I work in a school, a fairly large one at that and it is crazy.
I can stand in a field with 1600 other people for a fire drill! I can sit in an office with 7 other people but I can’t go to the pub with them when I leave next week. We are supposed to stay 2m from kids at all times as well as 2m from each other but it just doesn’t work in practice.
I suspect that schools and colleges are driving the uptick in cases and that it is going to get much much worse… That is despite huge efforts by management, teachers and support staff to try and ensure distancing and sanitisation…
We have had several positive tests (we get 10 whole tests sent to us - woo!). Each class group sits in the same layout and teachers have to record that layout for contact tracing. Those pupils are sent home. I note that all the pupils we have sent home are by de facto actually ill because we dont have tests for anyone who wants one - we only test ill pupils. Natch there are parents keeping pupils home who are ill too but without positive tests - this is the time of year that our little incubators pass round all sorts of coughs and colds. One of the pupils is quite badly affected and therefore the parents are now also in isolation - actually isolated in a room in the house away from the pupils.
It is pretty obvious to everyone in the industry that most children will be exposed to the virus. It may not affect them all and those that is does may not get that ill (some will and some may be badly affected for a long time) but the key is what happens next. Those children are going home and probably mixing with other children from other schools so it is certain to spread but the key thing is if they will pass it on to adults. Obviously there are those of us at school who will probably be exposed to it but most of us are young and most of us are healthy - however our extended families may not be. It is what happens at home for parents and extended family members that might produce problems in the weeks to come.
It all depends on how much transmission there is between children and adults and that is far from certain.
All I can say is that I am very happy to be leaving education. Nothing to do with the fantastic place I currently work in but it is difficult to ignore the stresses caused by working alongside 400 staff and 1200 pupils when it isn’t deemed safe to go to the pub with 6 mates.
Of course many schools would welcome some extra staff at this time so I look forward to seeing people like OP here lining up (spaced apart obvs) to play their part in helping schools manage this 
‘It seems the Government’s objective now is to keep us in some form of lockdown until the virus disappears from our shores completely – an absurdly quixotic ambition and a sign of the obvious mission creep that has occurred.’ Paul Emery in Unherd.
The commitment to killing the wasp by blowing up the house is destroying this country.
The number of friends losing their jobs, the suicides (no friends yet, thankfully), and the destruction of civil liberties, none of which occurred during the Hong Kong flu of 1968 that killed far more people than covid should be worrying everyone. Children are being traumatised by parents marinated in the MSM fear and for many their lost education and life chances will be irretrievable.
Coronavirus was only the 24th most common cause of death in England in August. Data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) shows Covid-19 accounted for a mere 1.4 per cent of all deaths last month - just 482 out of 34,000. And yet:
The hospitality industry is on the brink of crisis with 1 million jobs imminently at risk. There are already 750,00 people whom have lost their jobs. The decision being avoided is how many jobs – and all that it entails – are worth losing to avoid one death? Should we all be out of work, with all lives saved? This is ultimately the question.
The lockdown has destroyed large numbers of businesses, especially small businesses, with attendant loss of livelihoods, loss of educational opportunities, strains on family relationships, huge levels in undetected heart disease and cancer, eating disorders, increasing alcoholism and domestic abuse and suicides, to name but a few. I’m told that I don’t care and I’m heartless of prioritising these things over people’s lives. ‘YOU DON’T CARE LIKE I DO’ I’m repeatedly told. Well, stress kills, so does loneliness and a diminished quality of life; there’s a bigger picture here.
Covid kills an easily identifiable group of people, whom can be protected if they so choose, or can be made to if they lack capacity. Shield them and allow the rest of us to exist with the miniscule level of risk.
For those that cry ‘what about the children?’ Children’s risk of needing hospital treatment for coronavirus is “tiny” and critical care “even tinier”. Public health England has also confirmed they are poor transmitters of the virus. The six children who have died of Covid had ‘profound’ underlying health conditions that were already complex and themselves life-limiting.
In age groups up to and including 60-69, fewer than 1 in 1,000 people have died from coronavirus.
Age 70-79, it’s 2 in every 1,000 people.
Age 80-89, it’s 7 in every 1,000 people.
Age 90 and over, it’s 18 people in every 1,000 people.
Males have a higher risk in every age group than females.
(Age concern. June 2020)
It would appear that people are prepared to live with far smaller level of risk than I realised, although with the mainstream media and the government pummelling the population with misleading levels of risk who can blame them for hysterical hypochondria. Fear is in the air. After all, should children permanently wear facemasks to prevent spread of meningitis? It is far more dangerous than Covid 19 and children transmit it, unlike Covid.
81% of people already have immunity from previous exposure to coronaviruses and will show no symptoms at all. So, we are already dealing with only 19% of the population who will show varying levels of symptoms. There is a 99.72% survival rate.
A very high percentage of those currently testing positive under current UK PCR test regime are neither symptomatic nor infectious nor ill in any other medically defined way. This is mass hysteria. Cases here are creeping up as in France and Spain whom we copied in Lockdown, yet increasing deaths are not in the same proportion. The Pillar 2 mass testing is producing mainly asymptotic or mild cases, they are neither symptomatic nor infectious nor ill in any medically defined way.
We had a very low impact flu season in 2019 which meant there was a large number of people alive who would have normally died earlier this year. And we are using a Covid-19 test that has a high % of false positives. Studies have shown that if you die within 28 days of a positive test, then you are counted as having died of Covid. Sweden and Japan who had no lockdown are finding their immunity.
We have a government of a political leaning that prides itself in libertarianism, yet is brandishing the hammer of a fascist state. We have an opposition who want even more draconian measures. They are manufacturing a fear which is irrational to the threat. I feel like a mad person in a sane world when the facts point to the opposite.
We’re sinking the ship to kill the galley rat.
I’m not sure how I feel about your argument yet (it’s a lot of information to process), but massive kudos for the articulate way you’ve argued your point, and the data you’ve shared.
Do we have a ‘comment of the year’ award? Even though I agree and disagree in and out of some of those arguments, I thought that was a great post - thanks. That’s a really well laid out case.
Presumably you are referring to this study??
That is the study that tested the blood of 185 people, who had not had Covid 19, to see if their was an invitro T-cell response to Sars 2 and 81% of people did have some response.
That does not imply complete immunity nor does it imply they wont have any symptoms.
Also to note that it is a tiny survey on a pre print server that is not peer reviewed
“They should not be considered conclusive, used to inform clinical practice, or referenced by the media as validated information.” - I don’t know if it has been reviewed since the date in article but you are making claims not supported by the research.
I do actually have more sympathy for the government than Tom, and I do recognise that COVID can have very nasty long-term side effects when its not fatal. I was actually in favour of the 1st lockdown (in fact it was one or 2 weeks too late).
However, the government (and the scientists) are making the big, arguably flawed assumption that any future 2nd, 3rd outbreak will have the same hospital and mortality rates as March/April. That is unlikely - for starters we won’t get care homes so badly wrong (I would hope). In others words they are now fighting the last battle, not the current one.
Its interesting looking at the Bolton severe local lockdown. It was a big and worrying increase in cases, no doubt about that. Pubs and restaurants were totally shut (aside from takeaways); with I believe no noticeable impact on the cases. But more importantly (and thankfully), hospital cases minimal, COVID deaths I think 1. In other words, high cases numbers, low hospitalisation (thank goodness).
Does SAGE I wonder model non-COVID deaths arising from lockdown / recession etc. Perhaps they should? The first lockdown was into the summer, lengthy days. Whilst what we have at the moment is not a full lockdown, the impacts of continued restrictions into the winter will have a bigger impact, especially re mental health, people not getting non-COVID treatment. Employers are worried about this and rightly so.
Where the strategy should be aiming for in my view is how to live reasonably normally with higher numbers of cases then we would want, but minimising severe cases). As far as I understand it, Sweden broadly follows this. Whereas we are trying to have minimal COVID Cases via suppressing personal interaction and the economy. Even if you can do this, it will be at huge economic and health cost elsewhere.
I think the NHS app can help with a more nuanced approach, as would of course effective track and trace, plentifully supplied.
Finally, governments can try to suppress behaviour with curfews and the like etc, but…look at the experience of the US Prohibition…its not a happy one, it won’t work long-term, behaviour will go underground.
I wonder if some of the measures are being so cautious because normal seasonal flu can stretch healthcare, so that + Covid could make for a particularly unpleasant and dangerous winter?
That said, I do feel children are being disproportionately penalised by many of these measures. It’s not just school closures that are a problem, but all sorts of clubs, sports, swimming pools and other activities are also lost.
Heck, councils even seem to have removed some of the swings from parks - presumably because they aren’t 2m apart.
Those swings … yes it probably has the added bonus of the council not having to fork out to maintain them
It’s quite depressing seeing these pictures.
it is indeed.
This must mean me. Although I am in good health and do not think of myself as vulnerable, I’m in my late seventies and therefore at a higher risk of becoming seriously ill or dying if I contract the virus. Under TomAngel’s scheme I could ‘be protected if I so chose.’ That would presumably mean that unless I was prepared to expose myself to a significantly greater degree of risk than I do under the present provisions, I couldn’t, for example, travel on public transport, go to church or to a pub, restaurant or busy supermarket, have dinner with friends, or visit my daughters or grandchildren. Is that a price we oldies have to be prepared to pay?
None of us are happy with the way the virus works, and who it targets.
Tom’s suggestion, I think, is that restrictions on younger people are lifted, and elderly people are given agency over their own restrictions (but obviously it makes sense for you to shield)
The problem for the elderly is that their pension payments rely on the tax revenue generated by younger working people.
We’re in the perilous position of losing a lot of that tax revenue, so under such extreme circumstances, both elderly and young people are going to have to make some lifestyle changes until the vaccine is available.
Luckily, Robin, your generation is the strongest and most resilient this country has ever seen, so I suspect you’ll be able to handle it.
Well I’m probably stuck in the middle here at 50. Is this a price you want to pay? I think the point being made is for the sake of society and the economy let the young people aka my kids who are at university or working in their first jobs go out and keep things moving. I think that’s feasible, in return it should be possible to allocate ‘safe’ opening times for pubs, restaurants, churches or whatever. I wouldn’t mind if say supermarkets were allocated Fridays for ‘at risk groups’ only. There are ways to make it work and I can see how 6 months of an 18 year old’s life is significantly more impactful then 6 months out of 75 years. This is about society not individuals.
It’s quite a tough debate as there are arguments to be made on both sides, I think we’re going to fumble along until we get a vaccine as there will be no consensus.
I’m not even sure which side of the fence I’m actually on. My father is 82 and I have 3 kids, so how do you figure that out.
I don’t think it’s a price you should be made to pay and I sympathise with your situation. My parents are also in their 70s, both healthy but of course would be considered vulnerable. They live in France and we can’t travel to see them, neither they to see us. I think 6 months of a grandparents life away from their young and rapidly growing grandchildren must feel very long.
I completely agree. When you’re older and you know your days of being able to do the things you’ve perhaps waited and worked your whole life to do are limited, only for the shutters to come down like this, it can be very depressing. No one wants segregation, but if it’s the only way for older and/or more vulnerable people to get out and about, then setting aside a couple of days a week for these groups surely has to be the right thing.
My heart breaks for grandparents, for whom of course this is no real solution.
Equally you could argue should losing jobs. education and suffering poor mental health be a price young people have to pay?
We are in a horrific situation where the measures to protect one section of society are destroying the livelihoods, opportunities and mental health of another.
I am lucky I have a well established career, friends and relationship and a decent housing situation. If this had happened to the 21 year old me - single, living in a houseshare in London with few friends outside work I would have found it really really tough.
We have to land on a sustainable way to protect both groups as much as we can, which may involve different restrictions according to risk.
It is ironic that the more effective the social distancing measures the more people argue that they aren’t needed at all. I personally feel that if the virus was allowed to run rampant, without our continued, collective, concerted efforts to reduce transmission, the figures cited would paint a very different picture.
Hm. Too young for national service, too old for tuition fees, student loans and the gig economy? Free orange juice, school milk, secure jobs, affordable housing, inflation-proof pensions paid for, as you point out, by you lot? I think my generation has had less need to be ‘strong and resilient’ than our parents’ or our children’s.
So perhaps what you really mean is ‘I suspect you’re rich enough to be able to handle it’?
Actually that’s the opposite of my point regarding pensions and freeing up the economy to pay for them.
Great grandfather classed as too old to claim state pension when it was introduced. Grandfather died within a year of retirement, having been worn out by hard manual lump labour since he lost his craftsman’s skilled job due to disability caused by WW1 gun shot wound (a few shillings injured serviceman’s pension for six months only). My pension pushed back by six years with no notice (yes, I had checked with DWP). 50 years of NI payments and I’m told I won’t get a full state pension should I make it to 66 (I was going to say “should I manage to crawl” to the 66 finishing post … but not with these knees 
).
No “Uni” for me or any of my year at school. Come to think of it, I didn’t know anyone who went through higher education until I started being leapfrogged at work by public school types on graduate training schemes.
I don’t really have a point, other we all have different back stories. Everybody’s different. Some are better off than me, some are a hell of a lot worse off. But some of us oldies would like to get out and about just as much as the young would. But we can’t. We haven’t got decades ahead of us anyway. These years are our last chance - and in many cases our first chance. It doesn’t mean shutting down the economy, just setting aside a couple of days and evenings a week when we could do our shopping and socialising would be very welcome. Not that it will happen.