COVID-19 etiquette and good manners after 19 July 2021

Interestingly, my DD went in this morning to get a sausage swirl for for my DGS on his way to Jiu jitsu and the servers were ALL masked.

I would have done what you did Mollygo. In fact I would have left the establishment if my food was coughed over before Covid.

I try not to think about what goes on in many establishments, but in this shop, the buns are on display, the hot food is moved from the (visible) ovens/rotisseries at the back of the shop and placed in heated trays in front of you (behind a glass screen so you can indicate the bacon/sausage/ chicken piece you want).
The only handling is picking up the bun, slicing it then putting the filling on with tongs.
Perhaps I’ve got used to masks. I really can’t say if they had them before Covid, but I think they’re an idea that should be retained and I think you shouldn’t serve ready-to-eat food if you have a cough.

I wouldn't ever go back there Mollygo; heaven knows what they'd do to your breakfast bun when you weren't looking.

Do some of you ever think about what goes on in the back room before your food gets to the front counter?
Chances are that bun/sandwich/ cake had been coughed over before you even saw it/them.

Totally right to do what you did. Even pre covid I wouldn’t want people coughing over my food!

I think you were right to be careful. I know some people are exempt from mask wearing but they really should not be serving customers in a food outlet,,

Today I went to get a breakfast bun on the way to work. Instead of the usual masked server, a young assistant with a lanyard began the preparation. She sliced the bun open, then she coughed!
Yes, she turned her head and coughed into her elbow. Yes, she said, “It’s not Covid.”
I refused to take the bun, but she called another assistant over. I got a lecture on how some people can’t wear masks. I said they should be wearing masks to prepare food with or without Covid.
I left without the bun, but they didn’t dispose of it, just left it, presumably for the next customer.
What would you have done?

I have given up driving a few years ago, but when I was driving I always carefully observed speed limits.

A phenomenon that I noticed often was that if there was someone following me in a 30 mph area, such as in a village, also observing the speed limit, once the sign of the end of the 30 mph area (going to a 60 mph limit) was in line of sight, the following driver would overtake me, thus breaking the speed limit for the final part of the 30mph zone, maybe for 50 yards or more, often overtaking me at quite a speed, accelerating fast.

I wonder if what you observed in the store is structurally the same thing, even though according to the Prime Minister on Monday the final decision on whether to go ahead with the plan will not be taken until Monday 12 July and what he said on Monday is only what will happen if the decision is taken to go ahead with the plan.

After what I saw today, I think it's every person for themselves. I went into a large store with the understanding masks are still required indoors in my area. Not one person who wasn't working there was wearing a mask. They can't all be exempt. As things do seem to change quickly I wondered if I had missed something and asked the man at the counter if masks were still required. He said they were. Nothing had changed. People will just do what they like. I have no hope of any collective etiquette on anything now.

The two articles you link contradict each other.

What was known from the start was that the older you were when you got COVID, the more likely you were to get it severely or die, but a lot of this was because older people are the group most likely to be already suffering from a host of other medical conditions that are associated with poor outcomes if they get COVID. Healthy older, people with no underlying conditions, rarely needed hospitalisation or ventilation.

This has been superceded (it was written in March 2020).

Although it is true that older people are more likely to have other medical conditions which make them more vulnerable, age on its own has now been shown by statistical analysis to be a risk factor.

What we do when we receive information is entirely separate from what we understood the information to say. The information initially was a lockdown for over 70s because we were more vulnerable to the disease than younger people. But that advice changed within days to a universal lockdown as it was realised just how universal the illness and it's dangers were.

I do not remember Matt Hancok's interview but it was only one of many interviews given by government ministers at the time..

elderlyperson you didn’t get it wrong, you did what you thought was right and you didn’t catch Covid, so you did help the NHS, my SIL did exactly the same as you and she came through it and has no regrets. My MIL was in a care home and died during the first wave, we didn’t have a funeral because her AC are all over 70 with various serious health issues, again we don’t regret it, it was sad, but we had no choice but to have a Direct Funeral.
Others have done it differently, some are fine and some became ill.
But I’m assuming that you have now had both of your Covid Jabs? So hopefully your life is more on a par with the rest of us, but we personally will still be wearing masks in shops etc. And avoiding crowded places. I just hope that all our efforts aren’t undone in the coming weeks.

What matters is that you did, and are continuing to do, what makes you feel safe and comfortable, in the circumstances, and with the information available to you at the time.

I may have grossly misunderstood but I was watching Sky News on Sunday 15 March 2020 and a government minister, possibly Mr Hancock, was being interviewed outdoors.

He said that the government was considering suggesting to everyone 70 or over that they go into voluntary self-isolation, but there is no need to do it yet.

Up until that time only people who had got COVID-19 or might have got it were in self-isolation. To me, it seemed far away. Suddenly to hear that message, not for just people in big cities or in certain locations, but for everybody, had the effect of me deciding to go into self-isolation straightaway. In practice this really only meant asking Tesco to leave the grocery in bags on the doorstep instead of me opening the door and chatting with the driver and unloading my grocery while the driver held the tray up to waist height so that I did not have to keep bending down. Also looking out when going to the bins and so on. Also once lockdown started all the people delivering here, postlady, pharmacy deliverer and so on all automatically went over to knocking the door, standing back and when I answered from an upstairs window offering to leave it on the step and sign for me where signing was needed so that I didn't need to open the door when they were there.

By the way, all this stuff from some head office of open the door while they stand back 2 metres concerns me and I don't do it. Why? Because if on a cold winter's day one opens the front door then one feels the cold air even if one is still inside the house, so maybe droplets could fly through the air with the greatest of ease.

At the time I was genuinely fearful that I would not survive beyond July 2020 the way things looked with the report on Sky News from a hospital in northern Italy. Italy. At first it was just in China, Suddenly it was in Italy.

The next evening the government suggested voluntary self-isolation for people seventy or over. General lockdown only came a week later.

So at the time, the message seemed to be as I perceived it.

Now, in hindsight, I may have got it wrong, but hindsight is a wonderful thing.

I mean, if I had got it wrong, why was the figure of 70 stated?

He could have said people who are retired, but he didn't, 70 was what he said.

He didn't say people over 70 with a health problem, he just said 70.

So why unless there was a reason for it.

I mean, does something like estoppel apply because I acted in good faith on what I heard from a government minister.

Early on there seemed to be a lot said about older people self-isolating doing their bit to support the NHS by the very fact of avoiding being in a hospital bed with COVID-19.

So alright maybe I did get it wrong.

Elderlyperson
But the problem is that that seems to assume that the vaccine is 100% effective for everybody, has no side effects, acts instantly with a single dose - none of those are true.

The excerpt from chaos theory talks about vaccinations for rubella and measles, which we know are not 100% effective and have side effects. That information was known when theis excerpt was written and is implicit in the text.

I can see no way that this gradual relaxation assumes any of the above. HIV/AIDS has been controlled and we all live with it in the community - and that doesn't even have a vaccine.

some people might get a lifetime of long covid, maybe they can pass it on to any children they have.

No medical authority or researcher anywhere has suggested that a viral infection can cause genetic changes in the sufferer so that the disease can be handed down to the next gebneration.. I have not seen that suggested even by the anti-vax community.

^ suppose that basically I have been acting based on the fact that I am over 70, and the government message seemed to imply that everybody 70 and over (and only they) were at risk.^

I do think you have grossly misunderstood the government message, if that is what yout thought. The government has never suggested that COVID was a disease of the elderly. All the cases highlighted when the pandemic started were young or middle aged people, people who had been on skiing holidays, attended conferences and meetings abroad. That is why the lockdown was total.

Look at the medical staff that died, bus-drivers and every profession, the children who died, very few, but everyone a headline. Then there were schools closing and when they went back the constant sendng home of classes because a child had COVID.

What was known from the start was that the older you were when you got COVID, the more likely you were to get it severely or die, but a lot of this was because older people are the group most likely to be already suffering from a host of other medical conditions that are associated with poor outcomes if they get COVID. Healthy older, people with no underlying conditions, rarely needed hospitalisation or ventilation. coronavirusexplained.ukri.org/en/article/cad0004/

COVID has from the start been known to be indifferent to age when selecting its victims

Although all age groups are at risk of contracting COVID-19, older people face significant risk of developing severe illness if they contract the disease due to physiological changes that come with ageing and potential underlying health conditions.
www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/who-delivers-advice-and-support-for-older-people-during-covid-19#:~:text=The%20COVID%2D19%20pandemic,potential%20underlying%20health%20conditions

Both the last two documents are dated March and April 20_20_, so came out at the start of the epidemic

Also by the messaging earlier on giving me the feeling that as someone over 70 doing a good self-isolation I was doing my bit to support the NHS cope by not needing hospital treatment.

ElderlyPerson

www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-04-02/twilight-zone-button-pandemic

That has made me think.

I suppose that basically I have been acting based on the fact that I am over 70, and the government message seemed to imply that everybody 70 and over (and only they) were at risk.

So it seemed, perhaps subconsciously, to be quite alright to be in lockdown while younger people brought the food, the medicine, the post, the parcels and did all the work behind the scenes.

This reinforced by knowing that Tesco sent all its older staff home on full pay to keep them safe.

But as time has gone on many younger people have been ill too.

So why 70, rather than 65 or 75 or 60 or 40?

M0nica

Elderlyperson The table you show only has two variables. Rabbits and foxes, at least those were the variables when i studied it, but in applying this to people/virus, you are leaving out the important third vector - vaccination - and that changes everything.

This is where chaos theory, as contained in the excerpt I posted, comes in. The curve for the incidence of the disease goes down, the more that are vaccinated, but not as a smooth line. It can contain a lot of peaks and troughs, sudden rises in cases then equally precipitous falls, but the overall the line is going steadily down.

This is the situation we are now in.

But the problem is that that seems to assume that the vaccine is 100% effective for everybody, has no side effects, acts instantly with a single dose - none of those are true.

The summation of the areas under those peaks need to be considered, that summation includes people feeling ill, some people hospitalised, some people dying. some people getting long covid, maybe some people might get a lifetime of long covid, maybe they can pass it on to any children they have.

Growstuff the rates have only just risen most people are put off by Jerseys ever changing regulations. In fact just listened to a government announcement they are removing all isolation for vaccinated visitors from next week
Certainly do not feel unsafe here the rise is mainly in school children
It’s a beautiful island just sitting in the hotels gardens in the sunshine so glad we made the effort to get here Also Jersey hotels have not ramped up their tariff unlike UK ones

Well, the rules should be as they are, with a gradual relaxation.

We are never going to get rid of COVID, it is always going to be there, so we need to get our vaccinations, as with flu and learn to live with it. This is what has happened with HIV/AIDS, for which a vaccination has yet to be found. To begin with it killed and instilled fear in everybody. Then medication and treatments were developed that reduced it to being something like diabetes, lifelong medication required, but if you took it, life can be normal and sensible protective behaviours was recommended for those who are in danger of catching it.

I am an unmasker, but I will still wear a mask in crowded situations and if someone asks me to, which is what most unmaskers are going to do. In other words with vaccination, care is still needed but not blanket bans.

I went shopping early this morning in a large supermarket with about 30 customers in it. I will not be wearing a mask when a shop is so empty after 19 July. If I caught a bus or went into a crowded shop, I would wear it. Vaccinated or not. I no more want even a light dose of COVID than anyone else.

M0nica

Elderlyperson The table you show only has two variables. Rabbits and foxes, at least those were the variables when i studied it, but in applying this to people/virus, you are leaving out the important third vector - vaccination - and that changes everything.

This is where chaos theory, as contained in the excerpt I posted, comes in. The curve for the incidence of the disease goes down, the more that are vaccinated, but not as a smooth line. It can contain a lot of peaks and troughs, sudden rises in cases then equally precipitous falls, but the overall the line is going steadily down.

This is the situation we are now in.

Thank you.

So what does that imply for how the rules should proceed?

I am trying to understand, but my knowledge of mathematics, though reasonable, is not as high as that.

www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-04-02/twilight-zone-button-pandemic

Elderlyperson The table you show only has two variables. Rabbits and foxes, at least those were the variables when i studied it, but in applying this to people/virus, you are leaving out the important third vector - vaccination - and that changes everything.

This is where chaos theory, as contained in the excerpt I posted, comes in. The curve for the incidence of the disease goes down, the more that are vaccinated, but not as a smooth line. It can contain a lot of peaks and troughs, sudden rises in cases then equally precipitous falls, but the overall the line is going steadily down.

This is the situation we are now in.