Wuhan Coronavirus - are you prepared?

[LanghamP]

2 minutes ago, meepmeepmayer said:

There literally was a football match (in Italy) between Spain and Italy (if I remember correctly) that is now confirmed to have been a defining, massive virus spreader, and that everyone screamed about not holding, but they did it anyways.

I hear football is literally (not figuratively) life and death for some people in Europe...

[RenaissanceMan]

Brand new modelling study on the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the effectiveness of lock-downs and with some good news on case mortality rates:

Estimating the number of infections and the impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in 11 European countries

30 March 2020, Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team, Report in: Epidemiology, Public Health and Primary Care

"We estimate that, across all 11 countries between 7 and 43 million individuals have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 up to 28th March, representing between 1.88% and 11.43% of the population.

With current interventions remaining in place to at least the end of March, we estimate that interventions across all 11 countries will have averted 59,000 deaths up to 31 March [95% credible interval 21,000-120,000]. Many more deaths will be averted through ensuring that interventions remain in place until transmission drops to low levels."

If that many people are actually already infected (compared with Johns Hopkins figures), that would decrease the overall mortality rate substantially.

They share all their data and promise to update their results once a week.

https://doi.org/10.25561/77731

 

[xorbe]

What I am wondering about is if the places that don't shelter wind up with herd immunity much sooner, and better off in the long run.

Edited April 2, 2020 by xorbe

[RenaissanceMan]

30 minutes ago, xorbe said:

What I am wondering about is if the places that don't shelter wind up with herd immunity much sooner, and better off in the long run.

At the cost of many more people dying in a short time because of an overburdened health care system, yes. -  See Italy.

[xorbe]

That is the implication, yes.  But possibly better off in the long run, that is the question.  ie, by sheltering, we may go in circles with re-infections.  It might be worse than a single upfront cost.  Nobody knows.  That's why I'm wondering to see what happens with those that don't shelter.  Everyone seems snow blind with the short term possibilities, casting long term possibilites aside.

Edited April 2, 2020 by xorbe

[atdlzpae]

4 hours ago, LanghamP said:

I was surprised to see govnerners from the South (where I live) to now or soon enforce stay at home quarantines as strict as California, because those infected in the South now have apparently the grimmest outcomes. High blood pressure and sedentary lifestyles is a good indicator of Coronavirus mortality. I would have guessed the isolated suburban automobile living would have protected the South a lot, but hypertension trumps lifestyle. So it goes

It's unconstitutional. If you watch some Audit The Audit (great channel!) and police arrests you, you're in for an easy lawsuit for compensation. But remember to wear a camera.

1 hour ago, xorbe said:

What I am wondering about is if the places that don't shelter wind up with herd immunity much sooner, and better off in the long run.

Sooner? I highly doubt it. Better off? I highly doubt it. The chance of it mutating into a new strain (just like flu and cold every season) is almost 100%.

Edited April 2, 2020 by atdlzpae

[xorbe]

Just now, atdlzpae said:

The chance of it mutating into a immune version (just like flu and cold every season) is almost 100%.

This doesn't agree with what I've read.  Things that spread fast tend to be more stable.

[atdlzpae]

9 minutes ago, xorbe said:

This doesn't agree with what I've read.  Things that spread fast tend to be more stable.

We know it mutated already - google "S type" and "L type". And that was in China, with almost certainly < 1 million infected.

I know this mutation doesn't fool the immune system, but "tends to be more stable" is a false hope.

Edited April 2, 2020 by atdlzpae

[xorbe]

Right but tiny mutations, like 8 base pairs out of 30K or something.  Perhaps stable was unclear.

Edited April 3, 2020 by xorbe

[Gasmantle]

7 hours ago, LanghamP said:

In reference to Spain's government not doing a good job...how should it have handled the outbreak? It seems to me locking people indoors and fining outdoor people is pretty strong.

Here in the UK we are under a semi lockdown, we are supposed to remain at home unless travelling to essential work, doing essential shopping or one session of exercise per day. The police have been been given temporary powers to question people who are out and issue a £30 fine to anyone found to be out without a good reason.

So far a handful of people have been fined but the police are being criticised for not being consistent in their application of the rules, it seems some areas are more zealous than others. There is also a lot of vagueness as to what constitutes a good reason to be out.

I can see that the government want to limit virus spread but my concern is if this goes on for months we will end up in some kind of 'police state' that is difficult to reverse. It seem to me we could be at the thin end of a wedge.

[atdlzpae]

@Gasmantle https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/30/overzealous-police-use-coronavirus-powers-charge-shoppers-buying/

Some independent shops reported that council officers had attempted to tell them what items they could and could not sell, including chocolate eggs and hot cross buns.

https://twitter.com/PoliceWarr/status/1244163251799195649

Overnight 6 people have been summonsed for offences relating to the new corona virus legislation to protect the public:
These included
Out for a drive due to boredom
Returning from parties
Multiple people from the same household going to the shops for non-essential items

Out for a drive due to boredom - WTF??? What's the harm in that?
Multiple people from the same household going to the shops for non-essential items - so now a "judge, jury and executioner" can decide what's an essential item, huh?

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/coronavirus/non-essential-businesses-selling-essential-items-attempt-to-stay-open

"Any store that sells both essential items and non essential items, in the definitions we have both at our local and state public health orders, they need to close them off, those non-essential items," said Julie Sutor, director of communications for Summit County.

Your mouse broke and you're going to a Walmart anyway? Well good luck, you can't buy it even though it's on the shelve.

https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/fsxpzh/first_laws_proposed_by_the_hungarian_government/

First laws proposed by the Hungarian government on the first day of Rule by Decree
- removal of decision making rights of city mayors
- removal of employment and public administration courts
- removal of the ability to change one’s sex
- removal of the ability of Budapest city council to stop City Park construction projects
- the police is able to access tax records without warrant

all in the name of coronavirus emergency

 

Quote

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

It's staggering how fast the world turned to totalitarianism. We're truly doomed.

Edited April 3, 2020 by atdlzpae

[Flying W]

This thread has been a great read so far and I want to thank everyone that had posted. Its remarkable to access to information from literally around the world due to our love of EUCs. 

I only smart enough to that I dont know much so all I can add to this is my opinions and assumptions. 

Watching how here in the US trying to get some form of economic relief quickly turned into a political tug of war I have to imagine it's been the same in most of countries effected as well. 

I dont think things will be quite the same once we get on the other side of this. There will be a loss of freedoms (my opinion) but this time it wont be effecting a minority like banning the use of dirt bikes on your own property. This will be a loss of freedoms for everyone. 

As long as what is lost doesnt mess with day to life very much I dont think the majority will really care too much. But each time an even like this happens more will be lost. 

On a brighter note I did get to show how great a quick trip to the store can be on a wheel today. It's always cool to put smile on peoples face when you roll up and toss a wheel in a shopping cart!

[Gasmantle]

10 hours ago, atdlzpae said:

It's staggering how fast the world turned to totalitarianism. We're truly doomed.

@atdlzpae I quite agree.

Here in the UK where the police can issue a fine for being outside without a good reason it is very vague - what constitutes a good reason? It seems to me that is very much open to interpretation and is a law that is easy to mis-apply.

They have shut all pubs but I like a few pints of the dark stuff now and again so I do jump on my wheel and go to buy a few cans of beer, is that a reasonable cause to be out?  Beer isn't an essential item but I'd argue when all pubs are closed it's reasonable to expect adults to go out and buy a bit of happiness. I'm happy to follow government guidelines as far as is sensible but I'm not going to live like a monk so I'll risk a fine.

Easter eggs have been a bit of a problem as it seems in some areas they are regarded as none essential items and can't be sold - I'm not sure how much other countries celebrate with Easter eggs but here they are part of the culture and most kids would expect their parents to buy them. They might not be essential items but surely it's not unreasonable to want to buy your kids a bit of a treat.

Stopping mass gatherings like music events, sporting events etc would seem to make sense but but stopping people from buying Easter eggs is taking things too far.

 

Edited April 3, 2020 by Gasmantle

[Hunka Hunka Burning Love]

Turkmenistan has a unique way of dealing with this virus thing going around.    Ever watch "Borat?"  Never heard of this country before and may never will if they don't recognize the severity of the problem!    Coronavirus?  What Coronavirus?

https://www.businessinsider.com/turkmenistan-says-0-covid-19-cases-suppressing-news-coronavirus-2020-4

Edited April 3, 2020 by Hunka Hunka Burning Love

[travsformation]

A very informative video by Vox, they generally produce very good content, especially wheb science-related:
 

 

[travsformation]

On 4/3/2020 at 3:53 AM, atdlzpae said:

@Gasmantle https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/30/overzealous-police-use-coronavirus-powers-charge-shoppers-buying/

Some independent shops reported that council officers had attempted to tell them what items they could and could not sell, including chocolate eggs and hot cross buns.

https://twitter.com/PoliceWarr/status/1244163251799195649

Overnight 6 people have been summonsed for offences relating to the new corona virus legislation to protect the public:
These included
Out for a drive due to boredom
Returning from parties
Multiple people from the same household going to the shops for non-essential items

Out for a drive due to boredom - WTF??? What's the harm in that?
Multiple people from the same household going to the shops for non-essential items - so now a "judge, jury and executioner" can decide what's an essential item, huh?

I know this might be a touchy issue to disagree on due to anything from cultural differences to differing political views, so I'll try to explain myself the best I can to avoid misunderstandings.

First, I share your concern about the loss of liberties, just like I did back in 2001 with the Patriot Act in the U.S., or here in Spain, with the so-called gag-law put in place in Spain during the last credit crunch, seriously limiting demonstrations (people were on the streets protesting the austerity measures), prohibiting demonstrations in front of public buildings or recording the police (this law was passed amidst a public outcry due to the police brutality being used to disperse peaceful demonstrators...). So when the "state of alarm" was put in place, with its effective 24/7 curfew, all regional powers transferred to the central (equivalent to federal) government, and the army deployed in many cities around the country...my internal "authoritarianism alarm" went off.

For 22 days now, I've hardly been able to leave my apartment. Every time I go outside,  I have to carry a sworn statement on me, as well as proof of my place of residence and justification of the purpose of my outing. When I take my dog for a walk, I'm theoretically not allowed to go more than 150m from my house (I live in a quiet part of the city where this isn't enforced, luckily). When I go to the center, to the pharmacy, etc., I get stopped almost every time and asked to produce a receipt, which the officer inspects (especially the date and time) to make sure I'm not loitering or going out for an "unnecessary walk".

Do I like it? Of course not. Do I agree with all of the measures put in place? No, I don't. Does it feel like martial law? Absolutely. Am I concerned about what this country, and the world at large, are going to look like after this passes? Unfortunately, yes.

But, I abide by them and think they're necessary. On the first day of lockdown, a lot of people ignored it. People were simply warned and asked to go home. The second day, the police started issuing €100 fines. It still wasn't enough to deter people. After a few days, the fines had got up to €300. Now they're €600 minimum. It took a full week until people started to respect it entirely (at the one-week mark, there were more fines than confirmed COVID-19 cases), you can see the data for Spain published in Google's COVID-19 mobility changes report (talk about Orwellian...). And that's with police patrolling the streets enforcing it with fines.

Why is it being enforced so strictly? Because people disobey it. Why do I have to prove my place of residence? Because people were walking or cycling to the other end of the city to buy groceries just as an excuse to spend more time outdoors. Why do I have to produce a receipt proving the time of my purchase? Because people were going to the bakery to buy a baguette as an excuse and walking around the entire city with it for hours. Why can't I walk the dog with my girlfriend when we come into contact with no one else, and spend the entire day in the same house, most of the time the same room, anyway? Because in Spain, people would go for walks with friends and neighbours and claim they're family or flat mates? And how to prove it? It would be a bureaucratic nightmare that would allow many to disregard the restrictions, and involve  a ridiculous amount of time and resources to enforce it, which could be put to much better use else-wise.

Why is joy-driving punishable? Because it's an unnecessary risk: you might have contracted SARS-CoV-2, still be incubating it and showing no symptoms, your car breaks down and you have to call a tow truck, and both the driver and yourself can potentially infect each other, and start a chain of contagion that makes things worse. Or you have an accident 1h from your house, and then come into contact with the medical personnel of a community that was still COVID-19-free, and the doctors and nurses risk contracting the virus, spreading it to the population, and so on.

Same goes for going out to buy a few cans of beer. This is a global emergency, we're expected to minimize our exposure and that of others, and that means planning our shopping so we have to go out as little as possible. No one is saying "don't buy beer", but rather "plan ahead and buy enough for a week, for instance, instead of buying two at a time and going to the store once a day (or twice a day, as many people are doing, just to have an excuse to go outdoors). Every time one goes out, he risks unknowingly being infected, and thus infecting everyone he comes into contact with. The key is to behave as if you have the virus, so every time you decide to do something, you ask yourself whether it's a necessity worth the risk of infecting others.

It's about solidarity, consideration towards others, minimizing unnecessary risks and exposure, and ultimately, social responsibility (or the lack thereof or it wouldn't have to be enforced). It's sad it has to be this way, but it's the way it is. It's a complex issue and we're not always aware of the risks involved. Joy-riding on my EUC, I could dislocate my shoulder again and have to go to the hospital, where a) I could potentially pick up the virus and spread it to my girlfriend (who has asthma) and my entire apartment block (just by breathing in the elevator, since face-masks are impossible to come by), and b) I'd be using up medical resources (staff and time) that are much needed, as hospitals are beyond their capacity. These are unnecessary, and I dare say (hoping no one takes this the wrong way) selfish risks. If you put my boredom on one side of a scale, and the potential negative consequences (even if they're only potential) on the other side, one clearly outweighs the other.

These are humbling times. I'm aware of the risk of joy-riding, while others are not, just as others have brought to my attention risks that I wasn't aware of. I would have preferred an informative approach rather than an authoritarian one, but 3 weeks into the lockdown, a lot of people still haven't understood the basic means of transmission of the virus, including the moron in front of me at the supermarket yesterday, who seemed to think it was quite OK to touch his mouth because he had gloves on...

Enter the nanny state. I don't like it, but I accept it. I don't agree with all the measures implemented, but I accept a temporary restriction of my personal freedom for the common good, particularly the high-risk sectors of society. And I stress temporary because at least in Spain (I can't speak for other countries), I have a basic understanding of the legal framework, and all the restrictions put in place stem from what is legally deemed "state of alarm" (one notch above "state of emergency", but below "state of war"). It can only be implemented 2 weeks at a time, has to be justified, and requires parliamentary consensus. We have a coalition government, so no one party has the absolute majority to decide unilaterally. In other countries, it may be different, of course. And I'm of the opinion that public response to governmental measures is greatly impacted by trust in government (which can be quite culturally driven). The irony is that trust seems to be higher (people are more willing to trust and respect government restrictions) in places where it isn't needed, and lower in places lacking the "social maturity" required to slow down the curve without government intervention.

Once this blows over, there's no doubt in my mind that the government will exploit COVID-19 to crack down on demonstrators protesting the negligent management of this crisis and despicable financial measures (denying financial aid to small businesses but granting a large rescue package to two large private TV conglomerates, for example), but we'll deal with that then. From my point of view, those with authoritarian agendas will always find an excuse to implement them, and one reason is as good as any other. This one is exceptionally well-suited, no doubt, but perhaps its exceptionalism will be the wrench in the gears of the Orwellian sectors of government. But this is just speculation, I don't have a clue how this is going to play out, and while I fear the long-term consequences of accepting patriarchal measures (understood as accepting the moral superiority of and authoritarian demeanour of a father figure-like government), I fear to loss of human lives and suffering more (including loved ones).

There will come a time to stand up for our rights, if they are threatened, and one to demand accountability. But first, we need to weather the storm (IMHO)

Edited April 4, 2020 by travsformation

[Rehab1]

43 minutes ago, travsformation said:

denying financial aid to small businesses but granting a large rescue package to two large private TV conglomerates, for example

I’m not sure how other countries are protecting their small business employee's but hopefully  your country will be providing a safety net similar to the one being implemented in the US this weekend.

My bank in Ohio tested their SBA Employee Payroll Protection software late last night. They’re beta testing a few select companies before they begin ramping up the full application/ fund distribution process. 

My poor neighbor just invested over $250k on a new glass installation business a few months back. His facility is now shut down and unfortunately he will not qualify for our government’s employee paycheck protection plan.

Currently the US government is only issuing employee paycheck protection disbursements to businesses that have been in operation for over 1 year.

Unfortunately a majority of his family quit their previous jobs to support and work with him. So sad. 

Edited April 4, 2020 by Rehab1

[mike_bike_kite]

 

On 4/3/2020 at 1:02 PM, Gasmantle said:

Here in the UK where the police can issue a fine for being outside without a good reason it is very vague - what constitutes a good reason? It seems to me that is very much open to interpretation and is a law that is easy to mis-apply.

They have shut all pubs but I like a few pints of the dark stuff now and again so I do jump on my wheel and go to buy a few cans of beer, is that a reasonable cause to be out?  Beer isn't an essential item but I'd argue when all pubs are closed it's reasonable to expect adults to go out and buy a bit of happiness. I'm happy to follow government guidelines as far as is sensible but I'm not going to live like a monk so I'll risk a fine.

The new rules will start to seem a lot more sensible when people you know start going into intensive care. Most "sensible" people are staying in because they're trying to stop the transmission of the virus and not because they're worried about paying a fine. If you're ignoring the new rules then you're far more likely to catch the virus and obviously more likely to pass it on to others. They'll then pass it on to their families etc. To most people it's just a bad flu but if any of them has an underlying condition such as diabetes or asthma etc then their chances of dying starts to get very real.

The rules are fairly simple. Only go out if:

• you're shopping for essential food (I'm sure you could include your beer in with the other items)
• you're getting exercise (allowed once per day)
• walking your dog
• you're commuting to work and are an essential worker

 

[esaj]

I haven't actually followed the local domestic news that much for the last few days. Part of the country was isolated, and people can get fined if they try to cross in or out of the "zone" without a good reason (work usually), but other than that, there's no actual curfew declared or such, just a request for people to socially distance themselves, work remotely if possible, avoid visiting stores often etc, and AFAIK, it's going fairly good, people are doing that. Restaurants are allowed only to sell take out and most other such "gathering places" are shutdown.

I haven't been outside except for a smoke and taking out the dog for almost three weeks   My spouse handles the groceries, she goes to the store once or twice a week. I "evacuated" my work stuff from the office on Tuesday 17th of March, and immediately afterwards fell ill for the rest of the week. Don't know if it was just seasonal flu or Covid-19 or something else, pretty mild symptoms, fatique and low fever mostly. Still not 100%, but definitely not dying or in need of medical care.

 

Edited April 4, 2020 by esaj

[Gasmantle]

35 minutes ago, mike_bike_kite said:

 

The new rules will start to seem a lot more sensible when people you know start going into intensive care. Most "sensible" people are staying in because they're trying to stop the transmission of the virus and not because they're worried about paying a fine. If you're ignoring the new rules then you're far more likely to catch the virus and obviously more likely to pass it on to others. They'll then pass it on to their families etc. To most people it's just a bad flu but if any of them has an underlying condition such as diabetes or asthma etc then their chances of dying starts to get very real.

The rules are fairly simple. Only go out if:

• you're shopping for essential food (I'm sure you could include your beer in with the other items)
• you're getting exercise (allowed once per day)
• walking your dog
• you're commuting to work and are an essential worker

 

I go out once per day (not everyday) and live in a small village where I see no one on the way to the shop 5 mins away, people taking exercise for 30 mins everyday come in to more risk categories that I do.

How is a 5 min trip on my own to the shop causing any more risk than someone walking a dog ?

It's about using common sense.

 

[travsformation]

25 minutes ago, Gasmantle said:

I go out once per day (not everyday) and live in a small village where I see no one on the way to the shop 5 mins away, people taking exercise for 30 mins everyday come in to more risk categories that I do.

How is a 5 min trip on my own to the shop causing any more risk than someone walking a dog ?

It's about using common sense.

 

I'm not judging or morally policing you, so don't take is as such. But since you asked, here's my POV:

- How many people does the shop-keeper come into contact every day? While the rest of us get to stay at home, he's there all day, at risk of being infected. The fewer visits people make, the less risk for him.

- The shopkeeper is at higher risk of being infected. This, when you go to the shop, there's the possibility of him infecting you.

- How many items do you touch in the shop? How many do others? How many people breathe on the items you buy? Do you disinfect them when you get home? Washing your hands and then touching a plastic-covered item (high SARS-CoV-2 "survival time" on such surfaces) that you brought back from the shop but didn't disinfect can be the same as not washing your hands in the first place.

- Do you know who else visits the shop? Their hygiene habits? What they may have touched (door nob, railing, lid of a trash can), either in town, or where they work, or during their commute? Which people they've been in contact with, and the same variables for each of them?

Imagine a single coronavirus-positive person. Now imagine everything the've touched, everyone who's touched what they've touched and everyone they've come into contact with. Now imagine every person they've come to contact with as potentially infected, and imagine everything each one of them has touched and everyone each of them has come into contact with. Potentially exponential propagation. Now ask yourself...do you have a way of knowing for certain how these endless variables come into play in your direct environment and the places you visit? It's impossible.

Common sense might not be as self-evident as one originally thought, in an uncommon situation that's new to all of us. There are just too many variables, making the simplest logic: Stay at home. Minimize going out to the strictly necessary. Limit your trips to the shop to once or twice a week instead of daily, etc. (those are neither imperatives nor suggestions directed at you, I'm just stating what healthcare professionals are recommending)

[Gasmantle]

@travsformationI take your point but common sense is needed.

I can't speak for Spain as I don't know fully what their restrictions are or how the police monitor it, but in the UK it is a shambles.

In Cambodia (pop about 18mil) there are only about 100 case of Covid-19 and so far no deaths, the country is poor and has inadequate healthcare compared to the UK and most other western countries. People in Cambodia takes the risks seriously as poor healthcare means a relatively simple illness could be a death sentence. To protect themselves Cambodians sanitise their hands before boarding buses, going into as shop, getting on a train etc, they go out but are meticulous about how they interact and touch things etc. Experts are of the opinion this has resulted in them being able to contain the virus so far.

Now look at the UK, we are told no to go out to buy an Easter egg etc but when we do where is the hand sanitising at the supermarket or getting on public transport? The vast majority of contagion is through touching infected surfaces - a supermarket must be one of the greatest disease spreaders when people pick things up then put them back, handle trolleys etc.

If we were serious about this the place to start is proper sanitising and not restricting peoples movement where the risk is minimal.

The London Underground is arguably the most densly packed railway in the world and for weeks into the virus spread it has been running at full capacity cramming people into confined carriages with no ventilation - even now it still runs (albeit with less occupancy) - wouldn't it make sense to have staff ensuring people hand cleanse at the entrance and way out? But they don't do it - why not?

It's no good applying rigid rules without thinking it through properly while ignoring the real danger areas.

I'm all for limiting movement but let's apply common sense too - a guy going to a village shop 5 mins away is allegedly in the wrong but I could travel halfway across London without washing hands and spreading germs everywhere but that's ok if I'm going to work.

It isn't as simple as saying a person shouldn't go out - it depends where they are, what time is it, what are they going to do, who will the meet etc.

We have all been stuck at a broken set of traffic lights stuck on red on a quiet road late night with not another car in sight, I don't know about anyone else but I don't sit there all night till the police turn up - I use common sense, make sure it is safe and then drive on. 

Lets all use a bit of common sense, if we aren't careful we'll all lose our freedoms before long.

Edited April 4, 2020 by Gasmantle

[Rehab1]

1 hour ago, esaj said:

I "evacuated" my work stuff from the office on Tuesday 17th of March, and immediately afterwards fell ill for the rest of the week. Don't know if it was just seasonal flu or Covid-19 or something else, pretty mild symptoms, fatique and low fever mostly. Still not 100%, but definitely not dying or in need of medical care.

I hope you feel better buddy! Must be tough working in that outfit.

 

[mike_bike_kite]

2 hours ago, Gasmantle said:

It's about using common sense.

I guess it depends on your point of view. If you live in a small village where there are currently no cases then the virus probably seems like fiction.  If you're young and healthy then you might even see the virus as a personal infringement. Obviously your elderly neighbours might have their own opinions as you wander about as normal. Similarly for anyone who might have kids with asthma etc. Scientists, doctors and politicians have all been telling us every day to stay in unless we absolutely have to go out. We also know there aren't enough ventilators available. Yet you still go out? Is that really common sense? Personally, I have type 1 diabetes, so the virus is quite bad news for me - I just really hope your opinion is a minority.
 

[Gasmantle]

3 minutes ago, mike_bike_kite said:

 as you wander about as normal. 
 

Whoa, hold on tiger - who said anything about going out as normal?

I clearly said I go out only once per day and not at all most days.

I'm all for restrictions but use a bit of common sense also.