Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Airlines, Airports & Routes
Reload this Page >

Coronavirus Impact on Air Travel

Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

Coronavirus Impact on Air Travel

Old 26th Sep 2020, 13:21
  #1721 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Age: 75
Posts: 2,672
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Vokes55

You are obviously entitled to act as you think fit within the law of the land and "carry on with life as normal", as you put it, and that includes flying. What I don't like is you sneering at others who do not feel that they should take that risk and describing them as "risk averse coronaphobes".

My 72 years of acquired risk assessment, what I would call common sense, tells me that I should try to avoid contracting COVID-19 if I possibly can as the result that I could die of it is sufficiently statistically significant. I very much miss travelling this year and my hope is that I may be able to sometime in 2021, probably as a result of a vaccine being available to me. Indeed, I probably have fewer years ahead of me that do you so each additional month of careful social distancing is more of a loss to me than it would be to you. My concern is that a vaccine is not guaranteed so maybe my travelling days are over for good and a continued high rate of infection without a vaccine would probably result in that outcome sadly. Your philosophy of 'live life and let the virus do its worst', if it becomes the social norm as it may well do among those who will not suffer severe illness if they catch it, is likely to result in very high infection and death rates this winter with the result that the real return to 'normal' is even further delayed. Perhaps you would suggest instead that, like you, I should take the risk, live my life as "normal" and, heck, if I catch COVID and die well bad luck. Not wishing to be that reckless (and that is surely a better word than suggesting it's a phobia) I don't consider it a sensible option.
Expressflight is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 14:01
  #1722 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Vokes55
Exactly. At what point does the number of people dying alone having not seen their family for x months exceed the number of people dying ďwithĒ coronavirus. It probably already has.
Friends met on holiday talking to recently, mother is in a nursing home in Poland, no visits, no letters, no phone calls because worry about passing stuff and covid. A member of staff broke the rules and used his phone so they could speak to parent. Question asked "Why am I in prison, what have I done" ?

In a shared room of 6 people, 4 have died in last month, not from Covid or seemingly anything bad. They cut off from family, no contact and likely the loneliness of feeling abandoned meant living was not something they wished to do.

racedo is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 14:06
  #1723 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Barling Magna
Well, fair enough, but you need to be sure that you fully understand the risk you are taking and exposing others to. Not surprisingly the main focus has been on the number of deaths caused by C19, but often overlooked are the long-term impacts that a surprisingly large number of people (up to 15% of those with symptoms) suffer and these do not seem to be age-related: brain damage, breathing, kidneys, heart, blood clotting and more. This is because, as we know, C19 uses a spike protein on its surface to latch onto cellsí ACE2 receptors. We still don't know enough about this virus but it is clear that it is a nasty one, far nastier than flu (for which there is a vaccine of course). If you are fully aware of the risks you are taking and that you expose others to then go ahead but don't scoff at those with a more prudent view.
BS because that would mean thousands would be suffering from it in UK and millions worldwide.

We know diddly squat about the virus and the UK Govt scientific experts are so full of BS that all they are doing is guessing. When wrong as they are they claim it has mutated as a catch all to get them out of their incompetence.

racedo is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 14:11
  #1724 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Vokes55
Nobody is scoffing at those with a more ďprudentĒ view. People are scoffing at those who insist their view should be inflicted on everybody else. Itís a very 2020 attitude.

All people like me want, aside from keeping our jobs, is the ability to make our own choice and for people to take responsibility of their own health. If thereís a lockdown, nobody has a choice. If thereís not a lockdown, everybody has a choice. Those that are worried can stay indoors. Those that accept the risk can carry on. Government should focus on supporting those who choose to stay indoors, whilst the rest of us keep the economy afloat. Too late for that now of course.
People wish to make their own choice and live A LIFE.

Sadly what I have seen is way many people who jump at the latest Government edict and demand everybody follows it because Govt says so. All of a sudden people believe they have POWER to tell people what to do, to snitch and demand everybody follows some edict from the man on the telly.
racedo is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 14:16
  #1725 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: bishops stortford herts
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Vokes55...
Perhaps it is the ordered & civilised society that we all have inherited through generations live & function in grants that ability to make your own choice & choices...Others within society are certainly not quite so lucky & do not have choices within a declared Pandemic & require to be protected by all in & by society.

Epidemiology & Pandemics dictate that it is NOT for people to take responsibility for their own health...It is precisely the opposite in fact.

BTW.. Nothing to do with 2020 certainly as the Nation`s health is concerned clearly the public are very concerned & are not in the grip of "campaigns".

With the clear lack of resolve & ability since early March from our libertarian PM to protect the public then it is little wonder others may think a little differently from yourself & perhaps deserve not to be scoffed at.

Concerned rightly for your job a very unfortunate lack of strategy/resolve & support from HMG fits that frame better I would sadly hazard.



southside bobby is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 14:58
  #1726 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Oban, Scotland
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As a social animal we have to take account not only of the risk to ourselves but also the risk we might pose to others.
I'm sure that the Individuals who went on a night out in Aberdeen or Bolton or wherever thought that the risk was to them, not from them because they did not realise that they had an asymptomatic infection. They decided that their need for a Life was greater than the risk to them. Unfortunately out of the hundred or more that they infected, directly or indirectly, some will have become seriously ill and may not ever fully recover due to damage to their vital organs, including the brain. That cost falls on the wider community.
There are two good reasons for wearing a mask wherever it is required.
The first is that it blocks the larger droplets emitted when we cough or sneeze. The other is that it is a badge of our commitment to the wider community, just as refusal is also a badge.

inOban is online now  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 15:05
  #1727 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: U.K
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by inOban
There are two good reasons for wearing a mask wherever it is required.
The first is that it blocks the larger droplets emitted when we cough or sneeze. The other is that it is a badge of our commitment to the wider community, just as refusal is also a badge.
The first part of your statement, whilst undoubtedly true, appears to make little to no difference to the progress of the virus. Look at the strict enforcement in Spain and France and then compare to U.K, Netherlands, Belgium with our half measures in comparrison. The trejectory remains the same. The second part of your statement is not worthy of a response.
The96er is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 15:23
  #1728 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,675
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 17 Posts
Cases in the UK per 100,000 over 14 days have now overtaken Portugal and Croatia. If things don't change very soon, we will likely find more countries in Europe deciding to impose quarantine on people arriving from the UK. I suspect Italy, one of the few countries in Europe not on the UK Govt quarantine list, may be thinking about this sooner rather than later. Germany may well be thinking about imposing a similiar requirement
davidjohnson6 is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 15:32
  #1729 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The96er
The first part of your statement, whilst undoubtedly true, appears to make little to no difference to the progress of the virus. Look at the strict enforcement in Spain and France and then compare to U.K, Netherlands, Belgium with our half measures in comparrison. The trejectory remains the same.
How can you tell? You don't know what would have happened had mask wearing not been so widespread. It's quite possible that masks have reduced the spread compared to what would otherwise have been the case.
Link Kilo is online now  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 16:33
  #1730 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: U.K
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Link Kilo
How can you tell? You don't know what would have happened had mask wearing not been so widespread. It's quite possible that masks have reduced the spread compared to what would otherwise have been the case.
Try reading what I wrote again. Virus trajectory Spain/France with strict mask enforcement = virus trajectory UK/Netherlands etc.. with little mask enforcement.
The96er is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 18:12
  #1731 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: SYD
Posts: 504
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We're losing sight of the big picture again. Yes, Covid is a risk which we need to manage. For some, exposure to C-19 comes at a high price.

But so too do untreated heart disease, strokes, undetected cancers, depression, addictions, suicidal tendencies, despair (unemployment, eviction, mounting debts, cancelled elective surgeries), loneliness, domestic abuse.

If we neglect all of the above to ringfence one condition alone, it is questionable which omission will ultimately deliver the more tragic death toll.

Opening up society to those not in high-risk C-19 groups is the right thing to do. Help and support can be provided for those who feel themselves to be at elevated risk. They have the option to self-isolate to whatever extent they feel comfortable with; their sense of self-preservation guides this. But consideration must also be given to those whose wellbeing is under greater threat from other harmful conditions. And increasing herd immunity amongst the young and fit is actually a general positive too.

We need to strike a balance where those who are fit and able to carry on are free to do so without condemnation from self-obsessed finger-waggers who weren't banned from socialising with friends and earning a living in their youth. Let them live. Let them earn. Let them meet life partners. Let them exercise. Let them travel. Let them keep the economy ticking over.

You shelter if you want to. It's fine. Just don't demand that your personal fear of Covid infection be allowed to condemn a sidelined cancer patient to an avoidable premature death. Or push a despairing 19yo to such depths that they take their own life. There is more than one group of people who can be accused of being uncaring towards others in society.
OzzyOzBorn is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 19:58
  #1732 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Expressflight
. Perhaps you would suggest instead that, like you, I should take the risk, live my life as "normal" and, heck, if I catch COVID and die well bad luck. Not wishing to be that reckless (and that is surely a better word than suggesting it's a phobia) I don't consider it a sensible option.
No. Iíve been advocating the exact opposite. I want people like you who feel threatened by the virus to take responsibility for your health, as it seems you have been doing.

If everybody who felt at risk shielded themselves, avoided traveling or anything that makes themselves feel uncomfortable, the rest of us could get on with life without worrying about somebody telling us to put our mask back on if it stays off five seconds longer than needed after eating. Why does it take a government order for people who deem themselves at risk to stay indoors?

But just because you donít feel safe travelling, doesnít mean that millions of others shouldnít be allowed to. And donít be lulled into this media perception that the entire population agrees with you. Iíd be very surprised if thereís not a silent majority that want life to go back to normal, they just donít shout about it.

OzzyOzBorn wrote what I wanted to say far better than I ever could.
Vokes55 is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 20:07
  #1733 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,332
Received 54 Likes on 36 Posts
But isn't as neat as that is it? It's not just a case of the old and frail shield while the rest of us get back to normal. This lurgy is a bad bugger which can have serious consequences for those you'd perceive to be not at risk.
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 20:14
  #1734 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 956
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
On masks, I donít think anyone is advocating that they are the silver bullet, but they have a part to play. If youíre in a cabin or 180 people and all are wearing it properly, the amount of virus is going to be reduced substantially. But everyone has a part to play - if someone isnít wearing one, or wearing it wrongly, it can affect everyone in the vicinity.

Masks will not eliminate infection, but may well be reducing the severity. Masks will reduce the momentum of the germ.
Dannyboy39 is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 20:21
  #1735 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Oban, Scotland
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So some posters choose to live their lives as normal. In the course of this they may become infected. They will not know for a week, and even then as young and fit they may have few or no symptoms and may be genuinely unaware that they are infectious. Over their infectious phase they are likely to have passed it on to a hundred or more other people, some of whom for reasons of age, health or genetics become seriously ill, possibly for
​​​for months.

No man is an island, etc.
inOban is online now  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 20:29
  #1736 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: big green wheely bin
Posts: 876
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by inOban
So some posters choose to live their lives as normal. In the course of this they may become infected. They will not know for a week, and even then as young and fit they may have few or no symptoms and may be genuinely unaware that they are infectious. Over their infectious phase they are likely to have passed it on to a hundred or more other people, some of whom for reasons of age, health or genetics become seriously ill, possibly for
​​​for months.

No man is an island, etc.
The current R number in the U.K. is between 1.2 and 1.5. That means every infected person passes the virus onto just over one other person. Not a hundred or more.
Jonty is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 21:24
  #1737 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Oban, Scotland
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
People who know that they are infected, or who follow the rules on masks etc don't pass it on to anyone.
The others infect lots. Contact tracing of outbreaks in both the UK and elsewhere show quite clearly that a few people are responsible for most new infections.
inOban is online now  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 21:45
  #1738 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Vokes55
No. I’ve been advocating the exact opposite. I want people like you who feel threatened by the virus to take responsibility for your health, as it seems you have been doing.

If everybody who felt at risk shielded themselves, avoided traveling or anything that makes themselves feel uncomfortable, the rest of us could get on with life without worrying about somebody telling us to put our mask back on if it stays off five seconds longer than needed after eating. Why does it take a government order for people who deem themselves at risk to stay indoors?

But just because you don’t feel safe travelling, doesn’t mean that millions of others shouldn’t be allowed to. And don’t be lulled into this media perception that the entire population agrees with you. I’d be very surprised if there’s not a silent majority that want life to go back to normal, they just don’t shout about it.

OzzyOzBorn wrote what I wanted to say far better than I ever could.

Just out of interest do you think you have the right to travel to New Zealand and Australia if you wanted to?

If you lived in New Zealand would you object to their travel ban or do you agree with it?
LTNman is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 21:48
  #1739 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by inOban
People who know that they are infected, or who follow the rules on masks etc don't pass it on to anyone.
Based on what evidence exactly ?

racedo is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2020, 22:20
  #1740 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by inOban
So some posters choose to live their lives as normal. In the course of this they may become infected. They will not know for a week, and even then as young and fit they may have few or no symptoms and may be genuinely unaware that they are infectious. Over their infectious phase they are likely to have passed it on to a hundred or more other people, some of whom for reasons of age, health or genetics become seriously ill, possibly for
​​​for months.

No man is an island, etc.
No, because those who were worried about being infected due to ďage, health or geneticsĒ would take responsibility for their health and well-being and would either take themselves out of society or accept the risk based on that knowledge.

If everyone else passes it onto 100 people who have decided not to take themselves out of society, either because of their age, the fact they donít have an underlying health condition, arenít fat or have just accepted the risk, we will reach herd immunity far quicker. Thatís a positive.

Unfortunately, given that a third of the U.K. population is obese, I know itís a tough ask for people to take responsibility for their health. Maybe I live with rose tinted glasses on, believing the general population could possess the common sense and discipline to take ownership of their health and not rely on a fat man in a suit to tell them what they can and canít do. If only.
Vokes55 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.