COVID-19

Maybe we should have have our top people working along side them to see what there doing that we aren't, as I posted Australia were held up as a country that could show the world how it's done, and until recently they looked like they had it under control.
With regards figures that's what I'm saying are all deaths accounted for country by country I very much doubt it, that's my point.

 

we should be learning from NZ. mind boggling we dont even seem to so much as even asked them how they managed what they did.

 

Come on guys. There's no way many meaningful lessons can be learnt from New Zealand. It's just too different in terms of population, density, transport, geography, etc, etc. It's disingenuous to suggest it's even comparable.

Before lockdown there were more journeys on the London Underground EVERY DAY than the total population of New Zealand. That's how different the two countries are.

 

Cummings is one of the main reasons why a second and the current partial lockdown will be completely ignored
What's good for the goose is good for the gander springs to mind
Whether what he did was considered legal or not is not the issue people couldn't be with their loved ones as they passed etc etc due to his rules and he takes a jolly to some remote castle amongst other things
Had he held his hand up and admitted he had not acted in the spirit of things we may have stood a chance of people complying with another lockdown sadly that won't happen now Bearing in mind we are an island it should have been easier to contain in the first place

 

i think its just british exceptionalism to suggest there isnt anything we can learn. as dennis said they went in hard and early, didnt piss about being scared of doing what needed to be done and now theyre recovering and we're still paralysed. there isn't a minimum population requirement to show strong and decisive leadership.

 

But it's easier to go hard and early when you're controlling 7% of the people. Is it easier to monitor the behavior of 7 people or 100?

Also, given the space the implication of an individual being non-compliant is not the same. An infected person who doesn't stick to the rules in London, Manchester or Birmingham will come into contact with more people than a non-compliant person in Wellington.

It's also a lot easier with fewer people traveling from outside the country. I think it's forgotten what a hub Britain is. I saw something that the UK had 14 of the top 100 busiest airports in Europe so once again the simplicity for NZ to just cut themselves off is not the same as the complexity as it is for the UK.

NZ did do well to go hard an early but they also had a situation to make that easy. Pretty much every part of the UK demographic makes it difficult. To ignore that is simplifying a complex situation.

 

No we can learn stuff but it has to be meaningful.

Suggesting we learn stuff from the Channel Islands would clearly be ludicrous so what "strong and decisive" leadership looks like will differ from situation to situation.

 

i think the lesson that it is possible to eliminate the virus on an island is incredibly meaningful. instead of saying no that cant apply to us, why cant we say 'how we can scale this up so it does apply to us'. we are meant to be world beating after all.

 

You're slightly missing the point. It is simply easier to eliminate a virus spread by proximity to other people on an island that is 10% bigger but has 7% of the population. Add into the situation that New Zealand nearest major neighbour is 2,500 miles away and is also relatively sparsely populated.

We're not world beating, anyone who said that was simply talking hype. But forgetting politics for a moment the simple, logical differences between the two makes one situation very easy and one situation complex. Not everything is scalable.

 

I dont think i am. it might be harder for us etc etc but we havent even tried. the govt was initially happy to do nothing at all and to me that is our biggest barrier, just accepting our situation as if we're powerless to do anything.

 

Good post
If only everyone would use common sense it would be better than trying to follow government rules
Cummings is to blame for pushing the rules to the limit and why shouldn't people follow his example
Enjoy your meal

 

I'm not sure you can accuse them of doing nothing or not trying. They might not have done enough, might have done things at the wrong time....all these things are up for debate but I seem to recall spending two and a half months basically inside so they've definitely been doing something.

Their chances of success (if success is determined as eradication) were obviously much smaller than a country like New Zealand though. If we had literally followed New Zealand's lead it is highly unlikely to have yielded the same results. The comparison dumbs down a massively complex situation.

 

I get what you're saying but I don't view them the same way. in terms of deaths and hospital admissions just look at the situation from early March where the same things can be said and look at how it blew up from there. If you're waiting for admissions and deaths to point the way then you are probably already too late to take action.

I also follow your example but I think it's based on a couple of assumptions that I'm not sure are correct. Mainly that you're as likely to pick up the virus from an inanimate object as you are from another person which doesn't seem to actually be what they're saying. Most of the focus seems to be directly person to person with the person...item...person transmission being a secondary thing.

if you follow that thinking through then you're greatest risk is actually with people you know. They are by far the most likely people you will touch, especially skin to skin and even more so if you're away from judgemental eyes. I will freely admit that I've broke the rules a couple of times and every time it's been with someone I know that I have hugged, sat too close to, etc, etc. Apart from occasionally getting too close to someone for a passing second in a shop I reckon 90% of the times I've put myself "at risk" have been with friends and family.

But even forgetting that. Let's assume that the trade off between being close to loved ones and being further away from strangers are an equal risk. Not allowing us to see loved ones in their houses has no other negative aspects in terms of society, if they had allowed us to continue seeing friends and family but shut down pubs and shop instead then the wider knock on is so much more. If it is close between the two they will always pick the option that keeps people employed.

As for your last point I think more people will continue to do that and make their own decisions. I'm starting to view this in a similar way to speeding or drink driving - you can excuse it but you know the guidance so if you decide to go against it don't be upset or surprised them the ramifications hit and the lockdown gets tightened.

 

they wouldnt have done anything had the private sector not forced their hand by shutting down anyway. their plan was to literally do nothing and go for herd immunity, so i feel it is a fair accusation. i dont think its highly unlikely at all if we'd have shown some gonads and made tough decisions earlier on. other countries with higher pop densities or similar levels of air pollution or in some cases, much worse healthcare systems have outperformed us on almost every metric, so I don't buy the argument that the makeup of our population etc makes things too difficult as to be worthwhile.

 

It’s very simple.

Close the borders and have everyone stay at home for 3 weeks, except for critical workers who all must have mass PPE.

Then relax lockdown and make masks and gloves mandatory for everyone.

Problem solved

 

We're now getting into a typical political conversation where the goalposts are moving. We've gone from them not doing anything to them only doing things because the private sector forced their hand....which I see little evidence of to be honest.

If we want to discuss other countries with similar populations, densities, transportation links, etc, etc then I'm absolutely fine with that but the rather glib "New Zealand did it so we could have too" is just too flawed.

 

Ah, you make it sound so easy.

Two flaws to this... It appears the virus is cyclical and the stupid, lazy and selfish of our society