These people sat in parks today

1finny

Well-known member
Seen a few pics of people sat in parks.
They were mainly couples and families - really well socially distanced, huge gaps in fact.
I guess they might say ‘what’s the harm’?
Not sure how I’d answer that other than ‘you are not supposed to be out’

What’s the medical narrative for it please?
 
Seen a few pics of people sat in parks.
They were mainly couples and families - really well socially distanced, huge gaps in fact.
I guess they might say ‘what’s the harm’?
Not sure how I’d answer that other than ‘you are not supposed to be out’

What’s the medical narrative for it please?

I think one of the rationales is that if people see others "out" they'll think well I'm going out as well
 
Or how about just following the instruction. Said to wife as soon as Boris is well enough to take the lead again he's going to enforce an Italian style lockdown with checkpoints on streets etc.
 
Not sure on the medical narrative but I worry that people will see them out and think, well if they can go out .........

then loads are out, and social distancing is difficult/impossible
That's what I posted a while back regarding the couple out walking in the Peak District I think, it's OK when there's just the two, but, IMHO, not OK to drive all those miles & then others will see fit to do likewise & then it's not only those two in future
 
The big issue is if something goes wrong. What happens if someone has a heart attack when they are out. They are asymptomatic carriers. Do people try to help or not?

What happens if someone trips over and knocks themselves out?

Unlikely things that by chance could spread the virus.

Stay home and stay safe! Every journey you make by car or by foot increases the chance of transmission.
 
He needs to get someone to enforce himself first. How did he get infected? Did he follow his own rules or are the rules wrong?

To be fair bear66 (and I know you like playing devil's advocate) given the sheer number of people that the PM comes in to contact with, EVEN with following guidelines, he's bound to be more at risk.

Edit: As you well know, research out of the USA this week suggests that Coronavirus can spread 8m in a sneeze. People still have to go food shopping. 2m guidelines are probably a decent trade off between risk and practicality. (y)(y)
 
To be fair bear66 (and I know you like playing devil's advocate) given the sheer number of people that the PM comes in to contact with, EVEN with following guidelines, he's bound to be more at risk.
It was tongue in cheek but I was disappointed that Hancock came back after 7 days to a live press conference and then in a studio on Question Time. Presumably he was driven. He should have worked from isolation to be sure he isn't still carrying some infection.
 
I understood that Hancock had recovered better than BJ, which was why he came back. Maybe he queue jumped an NHS worker and got tested?
 
He wasn't tested for the virus or immunity. It was just time and he said the CMO said it was ok so it was ok.
 
The idea is we go out for some limited exercise or essential shopping (if not in vulnerable group). If people start sitting down for a chat etc its not exercise or looks like something you can do at home or in your garden (if you have one).

The one that I don't understand is having a go at people travelling in their car, say to find a quiet spot to walk (more away from people).
 
The idea is we go out for some limited exercise or essential shopping (if not in vulnerable group). If people start sitting down for a chat etc its not exercise or looks like something you can do at home or in your garden (if you have one).

The one that I don't understand is having a go at people travelling in their car, say to find a quiet spot to walk (more away from people).
This is the one I don't really get. The police shaming people with drones out for walks in secluded spots is ridiculous. Yes they were wrong because they went against the rules, but these people are not the problem.
 
the problem is theres no clear line, and there cant be without a complete lockdown, the governments trying to keep some access to open spaces which is good, however its difficult to draw a clear line over the rules, the risk is if too many start pushing the boundaries stricter lockdown will be enforced
 
I actually respect the government (irrespective of party) for trying to get the population to take some responsibility. (Without total enforcement).

Personally I think there's far too much "the government should do this... the government should do that". People, individuals, need to have some accountability too.

IMO - obviously.
 
When you go out in your car to 'exercise' you risk further interaction if you're in an accident or break down... this isolating thing is not difficult, it's literally staying at home and away from other people for a few weeks... why do so many people think they are entitled...
Imagine the freedom we will have if we follow the simple instructions...
Imagine what that freedom will be like if your loved ones are dead because you didnt follow them...
 
Back
Top