember almost making myself sick with worry as a teenager during the Cold War , where it felt like a mushroom cloud was just around the corner! - hope you can take it easy and as you say, we can get back to banter and watches - it’ll all sort itself out on the end


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[oldoakknives]

Track, trace, test and isolate! In a household setting, getting someone to self isolate at home with their family is, with the virulence of this virus, simply increasing their personal R to the size of their family. A family that will have to go to the supermarket for food and so on, thus sending whoever feels well enough out into the general population.

We need to be putting these Nightingales to use - and anywhere else where a lot of people with no real need beyond not infecting others can hang around until they are not infectious.

A good idea, if we could track the people who have it. Isolating them somewhere with bed and board away from the public would surely cut down the spread.

[eoghan101]

The Chief Scientific Adviser to the DfE has admitted he hasn't assessed the Government's school opening plans:

"Current plans to return children to school could risk spreading the coronavirus, the Department of Education's top scientific adviser has admitted.

Addressing the science and technology committee this afternoon, Osama Rahman said there is a "low degree of confidence" that children transmit Covid-19 less than adults.
Asked if this means "we are potentially putting together hundreds of potential vectors that can then go and transmit [the virus]", Mr Rahman said: "Possibly. Depending on school sizes."


Full story here:

https://www.tes.com/news/dfe-adviser...k-virus-spread

This is rather shocking.

[TBKBABAB]

Thank you, but am I missing something once again? It appears to me that surely those figures in your link, are the figures thrown out at the daily briefing that are actually fairly misleading, the tests carried out being mainly key workers, those that are thinking they have symptoms wanting to go back to or maybe avoid going back to work. Hence you are testing a slew to start with. As naturally that means testing is only carried out on people who think they have it and needed to work, completely ignoring all those that have it without knowing or indeed those not needing to be tested even if they do have it but do not need to work. I appreciate that we cannot test everyone. But we do need to test a large enough segment to get a clearer picture. That also means testing for those that have previously had it, too in this test group. For example I suspect there is a large, huge (maybe a millions) amount of people like myself, utterly convinced that we have had the virus, in our case back in February in our household, yet we will not appear in any figure anywhere. If that is true ( and it's only an if) then that changes the seriously ill death rate.

Also the way the R0 figure is being presented by the government currently, is in my opinion just a red herring, the Ro figure simply changes depending on how much contact we all have with each other, nothing changes that figure apart from our contact and maybe properly worn/used PPE. All this talk of releasing the public when the Ro is figure is low enough is ridiculous, if only because the amount of effected people in society will (we don't really know because of the lack of testing) at any given point this year in all likelihood be higher than it was in January. Therefore on that basis 'only' how can it be better to release people now when the affected total in the general public is possibly far higher than it was on the 23rd March. I suspect the answer is the economy demands we release now, I'm not arguing with that decision, just wanting to know and understand the real risk.

As I said those are public figures but compiled in one document and with a bit more detail, they aren’t misleading they are simple figures no one has said that and the document doesn’t say the testing tells you what the overall infection rate is.

We are testing enough people to give an overall picture but asper my last post results can’t be published but using these in part to calculate R0 is the simplest way to explain the current state and risk, the base is estimated to be about 3, yes you get it down by the use of social distancing and in very high risk areas using PPE none of this has/will change for quite some time, we are hardly seeing the general public being released.
Comparing with 23rd of March is pointless as everything was on an upward curve rather than downward and the R0 was probably close To 3.

[TBKBABAB]

The Chief Scientific Adviser to the DfE has admitted he hasn't assessed the Government's school opening plans:

"Current plans to return children to school could risk spreading the coronavirus, the Department of Education's top scientific adviser has admitted.

Addressing the science and technology committee this afternoon, Osama Rahman said there is a "low degree of confidence" that children transmit Covid-19 less than adults.
Asked if this means "we are potentially putting together hundreds of potential vectors that can then go and transmit [the virus]", Mr Rahman said: "Possibly. Depending on school sizes."


Full story here:

https://www.tes.com/news/dfe-adviser...k-virus-spread

Well shouldn’t he pull his finger out and assess it if that’s his job rather than saying possibly when he hasn’t assessed it.

[eoghan101]

Have just watched the committee meeting in full. Beggars belief at some of the questions he was unable to answer. Basically just pawned everything off on SAGE and cabinet. Some of the people on the comtitee did ask some slightly unfair questions. But in general he did not make me any more confident about the decisions being made.

[Rodder]

Other countries have managed the transition back to school without the hand wringing or the nauseating panic posts on Facebook about how 'I'm not sending little Tommy back to school, the Government is lying to us'. If they can manage so can we unless we all want to live underground like moles until a vaccine is found which may be years away. I don't see articles about droves of kids dying in Germany or the Netherlands.

Sometimes in life you have to man up and roll with the punches a bit. No environment can ever be truly safe - risk minimisation is the game.

Have the courage to explicitly say that about teachers. You clearly value everything your child’s teachers do. Someone mentioned something about 20th Britain, you’r post makes me proud!

[Rodder]

But it doesn't. It doesn't kill kids. We aren't sending the elderly out to congregate with each other we are sending kids back to school so they can complete their educations and maintain their life prospects.

So why can’’t children meet grandparents, perhaps because they spread it? Or do they just not spread it to teachers?

If it’s safe why won’t the government publish the science behind their decision?

[Rodder]

No point

[Rodder]

It’s madness. I feel so sorry for some of the primary teachers. I think there’s a real difference in willingness to take risk. I see younger teachers and TAs in their 20s happy to go back. But think of the poor teachers in their 50s and 60s, they shouldn’t be near 15 children, dinner ladies, cleaners, other teachers parents etc

I know people think teachers have it easy, and parts are. But the bureaucracy, paperwork and abuse make it hard. I can’’t think of another profession where retention is so low. If it’s easy why are so many people leaving year after year?

[TBKBABAB]

Track, trace, test and isolate! In a household setting, getting someone to self isolate at home with their family is, with the virulence of this virus, simply increasing their personal R to the size of their family. A family that will have to go to the supermarket for food and so on, thus sending whoever feels well enough out into the general population.

We need to be putting these Nightingales to use - and anywhere else where a lot of people with no real need beyond not infecting others can hang around until they are not infectious.

If someone is Isolating in a household after testing positive the other members should also isolate, that’s been there from the start if it’s testing as well then after 7 days presumably they will get tested.

[mondie]

Damn lies and statistics, is that based on reported date of deaths or actual date of deaths is everyone using the same reporting basis? Deaths lag behind infection dates by some way probably differently in each country.

There is much better data to base your decisions on relating to R0, testing results, new hospital admissions etc.

I missed this post. Where is this source of 'better' data? Your comment was triggered by a chart I posted based on WHO global data.

[TBKBABAB]

It’s madness. I feel so sorry for some of the primary teachers. I think there’s a real difference in willingness to take risk. I see younger teachers and TAs in their 20s happy to go back. But think of the poor teachers in their 50s and 60s, they shouldn’t be near 15 children, dinner ladies, cleaners, other teachers parents etc

I know people think teachers have it easy, and parts are. But the bureaucracy, paperwork and abuse make it hard. I can’’t think of another profession where retention is so low. If it’s easy why are so many people leaving year after year?

Retirement age for teachers who started before 2007 is 60 and a lot have taken retirement from 55, and what about the
supermarket, warehouse people, etc etc who have been working the whole way through I bet a lot them are in their 50’s.
50-60 isn’t in the very high risk group.

[Saint-Just]

[Rodder]

But there are teachers in their 50s and 60s, lots.

And I agree, the workers you describe have my deepest sympathies.

Retirement age for teachers who started before 2007 is 60 and a lot have taken retirement from 55, and what about the
supermarket, warehouse people, etc etc who have been working the whole way through I bet a lot them are in their 50’s.
50-60 isn’t in the very high risk group.

[TBKBABAB]

I missed this post. Where is this source of 'better' data? Your comment was triggered by a chart I posted based on WHO global data.

Read it again it says better data to base your decision on in reply to someone else’s post I wasn’t replying to anything
you posted.

[TBKBABAB]

But there are teachers in their 50s and 60s, lots.

And I agree, the workers you describe have my deepest sympathies.

8% over 55 , if they have underlying health issues they are allowed to stay at home and self isolate.

[Andyg]

A good idea, if we could track the people who have it. Isolating them somewhere with bed and board away from the public would surely cut down the spread.

Great idea. All you need to do is test everyone in the country on a single day and provide the results immediately. If not keep them isolated until the results come back. Which seems to be about 3 days.

However how about we track down everyone with serious pre existing health issues, especially those with existing heart or respiratory problems and isolate them somewhere, with bed and board, away from the rest of the general public? It wouldn’t reduce inflection rates, but would surely cut down on deaths. Especially as 90% of the deaths effect the over 80’s and or those with pre-existing health conditions.

[sprite1275]

I reckon it's a case of chuck the school kids back for a few weeks , get people back to work etc. The numbers will spike again just in time for the school holidays so they have 6 weeks to get the numbers down again.

[Christian]

My wife is a paediatric physio currently treating children with covid in hospital. She says she hasn’t seen any baby/infant cases...most are 9 years old or over and nearly all the children that are admitted to her hospital are BAME.

In terms of numbers, I think she said something like 30 child cases to 700 adult.

[oldoakknives]

Great idea. All you need to do is test everyone in the country on a single day and provide the results immediately. If not keep them isolated until the results come back. Which seems to be about 3 days.

However how about we track down everyone with serious pre existing health issues, especially those with existing heart or respiratory problems and isolate them somewhere, with bed and board, away from the rest of the general public? It wouldn’t reduce inflection rates, but would surely cut down on deaths. Especially as 90% of the deaths effect the over 80’s and or those with pre-existing health conditions.

Why would all that be necessary just to isolate those with symptoms? Surely even that would help.

[TBKBABAB]

I reckon it's a case of chuck the school kids back for a few weeks , get people back to work etc. The numbers will spike again just in time for the school holidays so they have 6 weeks to get the numbers down again.

Hardly chucking them back, just 3 year groups initially, if it happens, and that isn’t going to make a huge difference to getting people back to work it’s more the businesses getting things in line to enable that to happen. And 4-6 weeks before those kids are back at home isn’t enough to make any difference to the economy when it’s in this state.

[davida]

It’s madness. I feel so sorry for some of the primary teachers. I think there’s a real difference in willingness to take risk. I see younger teachers and TAs in their 20s happy to go back. But think of the poor teachers in their 50s and 60s, they shouldn’t be near 15 children, dinner ladies, cleaners, other teachers parents etc

I know people think teachers have it easy, and parts are. But the bureaucracy, paperwork and abuse make it hard. I can’’t think of another profession where retention is so low. If it’s easy why are so many people leaving year after year?

Understand your point but I haven't seen anyone speaking up in defense of all the key workers who have been going to work daily throughout this crisis. Ok, many stood on their doorsteps clapping but no one suggested we should down tools.

[sprite1275]

Hardly chucking them back, just 3 year groups initially, if it happens, and that isn’t going to make a huge difference to getting people back to work it’s more the businesses getting things in line to enable that to happen. And 4-6 weeks before those kids are back at home isn’t enough to make any difference to the economy when it’s in this state.

Well if they keep to there time scale, all primary school years will be back in July with maybe bars restaurants open. Lots more people back to work. Social distance in the schools will just not happen. I'm pretty sure by the summer hols that R number will be above 1. Just looking at some of them public transport pictures today is scary.

[eoghan101]

Understand your point but I haven't seen anyone speaking up in defense of all the key workers who have been going to work daily throughout this crisis. Ok, many stood on their doorsteps clapping but no one suggested we should down tools.

Key workers like teachers who have still been working throuout this. Certainly the risk to NHS staff is greater. But the big argument here isn't just abou the risk to staff it's the wider risk of opening schools were social distancing is impossible.

You have the scientific adviser for the DFE who doesn't know how many child deaths their have been, wasn't involved in any discussions about ppe for teachers, and said the confidence level for any evidence suggesting that children spread the infection less than adults was low.

Try and marry that up with the education secretary telling the education select committee on the same day, that the reason for schools opening for more students (they have never been closed) was based on the science and not the need for people to return to work.

It's a farce.

[Rodder]

Understand your point but I haven't seen anyone speaking up in defense of all the key workers who have been going to work daily throughout this crisis. Ok, many stood on their doorsteps clapping but no one suggested we should down tools.

But what’s happened in care homes is a disgrace. Lack of PPE in hospitals outrageous.

So you’re arguing because they’ve been let down we should do the same again?

Honestly, who here is confident enough that children don’t spread covid19 to go up to the next 15 kids they see and have a conversation with them, without a mask, without SD, in an enclosed space for 7 hours. Again, why on Earth is it ok for children to return to school but not see there grand parents?

Now maybe there is no issue, but if that’s the case why not publish the scientific evidence? Are we meant to trust the governments track record and morals to put safety over the economy?

[Kingstepper]

But what’s happened in care homes is a disgrace. Lack of PPE in hospitals outrageous.

So you’re arguing because they’ve been let down we should do the same again?

Honestly, who here is confident enough that children don’t spread covid19 to go up to the next 15 kids they see and have a conversation with them, without a mask, without SD, in an enclosed space for 7 hours. Again, why on Earth is it ok for children to return to school but not see there grand parents?

Now maybe there is no issue, but if that’s the case why not publish the scientific evidence? Are we meant to trust the governments track record and morals to put safety over the economy?

Grandparents are generally older than teachers.
There is a risk to more grandparents than teachers.
Schools will follow protocols to minimise risk.

[oldoakknives]

But what’s happened in care homes is a disgrace. Lack of PPE in hospitals outrageous.

So you’re arguing because they’ve been let down we should do the same again?

Honestly, who here is confident enough that children don’t spread covid19 to go up to the next 15 kids they see and have a conversation with them, without a mask, without SD, in an enclosed space for 7 hours. Again, why on Earth is it ok for children to return to school but not see there grand parents?

Now maybe there is no issue, but if that’s the case why not publish the scientific evidence? Are we meant to trust the governments track record and morals to put safety over the economy?

Did any hospitals actually run out of PPE supplies?

Do you think the people managing care homes should bear more responsibility for the situation, given that they knew their residents would be particularly at risk and didn't isolate them sooner?

Given that the average cost of a residential care home in the UK in 2019, was £33,852 a year rising to over £47,320 a year when nursing care was included, do you think the NHS (or government) should be paying for, and supplying, PPE required by them?

[Kingstepper]

Did any hospitals actually run out of PPE supplies?

Do you think the people managing care homes should bear more responsibility for the situation, given that they knew their residents would be particularly at risk and didn't isolate them sooner?

Given that the average cost of a residential care home in the UK in 2019, was £33,852 a year rising to over £47,320 a year when nursing care was included, do you think the NHS (or government) should be paying for, and supplying, PPE required by them?

Isn’t the issue that likely infected elderly people were discharged from hospitals into care homes to make beds available, thus spreading the virus into the homes?
As for PPE, could equally say the hospitals should also be managing procurement, not for the Government to micro-manage this. Reality was PPE became almost unobtainable, not a matter of cost and who was paying for it.

[number2]

Did any hospitals actually run out of PPE supplies?

Do you think the people managing care homes should bear more responsibility for the situation, given that they knew their residents would be particularly at risk and didn't isolate them sooner?

Given that the average cost of a residential care home in the UK in 2019, was £33,852 a year rising to over £47,320 a year when nursing care was included, do you think the NHS (or government) should be paying for, and supplying, PPE required by them?

Welcome to "elderly care" US style.

[oldoakknives]

Isn’t the issue that likely infected elderly people were discharged from hospitals into care homes to make beds available, thus spreading the virus into the homes?
As for PPE, could equally say the hospitals should also be managing procurement, not for the Government to micro-manage this. Reality was PPE became almost unobtainable, not a matter of cost and who was paying for it.

Yes having infected people discharged was definitely wrong. But I doubt it happened to every care home.

Yes it did become almost unobtainable, but did any hospitals actually run out?