Christmas break?

vegansrock do think your last sentence is rather silly. Would you also suggest that the following should also refused (be refused) medical and hospital treatment -
attempted suicides, self harmers, drunks, OD recreation drug user, people injured in sporting incidents, the obese, etc. etc.? after all could be (and I know, in the past has been) seriously argued that all of these people 'brought their accidents/illnesses on themselves?

I think a lot of people see this issue as black and white, and see the alternative to 'no mixing whatsoever' as 'wild partying'.

They make no allowance for people who have been extremely careful sharing a quiet Christmas with another person/people who have been extremely careful.
That's all that a lot of people want/feel they need to do, particularly where very elderly relatives are concerned. No partying - just a very low-risk way of providing some much-needed company to already very lonely people at a time of year when such feelings are amplified.

Yes, some idiots will party, but let's face it, they will do that anyway!

Those who need or can offer some much-needed companionship with extremely low risk either to each other or anyone else, shouldn't be lumped in with them, imo!

“Relaxing the rules” is surely a ploy by the government to encourage people into the shops to keep the economy going and boost spending on stuff we don’t need. If everyone has a scaled down Christmas and spends less on tat that’s a good thing in my book. Christmas parties with colleagues were always grim so hopefully fewer of them and less pressure on A and E with drunken accidents. I’m also sure there’s lots of people who’d love to have an excuse not to visit the in laws. To all those who think it’s a hoax I hope you are going to refuse hospital treatment if you get a bad dose of the virus.

I take it nobody has any suggestions for my almost 102 year old friend about seeing her one bubbled son, but not her other children, because obviously there's always next Christmas when she'll be 103!!

growstuff

suziewoozie

Alegrias Toby Young bless him, the man who got into Oxford because his dad rang up his old tutor and pleaded his case. Maths clearly not his strong point ?

Toby Young is behind the lockdownskeptics website, which a couple of posters on GN have quoted as "gospel".

Yes - he’s such a role model for the lockdown sceptics is he not - he has a nice line in misogyny as well bless him.

MayBee70

Just imagine how many older people would have died if they hadn’t shielded at a time when medical staff still weren’t sure how to treat the virus.

If Covid-19 had been allowed to run rife, there is no reason to think that everybody wouldn't have caught it at some time.

The population of the UK is about 66,600,000 million, so 660,000 would die and goodness knows how many would be left with Long Covid. Even those with "mild" symptoms possibly wouldn't be able to work or carry out out caring roles for a couple of weeks.

Lyndylou What you're planning to do is self-isolate yourself and family. If only the government would impose the same rules and enforce them for the whole population. Oh hang on ...

suziewoozie

Alegrias Toby Young bless him, the man who got into Oxford because his dad rang up his old tutor and pleaded his case. Maths clearly not his strong point ?

Toby Young is behind the lockdownskeptics website, which a couple of posters on GN have quoted as "gospel".

Russian roulette anyone?

Alegrias Toby Young bless him, the man who got into Oxford because his dad rang up his old tutor and pleaded his case. Maths clearly not his strong point ?

Just imagine how many older people would have died if they hadn’t shielded at a time when medical staff still weren’t sure how to treat the virus.

I am sticking to my original plan. My OH and I will isolate completely for 2 weeks before. My DD is arranging permission for GS to do his school work from home for a few days before school breaks up so they can also isolate for the 2 weeks. Then I know they can come to me and we are as safe as possible.

Finally it will be up to my DS his OH and baby if they come to us but I am happy to take the risk if they want to. If not I have warned them we all will drive there dressed as Santa with a sack of baby toys (that will have been not touched for a month!) and we will watch them opening up through the kitchen window!!

I'm think accuracy is important when we're discussion COVID so I want to put some numbers on here. In high income countries around 1% of people who get Coronavirus are likely to die of it, not 0.1%.
www.imperial.ac.uk/news/207273/covid-19-deaths-infection-fatality-ratio-about/

The 0.1% came from a Toby Young tweet which was later retracted. You're more likely to die if you are older and less likely if you are younger. But the rate is not negligible when you are younger, unless we're talking about children.

Around 1 in 20 of people who get Covid may still be suffering from Long Covid 8 weeks after infection.
covid.joinzoe.com/post/long-covid#:~:text=But%20it%20hasn%27t%20been,

I haven’t read anything that says 25% of people die unless it’s referring to how many people die if they have to be put on a ventilator. Most people, imo know that the death rate is quite low but many people suffer from longcovid and no one actually knows if they will be the one that will die from the virus, even if fit, young and healthy. Are people forgetting how many care/healthcare workers have died from COVID. I don’t remember that happening during a normal flu season. And I hope the people that were out clapping for the NHS aren’t the ones that are now planning to visit friends and family over the Christmas period.

BUT very much an exaggeration. 0.1% of those that get Corona Virus die. The rest recover. Yes, higher percentage in older age group - but still very very long way from the 'We are all going to die' scenario that some posters seem to think.
Research has shown that there is a wide-spread belief that this virus kills up to 25% of those that get it, which is totally and completely false.
I am not saying to be complacent, but do not think that such post as the one by sparkelfizz does nothing to help either.

I understand that many people live on their own so Christmas Day would be a terrible time but surely they have their support bubble.
What I don’t understand is this 5 day of celebrations which means 25 more days of lockdown, what about all the small businesses that won’t be able to open after Christmas.
If this plan goes ahead ( which I don’t agree with ) then 2 days is enough which means an extra 10 days of lockdown.
Why do some people think that covid will be celebrating Christmas so will be too busy to bother with all the families. x

Sparklefizz

I've just read this online and it could not be clearer:

There's no point in having a very merry Christmas and then having to bury your relatives in the New Year.

Actually I think that this post says it all really.

ajdswan Friends of ours, both mid seventies, had the same cavalier attitude as you ie life is for living, it’s all a ploy by the government to keep us indoors and under control and failing to believe that the virus existed. This alone beggars belief as they are so called intelligent people and to top it all one of them was supposed to be shielding. Even though we are in a relatively low area they contracted the virus and are now both very ill. They have now admitted however that they were wrong a bit to late after infecting their DS and his family - and who knows how many others ?. Rules should definitely not be relaxed over Christmas but unfortunately there will be many who will ignore those rules whether they are implemented or not. Happy 2021 ?

The virus doesn't celebrate Christmas (or any other time). I would rather be on my own this Christmas than never be alive to see another Christmas.

Asking people to keep away from each other is not intended as an inconvenience - it's a life saver.

Apparently there is a survey on Twitter that is coming out against a Christmas Break. They mentioned it on the ITV breakfast show.

I've just read this online and it could not be clearer:

There's no point in having a very merry Christmas and then having to bury your relatives in the New Year.

I intend to keep to whatever regulations are in force, and even if they're greatly lifted we will not be having any big, mixed families gatherings. As a Christian, I've been unable to attend Church, let alone family celebrations for any important dates this year. Easter is the most important festival in the Christian calendar but we were unable to observe Holy Week with services. Having said that, a friend will be 102 next week. She does not have internet, lives alone with carers in 3 times a day. Should she really be only able to see one of her sons this Christmas, does anybody think her chances of seeing next Christmas are high? Yes it's one Christmas, for some it is realistically their last. I think there has to be some compassion practiced in amongst being sensible.

I agree with the majority of posters who say they will not be spending Christmas with family this year. I don’t see the point of having this lockdown and then allowing households to spend five days together over Christmas. It’s totally
mad. I think the press have made matters a lot worse though and have encouraged this hysteria about not seeing family at Christmas. It’s one Christmas and if this saves lives and allows us to get back to some normality in 2021 this is all to the good.

Whatever the government decides about Christmas I don't think it will greatly change peoples' minds now. Those who were always going to get together will do so and those who have been staying home alone will continue.
I go along with a few posters here who are trying to come up with a compromise. Fresh air present swapping, isolation for a week before we meet up, only 6 people who were pretty much mixing before lockdown anyway, lots of hand washing.
It is New Year we need to worry about far more. All those parties with alcohol flowing, singing and hugging. No thank you.

I feel guilty posting this, but it’s what I feel.

We live in an area that was low risk in the first wave, but has now become much higher. We have seen very little of our son and family since March, we live quite close and saw a lot of them before Covid.

We have spent every Christmas with them, either at their house or ours for the last 15 years.

Both GC’s are teenagers now, so it’s not like when they were little and so excited about Christmas.

I would be perfectly happy to have a quiet, restful day, just DH and me, in our own home, for one year, as although it is lovely to be with them, sometimes it would feel easier to be just us.

So on a selfish level, I hope that unless the situation alters greatly, I would prefer it to be made quite clear by the government that a ‘stay at home’ day is what is required.

I should add that DS’s family are at work and school, mixing with many others, and I really don’t fancy a whole day indoors with all the risks that entails.

It’s just not worth jeopardising everything, and the five day scenario sounds crazy, although I’m sure that Boris and co honestly think that the country will just do as it likes, and they are trying to find some sort of compromise.

How long will it be before people start pushing for meeting together on New Year's Eve too? This four/five day break is a crazy plan and just shows those who wish to ignore guidelines that if they push long and loud enough the Government will cave in.

Along with most of you, I will be staying home over Christmas even though I have only seen my family once this year because of the distance.

Apart from the worry of Covid, just imagine how jampacked the roads will be and because of that I'm sure lots of people will decide to leave one day earlier, or return one day later, or even stay until after the New Year, turning it into a 10 day break.

I despair.