Xmas lockdown or not? n/g | Vital Football

Xmas lockdown or not? n/g

wxgill

Vital 1st Team Regular
My daughter, son-in-law and grandson were supposed to be coming at xmas but i've said i think it's best to cancel regardless.

IF the R rate is showing signs of dropping why stop the progress? Why have 2 or 3 family days for even more deaths?

That seems to be the trade off for 2 or 3 days of family visits.

I'm probably in the minority to think this.
 
My daughter, son-in-law and grandson were supposed to be coming at xmas but i've said i think it's best to cancel regardless.

IF the R rate is showing signs of dropping why stop the progress? Why have 2 or 3 family days for even more deaths?

That seems to be the trade off for 2 or 3 days of family visits.

I'm probably in the minority to think this.

I’ll join your minority.

Exception at Christmas is politically motivated rather than informed by the science.
 
My take on this subject is that probably half the population want to a relaxation of the rules and and the other half, measures in place that will be similar to a lockdown of sorts.
Christmas will last just over a week it will include New Year celebrations by some and as well as partying in the days in between, some very hard choices will have to be made and the government should at least hear and take on board not only what the scientists come up with but what the main opposition parties and the devolved governments have in mind.
It will be a lot easier to get a policy for the festive period if all parties and governments can come to some agreement, I hold my breathe.
 
I
My daughter, son-in-law and grandson were supposed to be coming at xmas but i've said i think it's best to cancel regardless.

IF the R rate is showing signs of dropping why stop the progress? Why have 2 or 3 family days for even more deaths?

That seems to be the trade off for 2 or 3 days of family visits.

I'm probably in the minority to think this.
My family are with you big meet up can wait a few weeks.Christmas is about giving. I say this Christmas we should give more people the chance to see Christmas 2021.We will never know if we have saved a life.But if Christmas is anything like normal for everyone there will be a massive death toll in January.
 
My take on this subject is that probably half the population want to a relaxation of the rules and and the other half, measures in place that will be similar to a lockdown of sorts.
Christmas will last just over a week it will include New Year celebrations by some and as well as partying in the days in between, some very hard choices will have to be made and the government should at least hear and take on board not only what the scientists come up with but what the main opposition parties and the devolved governments have in mind.
It will be a lot easier to get a policy for the festive period if all parties and governments can come to some agreement, I hold my breathe.
I work all but two days plus weekends.
 
Do that many really give two hoots about Christmas? It's just turned into a big commercial rip off. We're not doing Christmas this year, and having salmon for our dinner. Open churches for those who wish to go, but what is so important about Christmas that you would put your family at risk?
 
I have a slightly different variation. My mum is 80 and lives alone. I'm letting her decide if she wants to join us for a few hours. Due to her age she is high risk but I think its her risk to call. She lives local so no need for an overnight stay. Her call is my view unless anyone of us shows symptoms or have had any track and trace close contacts.

My wife's parents live in Germany so she hasn't seen them all year and thats not happening anytime soon.

The rest of Christmas will be quiet, no friends around or anything like that.

To be honest Christmas isn't such a big deal in my house any year. Kids are late teens now so its really time off work that I look forward to.
 
But its tradition innit?!

FWIW I agree with most of the statements on here. The mother and father in law aren’t round this year (first time in ages) even if we invited them they still wouldn’t come. We’ll wait til Easter and get together then.
 
I have a slightly different variation. My mum is 80 and lives alone. I'm letting her decide if she wants to join us for a few hours. Due to her age she is high risk but I think its her risk to call. She lives local so no need for an overnight stay. Her call is my view unless anyone of us shows symptoms or have had any track and trace close contacts.

My wife's parents live in Germany so she hasn't seen them all year and thats not happening anytime soon.

The rest of Christmas will be quiet, no friends around or anything like that.

To be honest Christmas isn't such a big deal in my house any year. Kids are late teens now so its really time off work that I look forward to.

Agree Mark. We are the support bubble for my mum 87 and my mum in law 90. Both at ages where this may even be their last Christmas. We get them together most years and have already said it will be their call if they want to come to us Christmas day or later.
 
I’m also in the minority.
It will be just me and the missus plus my brother who lives a few miles away in Appledore. He won’t stay over and we see him all the time anyway.
 
From what I've seen of opinion polls (for what they are worth) I'm pleasantly surprised to see that a large majority do not want a massive beano at Xmas only to go into severe lockdown afterwards. An outbreak of the much sought after "common sense".
:-)
 
My opinion doesn't carry much weight as (1) we have very little family left and no kids and (2) since about the age of 12 I have seen Christmas as one big commercial pain in the ass. About the only good things that I appreciate are well sung carols, mulled wine, mince pies and a log fire in the pub. Also, being the darkest time of year it is something to keep us occupied, I suppose. Time off work was appreciated as well, if only for the rest.

I am a bit of a cynic about family gatherings though. I think there is some statistic about being the time that causes the most separations and divorces or at least family tensions. There are many in-laws that do not get on, simply for being different kinds of people or having nothing in common. I really don't think single or lonely people should be fooled that everything is sweetness and light if you happen to have a big family.

Anyway, that makes it easy for me personally to say that I would be happy for lockdown not be eased.
 
From what I've seen of opinion polls (for what they are worth) I'm pleasantly surprised to see that a large majority do not want a massive beano at Xmas only to go into severe lockdown afterwards. An outbreak of the much sought after "common sense".
:-)

Call me cynical if you will, but they would say that, wouldn't they? I suspect a large number of those people have every intention of meeting up with family over Xmas regardless of whether it's "officially" allowed, all those people are saying in such polls is that they don't want a severe lockdown after Xmas, not necessarily that they're prepared to make any kind of sacrifice to ensure that's the case.

Won't be true of all people, obviously, but I suspect it will apply to many of them.
 
I think a lot of people are missing the point of the whole govt strategy to fight coronavirus.

The strategy is not to eliminate transmission completely, it's to reduce it to manageable levels. By manageable levels, i mean manageable for the NHS.

The govt will be 'accepting' a certain spread rate as 'okay'. That spread rate rate is what is manageable for the NHS to deal with. It's like banks who assess their 'risk appetite'. Sometimes any risk is unacceptable, and will look to eliminate it entirely. Other times, banks will assess that a certain level of risk is acceptable, and not look to eliminate it further. This is how the banking industry works ultimately. A lot of the time, you will never eliminate it entirely, or to do so would cost more money than you have, so you just eliminate it as much as reasonably possible etc. This relates exactly to our situation here. A transmission rate of X is what the NHS can manage, so this rate is our 'risk appetite'.

As soon as it looked like it was becoming unmanageable in the NHS, then they put in the lockdown in March/April. Then as it looked like it was becoming more and more manageable, as hospital admissions figures went down, then they loosened up the lockdown. Then once it looked like it's becoming unmanageable again in some areas they put in another lockdown, before putting in a national lockdown as figures started to rise quickly. As I say, the key word is 'manageable'. It's all about keeping it manageable for the NHS.

So it's a matter of what will keep the levels within our 'risk appetite'.

They have gradually opened various amenities, in order to open up the economy or to bring back education, and all of this will be done with the knowledge that all of it contributes to the ultimate transmission levels, and all of it raises the level closer to the accepted 'risk appetite' figure.

IMO anyone suggesting an outright ban on Xmas gatherings, should also be against the opening of all bars, all shops, any sports (and stadiums), and probably most importantly, all schools. All of these will have effects on the virus spread rate.

As I say, all of the things they have opened up will have a risk factor associated with them. It's just about which risks do you 'pick' at different times. At Xmas obviously the social side is very important. So far they've been pretty stringent on the social gatherings side.

I see no reason why we can't have less stringent rules on social gatherings, at the expense of other restrictions being more strict. With the aim being to keep the rate within the manageable boundaries - not reducing it. That said, i wouldn't want another month long lock down. This one is a nightmare. I would hope there's other things that could be done.