France bans cycling as it tightens coronavirus measures

This. All this. Remember that in 10 days we will not have a NHS. It will be completely overwhelmed. There isn’t enough capacity to deal with the  under 40s who will need hospitalisation for Covid, let alone those who get ill or need treatment for anything else. Even if we just let all the over 80s die without treatment, it will still not cope. I’m just flabbergasted by the response here 

And the gravel bike adverts that are blocking mine. It'll be interesting to see how long advertising revenues last, by the way...given that no one will be buying anything anytime soon! 

Keep it up Bill.  I'm heading into Kent and the Ashdown Forest today  - but will observe social distancing ettiquette.  Hopefully some of those bike shops are still selling coffee 

Sledgehammer for a nut? When the nut in question has the potential to kill millions of people. Use the sledgehammer, then burn it, encase it in concrete and drop it down the deepest hole available.

Whilst we are still allowed out, and that might well change if people don't take distancing seriously, then please, whatever you are doing, just dial it back a notch.

Getting on top of this thing sooner rather than later means we can get back to normal sooner.

Chris Hayes wrote:

The analysis from the Italian NHS on 2000 dead reveals that the average age of the deceased is 79.5yrs.  Almost half the dead had three preconditions (heart disease, diabetes, kidney ailments etc); a quarter had two and the remainder one. There were just 17 deaths under 50, all of which had a severe pre-condition. Seventy percent were male.  The average life expectancy of an Italian male is 81.2yrs. 

Now, the spread of COVID-19 positive tests in pretty even: 37% 70+; 37% 50-70 and the balance basically 19 - 50.  But deaths are MASSIVELY skewed towards the very elderly AND already seriously infirm. (Statista stats). 

Still think that it is worth closing the economy for this?  There are many businesses that will close from the measures taken by the Government and the panick that is ensuing....and they will not re-open: airlines, hotels, holidays businesses in the UK and abroad, your restaurants, cafes, shops and many, many manufacturing businesses that will run out of cash ...

On a macro level Sterling is plummeting along with the stock market.  The cost of government borrowing will inevitably increase and those that are left behind - and if we look at the Italian pattern that will be the vast majority of us - will be paying for this for decades.  Still think it is worth closing the economy for this?

Yes - absolutely. Half a million deaths DIRECTLY from the disease is what is expected, unless there is mitigation. This includes lots of young people with immune issues. On top of this is the INDIRECT deaths from people who can't get treatment because the hospitals are overflowing with covid-19 patients.

We are at the very very start of a long journey, unless we nip this in the bud. And even then....

Spanish flu, immediately after world war one, killed more people than the war itself. Just bear that in mind.

Well if all the oldies that are expected to die, and those at risk younguns just do it quietly, and don't clog up the A&E and ICU, so just die at home, then we'll be alright.

If not, much higher deaths from heart attacks and strokes.  Far more road deaths and industrial accidents caused fatalities.  And then what happens after the next terrorist outrage or train crash.  And cancer, forget about getting anything done about that.

Back pain, hip replacements, mental health, all overwhelmed bacause we just have to look after the dying and try and get it below 15%.

I might be alright, but I'm really hoping my better half can make it though this and we'd both like a few more years with our mothers around.

The casino capitalists almost brought their entire system down in '08 and we are and will be paying for it for many years.  This one, well hopefully we will manage and make it through, and perhaps with a bit of thought and changes we might come out of it better.

I agree with you.  So use some of the GBP350,000,000 plus to build more hospitals and a social care system for the elderly to isolate them - rather than screw up the economy for the rest of us - for decades to come.  

Keep in mind road traffic deaths are over 3000 per day globally, well in excess of any war, terrorist act and COVID-19, yet it does not provoke the kind of urgent response being used for the virus. And there are medical causes like heart disease and stroke that in many cases are preventable, responsible for many more deaths and hospitalisations. Air pollution is responsible for more deaths, but we don’t shut down the economy because of it. Influenza kills at least 300,000 a year.

In that context, it’s quite reasonable to question if the response to COVID-19 is proportionate, or irrational panic. Or if you’re a cynic like me, wonder if it is being used as an opportunity to cause global recession and hit the reset button on the economy.

But it is perfectly possible to let low risk people go about their lives, whilst really isolating those at a higher risk (which in Italy is those over 70yrs with 1 - 3 serious illnesses - many of which live in the sad isolation of old age anyway).  Also the death toll in Italy has been particulary high due to intergenerational living.  Hands up on here if you live with you grandparents?

Do you realise how many hospitals and COVID-19 resistant care-homes we could build for them with GBP 350,000,000,000? Let alone the two other 'stimulus' tranches we've seen this week...

It's not about the current death rate. The real aim is about slowing the number of infections to buy time for the build up of herd immunity and/or effective medication. An eminent immunologist described Corvid 19 as 'slippery'. After species jumping it mutated to allow human to human transfer in a few weeks. It took years for this to happen in previous similar cases. It has mutated again at least once as there are now two known strains. If it mutates again into something really nasty before we are able to deal with it then the manure will really hit the aircon.

"perfectly possible to let low risk people go about their lives, whilst really isolating those at a higher risk"

 "the death toll in Italy has been particulary high due to intergenerational living"

Wow! Who knew you were an expert in this field. Did you even know you where one a month ago? 

oh yeah and also you're also really hot in large infrastructure projects! Amazing! 

"Do you realise how many hospitals and COVID-19 resistant care-homes we could build for them with GBP 350,000,000,000?"

Just wondering when all those lovely CV19 resistant hospitals and care homes will open their doors? 2021? 2022? 

Now is not the time for armchair experts. Listen and adhere to PublIc Health England advice. Peoples lives,  someone's mum, someone's dad, someone's loved ones lives depend on it. 

Please - don't second guess this. Do the right thing. 

the little onion wrote:

Chris Hayes wrote:

The analysis from the Italian NHS on 2000 dead reveals...(SNIPPED) 

 

Yes - absolutely. Half a million deaths DIRECTLY from the disease is what is expected, unless there is mitigation. This includes lots of young people with immune issues. On top of this is the INDIRECT deaths from people who can't get treatment because the hospitals are overflowing with covid-19 patients.

 

We are at the very very start of a long journey, unless we nip this in the bud. And even then....

 

Spanish flu, immediately after world war one, killed more people than the war itself. Just bear that in mind.

Mitigation won't solve anything, millions will die anyway; sooner rather than later.

Suppression is the way 
Efficient & effective Testing coupled with Contact Tracing is the key, otherwise social measures (mandatory quarantine & isolation, distancing, etc) alone are futile. 

That's how China & S. Korea were so successful at tackling the outbreak.
 

Nice to finally see a voice of reason. We should do all we can to avoid more deaths, but the measures taken are no longer proportionate to what reason suggest we should do. Banning cycling will only have a negative influence on people's immune system - especially in the long run. Not to mention their mental health. Also, where were all the concerned voices last year when 80.000 people died in the US from the flu H3n2?

Chris - your stats may be correct and 'reassuring' but the public health system still has to cope with the situation and this is why you have to have these measures. In north Italy the army is moving coffins by night to other regions for burial as local cemeteries are full. The army is also setting up field hospitals. The victims may be old but they still have the right to a dignified death and burial. World health systems are designed for quotidian events and not pandemics. (it can cope with x amount of strokes / heart attacks / RTCs per day) Which is another reason why there are such strict  measures: to help prevent the collapse of the health system. 
Also, I guess no one really knows how the virus may mutate. It could start attacking younger bodies so surely it's best to halt it as soon as possible. 

The cyclist continues:

"I also need to visit a number of other weather stations in the region.

I'm riding alone and I've washed my hands. Now make sure you stand at least 2 metres away monsieur and allow me to continue with my essential work."

Even if there's now an automatic weather station up there that is a brilliant and witty comment. I live in lock down France, where were no longer allowed to cycle for sports or leisure reasons. Thanks for making me smile!

Something must be done. This is something. We must do it.

eburtthebike wrote:

I'd really like to know the reasoning behind these bans.  As CUK, BC and others have pointed out, risk is very low and benefits huge, so why ban it?

Well, consider the general reaction to incidents. 

• Car driver knocks over pedestrian
  • Police on scene, handing leaflets to pedestrians, advising them how to cross roads
• Cyclist knocks down pedestrian
  • Police on scene, stopping cyclists who are not wearing hi-viz
    ​

Does that answer your question? 

And I only wish it were satire.