Starmer calling for lockdown (Edited by GNHQ)

For people wondering why they hadn't heard about Asian Flu, I recommend you read the article in my link above.

The government deliberately played it down because they didn't understand how serious it was and there wasn't any treatment anyway - ventilators were still very primitive and not much use. Not only that, but it was an influenza epidemic not coronavirus and the fatality per case rate was lower.

lemongrove

I wonder how our cities here would respond to a 9-6 curfew,
As various French cities are putting in place?!
Mind you, their police are armed.

I think we need more enforcement - police don’t seem to get involved - but preferably stopping short of weapons!

Our cities would respond to a 9-6 curfew by all falling out of the pubs at five to nine and partying at someone’s home all night to stagger home at five past six.
Andy Burnham would keep Manchester partying all night.

With reference to those who believe the covid vaccine will contain some sort of tracing chip used to control us, someone started a thread a few weeks ago claiming just that!

It was a very long rambling opening post but she (or he I guess) didn’t get the support for the crazy theory she was hoping for!

Yes, we were far less densely populated in 1957 so social distancing wasn't the problem as it is now.

We may have been less densely populated but I think more people proportionately travelled on public transport.
There were also 40 in a class and no thought of distancing - you either caught it or were lucky not to.
Everyone in my class caught it, in two waves, most in the first wave then the stragglers who thought they'd been lucky.

I don't, however, remember people congregating in the streets in large numbers and, quite frankly, people didn't seem to consume the amount of alcohol they do now which makes people less inhibited.

I'm not sure that Asian flu was as virulent as Spanish flu in 1917/20, and that came in separate waves, which is a worrying portent.

I do remember the outbreak of polio, aka 'infantile paralysis' and pictures in the paper of children in iron lungs, very frightening.
The vaccine was given on a spoon - perhaps they'd run out of sugar lumps.

When I was a teenager ‘time’ was 10.30 pm!

Callistemon we got the first oral vaccine because Hull was so badly affected by polio. I remember going into a primary school in about 1964 and a little girl age about 10 was in callipers, because she'd had polio.

A friend of ours had polio, we didn't meet him until adult but there were consequences, which have not held him back, thank goodness.
Mary Berry had polio too which affected one arm.

Yes, I remember a girl at my school who was in calipers and I think we were told she caught it at the swimming pool.

I can remember the spoon and the pink vaccine.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO1TJdXZ6Og
Hull in 1961-vaccine

I'll have a look at that in a minute but I'm sure I had the vaccine much earlier than that.
Probably 1956 or 57, in fact I'm sure it was about then.

Babies take it in syrup
That's how we were given it, although we weren't babies.

Callistemon

I'll have a look at that in a minute but I'm sure I had the vaccine much earlier than that.
Probably 1956 or 57, in fact I'm sure it was about then.

I don't recall having the vaccine, but polio was certainly rife in the 1950s. Children with leg calipers were quite a common sight. I thought vaccination for it was introduced before the 1960s.

Thank you Mr Google. Vaccine introduced in the UK in 1956

uk.news.yahoo.com/on-this-day--polio-vaccine-introduced-to-british-public-in-bid-to-eradicate-20th-century-plague-163554852.html

I would support a short lockdown to help the R number reduce. Sadly, unless it reduces to 0, which it won't in a few weeks, as soon as the lockdown finishes and people start to circulate again, we will be back at square 1.

1956 was the injected vaccine. 1961 was the oral vaccine. I should know I got both!!!!

Perhaps I'm getting forgetful!
But we did have it at school, 1st or 2nd year of senior school and I thought it was given on a spoon.

LauraNorder, why do you believe Andy Burnham would keep Manchester partying all night?
His job is to support his city. That's what he's doing, trying to get the right level of financial help for residents, the hospitality and small businesses.
Disagree with his stance if you like, on a political basis but let's not slur a good man by suggesting he doesn't care about the spread of this awful virus.

Sarnia

I would support a short lockdown to help the R number reduce. Sadly, unless it reduces to 0, which it won't in a few weeks, as soon as the lockdown finishes and people start to circulate again, we will be back at square 1.

Lockdown on its own is, indeed, likely to lead to resurgence once lifted. But that is not what is proposed.

It's lockdown in conjunction with radical changes to the current shambolic centralised 'test, track, trace and isolate' operation. Where local Public Health authorities have been enabled to carry it out their success rate is much higher than the government scheme. But the government refuses to fund them, preferring to stick with the failing scheme where 'consultants' are being paid up to £7,000 a day with pitiful results.

I must confess that I am totally mystified as to what the government is trying to achieve by throwing £billions at a failed operation. They certainly don't appear to have the wellbeing of its citizens at heart.

Iam64, I believe that his anarchistic stance, the way he delivered his protest will encourage the covidiots to put up two fingers to the government and go forth and party.
I don’t think that Andy Burnham would personally encourage this but I feel his current attitude will do so.

Fair enough LauraNorder, if that's your view.

MaizieD sets out exactly why Starmer and Burnham (and many others) are calling for a circuit breaker, properly funded rather than these endless stop again, with no end in sight. Bolton was put into extra measure by text at 10pm, no discussion with the council. The Council leader, a Conservative stands side to side with Burnham on this. We need cross party cooperation but that can't be achieved with the current tory management.

I agree that cross party cooperation is needed and this is easy for me to say because I don't live in Manchester, but if the Gov. believes it necessary for them to go to level one, they refuse and their allowed to ignore the Gov. doesn't that then make it possible for others to do the same?

Do you mean "go to Tier 3"?

I've just written this post on the Coronavirus thread, in response to LauraNorder:

By that logic, local lockdown will destroy Greater Manchester's local economy, but it seems you don't care about the lives of many millions of people.

No, you need to understand economics. The government can just get the Bank of England to "print" the money to support Greater Manchester, as it has done with the £13 billion for the ineffective Trace and Test. People will spend the money, be taxed on it and it will return to the Treasury.

You contradict yourself in your penultimate sentence. We do indeed need to act as a nation to protect each other, which is why Greater Manchester needs to be supported. 9 of the 27 council leaders in Manchester are Conservative and they are all backing Burnham.

LauraNorder

*Iam64*, I believe that his anarchistic stance, the way he delivered his protest will encourage the covidiots to put up two fingers to the government and go forth and party.
I don’t think that Andy Burnham would personally encourage this but I feel his current attitude will do so.

It's not anarchic.

Burnham wants support for the businesses and individuals who will be affected, so the measures will be effective. If they don't get it, the temptation will be to flout the law, in order to pay the bills. Tier 3 on its own won't achieve much.

That's not anarchy.