TUI Zante to Cardiff - Covid

[Pistonprop]

"Normality" right now would be nothing short of catastrophic.

[R T Jones]

From my experience, the silent majority of people want life to return to normal and believe the continued global obsession with this virus is an overreaction that's causing far more damage than the virus itself. The majority will wear a mask on a flight because they have to, not because they think it "keeps them safe" or stops them spreading illnesses. Of course you won't read that in The Sun so you probably won't be aware of that.[/QUOTE]

More and more people I talk to are thinking much the same.

[250 kts]

Vokes55

Of course the majority want to get back to how things were. But the fact remains there is a highly contagious virus in the community that, in many cases is asymptomatic, that you can catch from anyone in close proximity for which there is no vaccine. It's only an overreaction for those that haven't been directly affected by those that have lost a loved one or close colleague.

[Vokes55]

There are always highly contagious viruses and illnesses in the community. Do we need to decimate the economy, people’s livelihoods and future prospects and mental health for every single one of them? Especially as, as you rightly mention, the majority of people don’t even know they have it, let alone get sick from it.

The constant referrals to people who have lost family members is all well and good, I don’t think the aforementioned silent majority disagree with the fact that action had to be taken when the virus was new, rife, out of control and being fought blind. But we are 7 months on, we know exactly where the virus is, how it affects (or doesn’t) people, how to treat it (and how not to treat it) and most importantly, the fact that for the majority of people, it doesn’t even make them sick.

How long does this go on for? If there’s no vaccine and the virus takes years to burn out, do we continue with a crippled economy? Do we continue not doing all the things that make life worth living? Seeing loved ones, watching live sport/music/shows, travelling, working? Do we continue sitting at home, “staying safe”?

Newsflash, life is unsafe and nobody makes it out alive. Time to move on.

[PilotLZ]

Safety measures are necessary in almost any human activity, be it to avoid slipping and falling or to avoid getting infected - but staying put and doing nothing for what can potentially be a couple of years because of a virus with a true mortality rate of less than 1% is not an option. A "new normal" full of isolation, policing, ever-changing restrictions, ill mental health, poverty and despair will ultimately cause far more damage. Lockdowns kill people. Depression and anxiety kill people. Stress over what's going to happen tomorrow and how to make ends meet kills people. Poverty and growing inequality will result in millions of deaths and many people's life expectancy significantly reduced. But few talk of that.

The latest development of the situation is downright appalling. Putting Greece and Zante on the quarantine lists of Wales and Scotland will create another logistical nightmare - but will not do anything useful. What can possibly stop people from landing at Newcastle, Leeds or Manchester and then getting the train to Edinburgh, thus avoiding quarantine? Nothing, I think. But it's going to create even more inconvenience in a world where all sorts of inconvenience have been plentiful in the past 6 months.

[wiggy]

Vokes55

Agreed..

I think we (and especially the politicians) have backed themselves into a corner here..as testing is ramping up many countries are seeing an increased number of cases, and that seems to be the key metric for imposing quarantine and/or similar...not "symptomatic cases", not "cases in hospital", not "cases in ICU", simply "cases"..look at the MSM, every ***** evening, it's all about the daily number of "cases", " Breaking news - will the UK or who ever reintroduce quarantine from X or Y because of the number of "cases"?

In the UK and elsewhere schools have reopen and within days we are starting to hear of closures because somebody has tested positive. Closure,...schools shut, sent home, even though they and their cohort are rarely if ever seriously impacted by the virus.

This has all the shades of the Eyjafjallajökull volcanic ash airspace closure where, having put draconic flight bans in place some of the NAAs/ governments were very reluctant to reduced restrictions, despite the evidence, because nobody wanted to be the politician who signed off on the relaxations in case it bit them in the behind.

For the sakes of the general population we simply cannot go on like this...I'm of an age where I'm at elevated risk - I'm happy enough to reduce contact, continue with social distancing, etc, but my working age kids, and former colleagues, really need the economies of the world to get moving again...and that in part means air travel.

[Gipsy Queen]

Vokes55

A welcome dose of pragmatism, but try explaining that on the Jet Blast Covid thread.

[etudiant]

Sadly it simply confirms what we all know. The vast bulk of what we do is non essential. Tourism was the world's premier employer, now prostrate because of the virus.
Is this kind of shutdown a rational answer to the disease? I suspect not, but it sort of worked in China, so it must be appropriate for us as well.
Why is no one looking at Sweden or Taiwan, countries that have moved on past the lockdown stage?

[infrequentflyer789]

Originally Posted by wiggy

Agreed..

I think we (and especially the politicians) have backed themselves into a corner here..as testing is ramping up many countries are seeing an increased number of cases, and that seems to be the key metric for imposing quarantine and/or similar...not "symptomatic cases", not "cases in hospital", not "cases in ICU", simply "cases"..look at the MSM, every ***** evening, it's all about the daily number of "cases", "

UK testing has been fairly static for at least a month now, but positives are rising. Hospital admissions lag cases by at least 10 days or so, ICU by a bit more and deaths by 4-6 weeks (although you only get 4 weeks in the UK then you are considered "recovered" even if still in hospital). In Spain, hospital admissions have already followed cases upwards and deaths are now starting to rise too, France looks similar. Both were arguably doing better than UK, what they did was go back (close) to "normal" pretty much all at once, while UK lifted restrictions more slowly. Cases are ticking up here now though and it is starting to look like hospital admissions might be too (too early to determine trend).

There isn't an easy answer, because by the time you actually see a clear rise in hospital admissions the time to act has passed, cases will have risen much further, and many more hospital admissions and deaths are already baked in.

In the UK and elsewhere schools have reopen and within days we are starting to hear of closures because somebody has tested positive. Closure,...schools shut, sent home, even though they and their cohort are rarely if ever seriously impacted by the virus.

The real worry about schools going back isn't the kids, it is the fact that kids pretty much always live with people older than them, they are more often asymptomatic and are less good a social distancing. The risk is not to them, it is from them infecting those that they live with. Well, at least that is my worry, I do have the perspective of being classified extremely clinically vulnerable and having two teenagers going back to school next week, they need to go back, but I do NOT need covid. Too little data/knowledge to guess how bad it would be (doctors basically saying "we don't know, do NOT get it"), but hospital is apparently almost certain and generally it's russian roulette odds from there.

For the sakes of the general population we simply cannot go on like this...I'm of an age where I'm at elevated risk - I'm happy enough to reduce contact, continue with social distancing, etc, but my working age kids, and former colleagues, really need the economies of the world to get moving again...and that in part means air travel.

There are really three things we (talking about UK) can do:

1. Go back to "normal" and let it run. 6-7% or so infected so far according to antibody tests, 60-70% according to the same tests in worst affected areas of Italy, so we're 10% of the way through in terms of infections and deaths, and who knows what long term consequences. To get through it in any reasonable timescale to hit herd immunity before immunity runs out (and first reinfections are starting to be confirmed now) you are looking at health care completely overwhelmed (killign many more in collateral damage), possibly collapsing, and quite possibly taking the rest of the system down too. "Normal" would last a few months at most.

2. Go for a "zero covid" strategy (see e.g. https://www.independentsage.org/a-be...zero-covid-uk/ ) - much more effort (apparently more than we can be bothered to do as a nation) and pain in the short term, but then allows a return to "Normal" after elimination - but would require tight border control and quarantine on probably all international travel to keep it out, until the rest of the world catches up. This is NZ strategy. I'm fairly sure NZ tourism and travel industry is ****ed right now and for foreseeable future, I'm not sure that the population is screaming at the government for doing a bad job.

3. Try and find a "new normal" that will keep it suppressed at a level where we can cope with it, test, trace, play whack-a-mole with local outbreaks and quarantine zones, and hope people carry on complying with the restrictions until we can buy enough time to find a vaccine or treatment(*). This is the UK strategy, or directionless drift. Some sectors of the economy will come back, some won't. Some planes are flying, I don't have to go outside to hear them, but those I know who work in theatre have been told there is nothing until next April at earliest.

If you "can't go on like this" with the new normal option, I would suggest there are really no good choices at all for you. Move to NZ maybe, but I missed that boat long ago.

(*)No, "dex" is not a treatment, thousands of vets (older ones at least) collectively went "well Duh!" at the news that whacking in a load of dex as a last resort when things are dying tends to postpone death, sometimes, for a while. It doesn't treat anything or fix anything and you will be in a pretty bad way with plenty of long term or permanent damage by the time it is of any use, but remember you can't die of covid in the UK after 28 days, that's all they have to keep you alive for. Covid docs have it easy, cancer docs have to keep you alive for 5 years before you are a survivor, covid? - 4 weeks. If you though the govt. was devoid of strategy think again, it's right there in that 4 week cut off, we find a way to keep most patients alive for that long and suddenly almost nobody dies. Conveniently solves the re-infection problem as well, no one is ever going to (officially) die of covid re-infection in the UK.

[250 kts]

Vokes55]There are always highly contagious viruses and illnesses in the community. Do we need to decimate the economy, people’s livelihoods and future prospects and mental health for every single one of them? Especially as, as you rightly mention, the majority of people don’t even know they have it, let alone get sick from it.

The constant referrals to people who have lost family members is all well and good, I don’t think the aforementioned silent majority disagree with the fact that action had to be taken when the virus was new, rife, out of control and being fought blind. But we are 7 months on, we know exactly where the virus is, how it affects (or doesn’t) people, how to treat it (and how not to treat it) and most importantly, the fact that for the majority of people, it doesn’t even make them sick.

How long does this go on for? If there’s no vaccine and the virus takes years to burn out, do we continue with a crippled economy? Do we continue not doing all the things that make life worth living? Seeing loved ones, watching live sport/music/shows, travelling, working? Do we continue sitting at home, “staying safe”?

Newsflash, life is unsafe and nobody makes it out alive. Time to move on.[/QUOTE]
Not that we don't have a vaccine for. You're right life is unsafe, but does that mean you are actually prepared to put yourself at unnecessary risk by having to sit next to someone on a train, bus etc. that could be infected? Yes, we have to get on with things but with appropriate precautions, something many already seem to be forgetting.

[ara01jbb]

Originally Posted by etudiant

Why is no one looking at Sweden or Taiwan, countries that have moved on past the lockdown stage?

“Hej” from Sweden, where I can provide your periodic reminder that just because we had no lockdown, things are not so rosy here. The country is in just as deep a recession as our Nordic neighbours, our aviation industry is on life support (and now Norwegian needs more state aid) and more people per capita have died than most other European countries. It’s easy for Brits to say that we’ve done better than the UK, Spain or Italy, but that’s not saying much.

[Radgirl]

As I have posted before, a vaccine is coming. I dont know which one, its efficacy or approval date, but we will get there and the vaccine, even if only 50% efficacious (which is the FDA requirement for a license) will obtund and effectively terminate the epidemic. The question is what do we do in the interim. My concern is that Europe, and now the UK, is seeing a similar picture to the US when the US stopped lockdown. A steady increase in incidence in the young but very few hospital admissions or deaths. The incidence then reached a critical level and effectively spilt over into the vulnerable. Houston for example then went from very few admissions to an overloaded healthcare system in a couple of weeks. Now I dont think European healthcare will ever be stressed but I do worry we will see more ill and dead. Whether we do depends on the will and determination of politicians to restrict the population again.

Sadly whatever happens, aviation is in dire straights. I for one am angry because I believe society can be back to normal in the western world by Q4 2021 so 'all' we need to do is support the industry for another year. The money spent on a blunderbuss approach where some got grants, some got furlough, some got cheap meals, but others got nothing and the industries at risk were not targeted will be the downfall of our woeful leaders

[Vokes55]

Originally Posted by 250 kts

Not that we don't have a vaccine for. You're right life is unsafe, but does that mean you are actually prepared to put yourself at unnecessary risk by having to sit next to someone on a train, bus etc. that could be infected? Yes, we have to get on with things but with appropriate precautions, something many already seem to be forgetting.

You put yourself at “unnecessary risk” every time you wake up in the morning. Last month a train derailed in Scotland. People died walking down the street from being hit by cars or being stabbed (sorry I cannot provide specific examples as I don’t watch the news).

And don’t scoff at that last one, because one of the biggest results of economic catastrophe is an increase in crime and unrest. If 2million plus end up in the dole queue, how many of those will turn to crime, alcohol, drugs when they cannot make ends meet and feel a lack of purpose, worth and direction?

The modern world, and particularly the U.K., has become obsessed with risk. Everything requires a risk assessment because people can’t take ownership for their actions, possibly fuelled by the boom in “no win, no fee” legal cases. If somebody falls over in the street, it must be somebody else’s fault. If you hit your head on a low beam, it must be somebody else’s fault for not making it clear the beam was there. If people could take ownership for their actions, whereby people at “risk” would keep themselves out of busy pubs, away from public gatherings, off crammed tube trains, then the 90+% that aren’t “at risk” could get on with life as normal and keep the economy going, avoiding the aforementioned socioeconomic collapse whilst preventing the NHS from being “overwhelmed” (which, speak to any doctor, it never came remotely close to during the initial spike in March).

Everyone loves to blame the government for going into lockdown too late. But the virus was known about for at least two months previous, why did those “at risk” not take themselves out of society? Why didn’t people take responsibility for their own health and lives if they believed this was a serious risk to them? Of course some parts of society (care homes...) had no choice, but plenty did.

Its this blame blame blame attitude that’s the reason we now have this pointless quarantine system that’s crippling the aviation, travel, tourism and a number of other industries. The government have been blamed for every aspect of their response to this pandemic, sometimes rightly so but often unfairly. But they know that if somebody “at risk” goes to Spain, catches coronavirus and becomes seriously ill, they’ll almost certainly blame the government for saying it’s okay to go to Spain, rather than themselves for going somewhere with an increasing number of cases.

If society could take responsibility and ownership for their actions, we wouldn’t need draconian measures like lockdowns and restrictions. Those that see risk would stay away from busy public places, tube trains, Spain etc, and the rest of us could get on with life.

[Radgirl]

If people could take ownership for their actions, whereby people at “risk” would keep themselves out of busy pubs, away from public gatherings, off crammed tube trains, then the 90+% that aren’t “at risk” could get on with life as normal and keep the economy going

The problem is that the 90% are also at risk: at risk of infecting those over 40, BAME or with comorbidities and upon whom the economy also relies. I cant run my hospital with only 20 year olds and nor can most businesses manage. society is interconnected

Everyone loves to blame the government for going into lockdown too late. But the virus was known about for at least two months previous, why did those “at risk” not take themselves out of society?

In the UK because the government failed to inform or properly inform. The average 50 year old worker couldnt simply tell his employer he was not going to work even if he did have the training to call out the government's propaganda and wrong decisions. In relation to the elderly, the government ordered hospitals to get rid of them back to care homes even if they were covid positive. Care homes were threatened with police action when they resisted. The government could have closed the borders. It could have locked down selectively if done earlier. Dont blame the man in the street with no training in epidemiology or infectious diseases.

[Tartiflette Fan]

Originally Posted by R T Jones

From my experience, the silent majority of people want life to return to normal and believe the continued global obsession with this virus is an overreaction that's causing far more damage than the virus itself. The majority will wear a mask on a flight because they have to, not because they think it "keeps them safe" or stops them spreading illnesses. Of course you won't read that in The Sun so you probably won't be aware of that.

and just how many have you canvassed/heard expressing an opinion ? Seems unlikely to be 30 000 000+.

[infrequentflyer789]

Originally Posted by Radgirl

why did those “at risk” not take themselves out of society?

In the UK because the government failed to inform or properly inform.

Not so, the correct messages were out there more than a week before lockdown, I followed them, planned, and prepared. Many, possibly most, people did not, some didn't listen, some actively worked against it, some woudl actively do the opposite of what Boris says on principle. The week I assessed myself as "at risk" and began, in effect, "shielding" (before shielding was officially put in place and weeks before I was actually notified I was on the list) a bunch of my neighbours were planning a "lets all catch covid" street party (lockdown thankfully intervened), and that is in a very middle-class highly educated professional neighbourhood, knows what it was like on the council estates.

Problem was the government assumed that brits today are still stiff-upper-lip do-the-right-thing keep-calm women-and-children-first all-in-this-together, whereas in fact it turns out (entirely predictably really) that brits today have the collective intelligence and social responsibility of a bunch of lemmings going mountain climbing blind drunk after dark for an eye test. We were asked, nicely, well before lockdown, to be responsible, and restrict socialising and non-essential travel (i.e. the Swedish way), the result was massive crowds crammed into the pubs and the biggest crowds in decades at beauty spots like Snowdon.

The average 50 year old worker couldnt simply tell his employer he was not going to work even if he did have the training to call out the government's propaganda and wrong decisions.

Not strictly true, under English law you can (civilians at least) walk out of an unsafe working environment. My wife did exactly that in the week before lockdown having clashed with management over their "business as usual" attitude and lack of covid precautions in direct contravention of then govt. guidance and in fact their own head-office guidance. Having told her she was scaring people and causing panic, the following week they implemented practically everything she'd asked for. Too late for her, not job wise, she still in fact has same job, but because at that point she was already infected, mostly likely from work since we'd already stopped all social engagements. I have stayed covid-free, because we were proactive and prepared.

I've had similar stories (with and without walk-out) from others, including health professionals, with a common theme that the other people were about a week behind the curve, in the end that's all the difference of opinion was. Trouble is, when you are on an exponential doubling every 2 days, a week is a long, long, way behind the curve.

[NoelEvans]

Originally Posted by wiggy

This has all the shades of the Eyjafjallajökull volcanic ash airspace closure where, having put draconic flight bans in place some of the NAAs/ governments were very reluctant to reduced restrictions, despite the evidence, because nobody wanted to be the politician who signed off on the relaxations in case it bit them in the behind.

Very close parallels. It has all been done on 'modelling'. In both cases quite rightly there was a very, very cautious initial reaction. With this nasty bug there was an increase in deaths, which fortunately was avoided with the volcanic ash. One big difference: Iceland couldn't/didn't hide the problem, so people could respond quickly. Everyone is so quick to criticise 'the government' but all governments doing much the same with a few variations (looking at outcomes, this one probably better than lots of others). Thousands of 'instant experts' doing the criticising, but no real ideas.

I have been to a few pubs and restaurants recently, all very well behaved and organised. The 'better' supermarkets are also a pleasure to go to but there is one of the 'ordinary' ones near us that we avoid due to the behaviour of the clientele, although we are happy with one from the same chain a bit further away. There is sensible behaviour from a lot of the population and appalling behaviour from some. We will be avoiding chavs for quite some time, especially the younger ones and especially in pubs and restaurants and on trains and flights. We pay more attention to the sort of clientele that a business attracts and those attracting chavs have lost our business.

I agree with infrequentflyer789's post. Employers could sort themselves out to deal with this. My wife and I have both worked at separate places that were very, very good at making early, sensible decisions.

The fundamental problem at the very beginning of all of this? We didn't get the same warning that we got from Iceland about their volcanic ash...

[PilotLZ]

And there wasn't any analogue of the WHO behind Iceland, singing along "don't worry, they've got this very well under control" right until everyone saw that they haven't.

I do agree that the type of clientele which a business attracts will now be more important than ever in consumer choice. However, the problem is that some people might get too quick-handed to judge an entire airline on one flight only. In the supermarket, you can see day after day that their type of clients remains unchanged. With an airline, people who only fly once or twice a year do not have the luxury of making long-term observations. Hence the importance of a very high level of adherence to the rules. Everything necessary to enforce the safety rules needs to be done with the assumption that there's no tomorrow and no second chance.

[NoelEvans]

Originally Posted by PilotLZ

And there wasn't any analogue of the WHO behind Iceland, singing along "don't worry, they've got this very well under control" right until everyone saw that they haven't.

It's one step before WHO in this whole debacle that was the fundamental problem. It was them who was singing along "don't worry, they've got this very well under control". And they are still misleading everyone by sticking to that 'song'. They mislead WHO and we are all suffering the consequences. As I have said elsewhere, that controls all my purchasing choices now.

Originally Posted by PilotLZ

I do agree that the type of clientele which a business attracts will now be more important than ever in consumer choice. However, the problem is that some people might get too quick-handed to judge an entire airline on one flight only. In the supermarket, you can see day after day that their type of clients remains unchanged. With an airline, people who only fly once or twice a year do not have the luxury of making long-term observations. Hence the importance of a very high level of adherence to the rules. Everything necessary to enforce the safety rules needs to be done with the assumption that there's no tomorrow and no second chance.

Spot on. Our local pub is really good with their new 'ways' so I am happy to go there. A pub full of chavs would now never get my business. You are right about airlines, people judge them on very few 'samples'. For that reason it is so important for airlines to be very, very heavy-handed with transgressions of their infection safety rules. Airlines, or any other businesses, do not need bad headlines like this Thread title.

[250 kts]

Vokes55

So now you compare a pandemic which has killed many 000s with the same risk factor as getting on a train?