Chat about Novel Coronavirus - 2019-nCoV - COVID-19

Posted on
Page
of 681
  • He made me think of Little Britain / Computer says No, as in whatever may have happened, however many people have died, or might have been saved by the measures introduced, "the Science says No".

  • It is indirectly both, a large chunk of the capacity is reserved for NHS an care homes. However people due to go in to hospitals that require an over night stay are being asked to get a test 72 hours before the appointment and are applying as community tests, many care workers are off as they have household members who are applying for community tests, so there is cross over between the two streams impacting each other

  • I don't have this problem yet as I haven't yet received a message but how far do you take it?

    If someone in year 10 tests positive and year 10 isolates then my year 10 daughter stays at home. If the household isolates then my year 7 daughter stays at home too. Does 7 year also isolate because of the connection? Where do you stop?

  • People attending hospital for an out-patients appointment to plan for potential surgery sometime in the future are also being asked to take a test.

  • I stop with what I can control. Like I said, this is not me telling anyone how to interpret the guidelines. If I were in that position, I would have my yr7 stay home too, to minimise the risk of her potentially being affected and then all of yr7 definitely having to stay home.

  • But staying at home and missing classes, especially if the school expects the child/class/year to be in and so isn't setting remote work, is harmful to them. It's all a bit of a screwed either way situation.

  • Yeah. What's wrong with a black and white rule?

    Do you absolutely trust everyone in a group of more than 6? Really?

    I have a bridge for sale btw. Would you like to buy it?

  • For example.
    School bubbles pop when the parent pick up happens and kids go off to play with their mates / parent's mates at the park and they're all in different year bubbles.

  • I stop with what I can control.

    I probably agree with this, and your example makes sense. However, I imagine also that every year in any year can be connected by siblings. I only have one child at school, but with my limited knowledge of all the other kids I think I can join year six, year five, year four, year two and reception; all through one single step.

    A positive test anywhere could see therefore see whole school close; and if that were true then doing any of the child management / bubbling is pointless (since even if they were mingling freely, then a positive case would close the whole lot).

    It's significant that we're having to discuss this, or having to interpret / second guess the guidelines.

  • Again, only have one child, not yet school age, I'm only going by what my gut says.

    We are lucky in this household that we have the flexibility to err on the side of caution, which likely influences my instincts here.

    #checkingmyprivilege

  • Yeah - sorry, I wasn't having a go or anything if it came over like I was. For what it's worth I technically agree with your gut (err...), but I suspect that if it were insisted on then we'd all be home schooling for the next year or two.

    I don't think my daughter's bubble is worth a lot, but I (and the other parent's I imagine) go along with it because it let's the school stay open. I get the impression they will keep it open unless all schools are told to close again (which I imagine will happen before the end of term anyway).
    If I was in that situation I guess I'd just do what I'm told by the teachers to keep it open.

  • School bubbles pop when the parent pick up happens and kids go off to play with their mates / parent's mates at the park

    Yeah, after first two days back at school, seeing exactly this, I regretfully told the kids that we won't be going to the park after school anymore.

    It sucks, but it is, without doubt, the right thing to do.

  • That's what we did, youngest was sent from nursery with a cough and told she couldn't return until tested negative, this meant her sisters missed primary school and secondary school for 3 days until the result came through. I found it especially frustrating as no work was set and it was the first week of year 10, so a number of first lessons for new options was missed. Seems the secondary school only has a plan to remote teaching if the whole year is off and can't do remote and live concurrently.

  • If someone in year 10 tests positive and year 10 isolates then my year 10 daughter stays at home. If the household isolates then my year 7 daughter stays at home too. Does 7 year also isolate because of the connection? Where do you stop?

    A household should/must isolate when someone in the household displays symptoms or tests positive.

    If someone in your daughter's class/year/bubble shows symptoms then they (just that person) get sent home (or doesn't go into school if the symptoms started at home). They (that person) should then get a test. If it comes back negative they can go back to school when they are well enough (a sniffle isn't a reason to stay home). Their siblings can still go to school in the mean time.

    It's only when that person tests positive (and possibly only when a second person in the same bubble tests positive) that the rest of the bubble can't go into school for 10-14 days. There's no need for the families of everyone else in the bubble to isolate. Again, a household only needs (but could choose to anyway) isolate when someone in the household displays symptoms or tests positive. If you had one child that had their bubble sent home then your other children would still be going to school.

    People can choose to be more cautious than this, but the above stops the endless proliferation of isolation requirements.

  • The Cummings style of applying Science then: Really, it lets you ask a question, you get an answer.

    But it cannot answer questions such as: Should we let older people die to save the economy? As that is a moral question.
    And then you have to ask the economist: What are the real impacts of that? Will it work, can we assume "economically inactive" people really don't contribute much?
    What happens in the meantime, are you dealing with a semi-chaotic system as the pandemic is still ongoing?
    How large are your error bars in your estimates?

    This is like the government and their "We followed the Science" ?

    (after arguing with the "it's just the flu" and "they would have died anyway" anti maskers on the local FB groups all week I can't deal with this video right now hah)

  • fuckinell, not having kids seems like a strong survival tactic right about now.

    good luck fellas!

  • It's severely hindered my local group of NCT mums. They can only meet in groups of 3 as there are also 3 newborns with them which technically count.

  • School bubbles pop when the parent pick up happens and kids go off to play with their mates / parent's mates at the park and they're all in different year bubbles.

    You can't have classes of 5+teacher within schools, so the Government doesn't have any other option that what they are doing other than sending all children home from school (and no parent wants that).

    It's about controlling it where you can. And two situations with 32 people aren't always the same thing.

    30 children + 2 teachers in a class room where children regularly sanitise their hands and then sit facing forwards with no shouting.

    Compared to 32 people getting pissed up in a pub all talking face to face, rarely even washing their hands after going for a piss, whilst the volume level slowly climbs to the point that people are almost shouting in each other's faces.

    Of course, the Government has lurched from semi-complex rules to their new "rule of six" nonsense that has many other traps. But they've done this because the vast majority of people thought that the old rules don't really apply to them.

    Anyway, it's likely to be a moot point soon as I expect that pubs/restaurants will be shut by the end of the month and we'll be back in semi-lockdown (but with schools remaining open) anyway.

  • not having kids seems like a strong survival tactic for about the last six months

  • We have two parks at wells park (up and down). Up is for smaller kids. So we're cool.

  • Not sure if my point was clear. It's not so much the bubbles in school, which I understand and understand all the mitigation / risk assessment (rows (not islands) of pupils, regular handwashing, smaller break time, year bubble). I'm saying it's all for fucking nothing when you get to school and you see the bubbles break up because as someone said earlier, even with only one kid in the school you can easily connect to 5 different bubbles.

    I hope, really I do, there's a push to reinvent the world not around a pub.

  • Anyway, it's likely to be a moot point soon as I expect that pubs/restaurants will be shut by the end of the month and we'll be back in semi-lockdown (but with schools remaining open) anyway.

    Blimey - really?

  • Blimey - really?

    I mean, the R rate is well over 1 and the number of daily cases is much higher than the level at which we shut down the entire country already so it's only a matter of time. They only reason they're delaying is to avoid worsening the economic fallout.

  • I see your point but the bubbles are a mitigation within schools because you can't limit groups to 6 within schools.

    The mitigation outside schools is limiting people to groups of 6.

    Maybe I'm not being clear.

    Take schools out of it. Even with the rule of 6 you can go to the pub with 5 people, then go mix with a different 5 people, then another 5 people on another pub visit, etc.

    But without the bubbles within schools you risk closing entire schools if there are one or two cases. At least with bubbles in schools you can limit the (dare I say it) collateral damage.

    If you don't have all children in school then a sizeable majority will be mixing more by not being at school. They'll just be mixing in groups of 6 or fewer at a time.

    Neither rule is perfect but they're the simplest things to implement within each situation.

    The only single rule that could be applied everywhere would be back to lockdown with no mixing between households, pubs/schools closed, etc.

  • Blimey - really?

    I think so. To the point that I bought a few extra bog rolls yesterday.

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

Chat about Novel Coronavirus - 2019-nCoV - COVID-19

Posted by Avatar for deleted @deleted

Actions