Hospitality opened on 4th July. Cases continued to drop until children went back to universities and schools and the government started actively trying to get people back to their office environment. Public Health England regularly gave a figure of 3% of total Covid infections being found in hospitality. So the data was there when they made their decision to let all retail settings open up indoors on 12th April - excluding hospitality. They don't have the data to support why they've made that decision which is why they've been thrown in to a panic about this whole case. The point is to hold the government to account and that data needs to drive the decision making. Also, it's extremely naive for you to not think that every single day counts ahead of that 17th May opening. These are businesses that have been absolutely crippled financially - yes support has been there for the workers through the furlough scheme but sadly lacking for the businesses. Being able to open up fully at the start of May would improve the lives of tens of thousands of people and provide no greater risk to the population. Table service only. Rule of six. 40% reduced cover capacity. Enhanced service cycles and cleaning regimes. Pay by App. Coming in to contact with people outside of your chosen group less than you would in other retail environments. But none of that makes sense to you? There isn't such a thing as a 'busier hospitality venue' in a Covid secure opening. I swear you think it's just a free for all or something?
So let's suppose Lord and Osmond win. Health Secretary decides to go to the Court of Appeal. Appeal dropped on 17 May. What would have been achieved?
I can’t see how else they could do it in practical terms though? What else would the staff do? If they’re going to be collecting drinks/food from the bar with a mask on, then when they get to the threshold would they take their mask off with one hand (and put it where?) deliver your food, collect any empties and then stop at the door frame again to put the mask back on one handed (if they even have a spare hand)? They’d be taking it on and off every two seconds and touching the wet mask that’s been next to their mouth and nose and touching your glasses and cutlery with no hand washing opportunities in between.
I can see that point. But I've seen people walking down the street alone wearing masks, walking dogs wearing masks and even cycling wearing a mask dont know whats up with some people.
If that's what they want to do then it's not causing any problems is it? We all want things to get back to normal as soon as possible. All this will hopefully be a distant memory in time.
No it isn't causing a problem and of course they are free to do so. It is however possibly a worrying sign of the levels of fear that have been raised in people.
Not really causing me any problem although I cant think riding a bike with a mask on his very good for you after a long big shop I sometimes feel unwell after wearing them for so long. It is worrying though that people are so scared and we have been told by scientists that virus is very unlikely to be passed outdoors.
There are some people who will not be vaccinated and some who may not gain enough antibodies due to medication they have to take. I do hope we don't see an unlocked society which is supposedly liberal but then mocks and derides individuals who are less fortunate in the immunity stakes and so choose to make personal choices to enhance their chances of survival, even if by a couple of percent.
Very true, but just because something bad happens in life it doesn't automatically mean it is wrong when we have to adapt. When the Germans were bombing the shît out of the UK I doubt people were kicking off about having to switch their lights off- the Blitz killed far less. I assume people were terrified about it too. Just because it is an inconvenience and makes people anxious, it doesn't necessarily make it the wrong thing to do. I treat people for health anxiety and see how terrified they are of it. Before this they were mostly worried about contracting cancer. The problem was therefore likely there before this, the focus has just shifted to something else (Covid).
If you don't understand that people are in closer proximity in the aisles of tk maxx where a pram brushes both sides of the aisle at once than they do in a pub seat at a table then there's something wrong with you. If you don't think they can differentiate between a country pub and a town centre bat rammed to the rafters but do believe they can differentiate between b&m and Primark then again there's something wrong. And what's wrong? Imo your agenda which is completely clouding your judgement
Then surely you must acknowledge that places like tk maxx and Primark with racks so close together that you touch both sides as you walk are not as socially distanced as a bar cum restaurant with a set number of seats at a set number of tables right? And as an intelligent man you just accept that it's just as easy to seperate different kinds of pubs and bars etc as it is to seperate different kinds of shops which the government managed to do within the space of a few hours last march
Cases started exponential growth in July last year. That was from a very low level, but the increase in growth can be traced back to then. The theory (whether you agree or not) is that in a hospitality setting, you are sat in your seat and you are taking items (cutlery and glasses) from the table where they are laid to your mouth. So, if any virus is present in the air in the pub you are more likely to get infected than for the same time spent in a shop - unless you go around Tesco licking the cans of beans. People also tend to stay in pubs longer than in shops - and alcohol helps to reduce social inhibitions making drunk people more likely to get closer than ideal (as well as talking louder, shouting, singing, etc which increases transmission. The State of Texas listed "going to a bar" among the mostly risky activities last year. (https://www.texmed.org/TexasMedicineDetail.aspx?id=54216) - higher than eating in a restaurant (or buffet) and the same risk as a large religious service or a large concert. That may have changed now, but it isn't just the British government making these decisions and (whether you agree with them or not) there are *scientific reasons* that hospitality is considered an higher risk than other activities. Having said that, the hospitality industry should absolutely have been given more help/money than it was - enough to mothball any affected parts of the industry until it was safe to do so.
My elderly and vulnerable parents have been allowed to go large religious services weekly for ages so isn't what you say actually evidence that they ARENT following the science but are simply selecting what is allowed based on their ideology?
Different rules in different countries and then different rules in different states. Can you see why a study in Texas that isn't a mirror image of the UK would be questionable data? Especially when our own Public Health England were sighting 3% of Covid transmissions being labelled as in the hospitality sector. You say the growth rate was exponential from July but the R rate was declining and only started to increase the first two weeks of September. I'm also really unsure what situation you're painting for hospitality vs. supermarkets? More items in hospitality are single use and destroyed or single use and washed, multiple people touch multiple items repeatedly in supermarkets, don't social distance, with hygiene practices in place far less. With it being an air born disease as you mention there's a greater chance in supermarkets of hand to mouth after touching something. There's also track and trace and checking in.
Who said I was an intelligent man? I have made no such claim. And I'd be interested to know what you think my 'agenda' is? I think I perceive a lot of anger.
You've always appeared to be one. Don't worry it was a compliment. I think agenda was the wrong word, I mean your mindset like you'd already decided it was bad so you were unable to see things. We're all guilty of it
I don't think wearing a mask while excersizing is a good idea at all, and has the potential to cause far more harm than good. And if your outside alone and keep your social distance I don't think masks are needed or will enhance your chances of survival what so ever. They haven't had a impact since they became mandatory indoors. But each to their own i suppose.