How is Stay Alert different to Stay at Home?

I don't think my routine will change. No intention of going out any more than I am now and only when I need to.
 
Means the same thing to me Ghost, especially as on the BBC 1pm news, the conservative spokesman gave the full wording (which Boris no doubt will at 7pm) as; "stay alert, meaning also to stay indoors ... etc". The opposition are right to seek clarity on such points, however, perhaps they should wait until after 7pm to do so.
 
Wizaard said:
I don't think my routine will change. No intention of going out any more than I am now and only when I need to.
Click to expand...
Same here Wiz. It's our grandson's 3rd birthday on Tuesday and our daughters birthday on Monday and we won't see either of them even though they live only a mile away. As much as we'd like to, we've complied for 7 weeks and will continue to do so - despite several of our elderly & vulnerable neighbours regularly not doing so.
 
Brett scores for fun said:
Means the same thing to me Ghost, especially as on the BBC 1pm news, the conservative spokesman gave the full wording (which Boris no doubt will at 7pm) as; "stay alert, meaning also to stay indoors ... etc". The opposition are right to seek clarity on such points, however, perhaps they should wait until after 7pm to do so.
Click to expand...
With respect, Brett, Boris isn't waiting till he speaks tonight, he is already tweeting it :

https://twitter.com/x/status/1259440331763978240
 
We don't seem to be a very socially-bonded country at the moment. The police are saying that more and more people venturing out is making the situation difficult to control.
Out walking the dog in Cleveleys yesterday I could see groups of young kids playing together in Jubilee Gardens.
It might be good propaganda to evoke the Dunkirk spirit but that's way off the truth of it.
 
Looks like it's all irrelevant anyway ..

One of Britain’s leading doctors has said a New York study showing more than half of coronavirus patients in hospital had been staying at home suggests the UK should relax its lockdown more quickly.
Cancer specialist Professor Karol Sikora said the study appeared to show that while it was important to protect the elderly, already sick and vulnerable, far more people could be allowed to return to normal.
The survey of 1,269 patients admitted to 113 hospitals over three recent days - the first such look at people getting seriously ill despite six weeks of severe social distancing - confounded expectations
It found that the majority of people hospitalized with the coronavirus across the state of New York had been staying at home and were not essential workers, prompting the questions of whether or not lockdowns work or for how long they are necessary.
 
Exactly.The virus just does what is does.Its just a bio machine it doesnt respect lockdowns or non lockdowns.Borders or regions.So locking down the majority of your healthy population is pointless.If anything the countries that have locked down are doing worse than the ones that didnt and the excess mortality will show this.
 
WestStandWaller said:
Looks like it's all irrelevant anyway ..

One of Britain’s leading doctors has said a New York study showing more than half of coronavirus patients in hospital had been staying at home suggests the UK should relax its lockdown more quickly.
Cancer specialist Professor Karol Sikora said the study appeared to show that while it was important to protect the elderly, already sick and vulnerable, far more people could be allowed to return to normal.
The survey of 1,269 patients admitted to 113 hospitals over three recent days - the first such look at people getting seriously ill despite six weeks of severe social distancing - confounded expectations
It found that the majority of people hospitalized with the coronavirus across the state of New York had been staying at home and were not essential workers, prompting the questions of whether or not lockdowns work or for how long they are necessary.
Click to expand...
This is the guy who claimed to be Professor of Oncology at Imperial College which came as a huge surprise to them. Fervently anti NHS and a mate of Owen ' let's privatise the NHS' Paterson MP.
Just for balance
 
Ormergod said:
Exactly.The virus just does what is does.Its just a bio machine it doesnt respect lockdowns or non lockdowns.Borders or regions.So locking down the majority of your healthy population is pointless.If anything the countries that have locked down are doing worse than the ones that didnt and the excess mortality will show this.
Click to expand...
absolutely true. as stated by the chief Epidemiologist in Sweden. he says that like any other pandemic it has to be ridden through, and that you cannot hide from a virus. he also says that there is no " second spike" just a continuation of the first one.
 
WestStandWaller said:
Looks like it's all irrelevant anyway ..

One of Britain’s leading doctors has said a New York study showing more than half of coronavirus patients in hospital had been staying at home suggests the UK should relax its lockdown more quickly.
Cancer specialist Professor Karol Sikora said the study appeared to show that while it was important to protect the elderly, already sick and vulnerable, far more people could be allowed to return to normal.
The survey of 1,269 patients admitted to 113 hospitals over three recent days - the first such look at people getting seriously ill despite six weeks of severe social distancing - confounded expectations
It found that the majority of people hospitalized with the coronavirus across the state of New York had been staying at home and were not essential workers, prompting the questions of whether or not lockdowns work or for how long they are necessary.
Click to expand...
So how did they come into contact with a transmitter of the virus? Answer that and there might be something in it, otherwise some may have been telling a few porkies
 
The home has always been the place that infectious diseases have a high transmission rate. It was why they were telling family members with COVID 19 to isolate in separate rooms when this first started.
 
The change to the wording of the message will be ammunition enough to those who, for selfish reasons, want to push the boundaries. It doesn't matter what 'alert' means in contrast to 'lockdown'. It is the opportunities it will give to the selfish and the feckless that will lead to problems.
 
I would imagine the only way you could get it at home is if someone brings in with them, either from work if you are key worker, or having family around. Other ways are bringing in infected items, shopping etc from supermarkets. In many ways people are responsible for their own destiny. Don't have people/family round, disinfect all items of shopping before you put it away, disinfect door handles, stair rails, switches anywhere that peoples hands may have come in contact with. The main thing is keep washing you hands. Not saying this will stop it but you do everything you can to mitigate getting your home infected.
 
In answer to the op, I agree it’s not at all clear what the difference is.

Stay at Home meant you stayed at home with limited exceptions (work if you can’t work at home, essential shopping, emergencies and your one hour of exercise).

The new Stay Alert message suggested to me you could go out
but should always be aware of the need to keep social distancing etc. However I see the blurb also says you should stay at home if possible, and work from home if possible. So yes, on the face of it, not much change.

But clearly it must be a relaxation of the previous rules as otherwise why bother?

In practice I suppose the difference is that breaches of the old rules could result in a fine. The new “rules” are actually just recommendations or guidelines, and a breach won’t result in a fine.

And as more shops open people will find more reasons to go out. And similarly more employers will find reasons to get their staff back in the office/factory.

But I certainly agree; it’s not clear what’ll be expected of people. So people not happy with the lockdown will take it as a green light to crack on as before; while the people in favour of the lockdown with find more reasons to get cross about the behaviour of their neighbours and others.

Hopefully all will become clearer at 7pm tonight.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
In answer to the op, I agree it’s not at all clear what the difference is.

Stay at Home meant you stayed at home with limited exceptions (work if you can’t work at home, essential shopping, emergencies and your one hour of exercise).

The new Stay Alert message suggested to me you could go out
but should always be aware of the need to keep social distancing etc. However I see the blurb also says you should stay at home if possible, and work from home if possible. So yes, on the face of it, not much change.

But clearly it must be a relaxation of the previous rules as otherwise why bother?

In practice I suppose the difference is that breaches of the old rules could result in a fine. The new “rules” are actually just recommendations or guidelines, and a breach won’t result in a fine.

And as more shops open people will find more reasons to go out. And similarly more employers will find reasons to get their staff back in the office/factory.

But I certainly agree; it’s not clear what’ll be expected of people. So people not happy with the lockdown will take it as a green light to crack on as before; while the people in favour of the lockdown with find more reasons to get cross about the behaviour of their neighbours and others.

Hopefully all will become clearer at 7pm tonight.
Click to expand...
Are they being deliberately obtuse just so they can turn round and offload culpability onto the interpreters of the message, whether that be the individual or the media?
 
Wizaard said:
Are they being deliberately obtuse just so they can turn round and offload culpability onto the interpreters of the message, whether that be the individual or the media?
Click to expand...
That’s a distinct possibility. They want us to move the economy forward sure and seem to be relying on the individual to take responsibility for the rest.
 
Sounds like back door to herd immunity to me. Thousands more will die. More blood on the Tories hands
 
Tangerinemoss said:
With respect, Brett, Boris isn't waiting till he speaks tonight, he is already tweeting it :

https://twitter.com/x/status/1259440331763978240
Click to expand...
Thanks Tangers. As we know from personal experience tweets and emails often need explanation behind the narrative, as they're often taken out of context. I don't really get why world leaders like Boris and Donald rely so much on social media, as they leave themselves open to being picked off & criticised. They perhaps think it's the modern way of doing things. I was a leader throughout my career and I personally wouldn't choose to do so.
 
Brett scores for fun said:
Thanks Tangers. As we know from personal experience tweets and emails often need explanation behind the narrative, as they're often taken out of context. I don't really get why world leaders like Boris and Donald rely so much on social media, as they leave themselves open to being picked off & criticised. They perhaps think it's the modern way of doing things. I was a leader throughout my career and I personally wouldn't choose to do so.
Click to expand...
Brett, I actually think they do it because it is easier to shut down discussion with Joe Bloggs than it is to have an adult democratic debate in Parliament or wherever. I've had a bit of a rant on another thread about Boris today keeping the devolved administrations, who have responsabilty for health and who have got different R number (ours in Scotland is higher because we are behind England) in the Dark, the first the Scottish FM knew of the change was seeing Boris's tweet!!
 
The new mantra reminds me of the classic line from Porridge.

"There are only 2 rules in this prison. Don't write on the wall, and obey all the rules!!!
 
I see, as soon as Boris spoke, the Londoners were all cramming into their sardine can Underground trains to travel into the City this morning. With hardly a face mask in sight. Another surge of CV cases seems inevitable. Mind you, the death toll might not be as high in percentage terms next time, since a lot of the infirm in care homes have already been taken out. It’s going to be a Hokey-Cokey Lockdown for the Cockneys... in, out, in, out, shake it all about.
 
If you leave your house, then remember to switch your brain on and keep your distance as much as you can. It’s amazing how unalert people are in supermarkets so they aren’t going to be alert when out and about.
 
Stay Alert indicates a progression beyond your home and it's purpose as a phrase is designed to focus attention on continued vigilance through the transition from Lockdown to relative normality.

It's actually a very clever and important message as is the timing of the change, because it is at this point, when people are most likely to slip into some complacency.
 
Agree with you bifster. Pretty obvious what it means. People just want to make mountains out of molehills out of this.
Personally I think there's far bigger sticks to beat the govt with. The idea that it could be considered safe for Year 1 and Year 6 children to return to school being the latest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top