Pubs opening July 4th - Gigs?

[wateroftyne]

Just now, sykilz said:

The reporter on BBC news has also said you won't be permitted to raise your voice as that may increase projectiles from peoples mouths. So only very very quiet bands .......It seems a bit of a ridiculous list of restrictions to be honest, and of course it's virtually unenforceable. 

It's a shame JJ Cale isn't still with us. He could have been the only gigging musician on the planet.

[Drax]

15 hours ago, hiram.k.hackenbacker said:

Just drove back from that their London and there was a pub open serving with builders (pints in hand) outside. Wasn't quick enough to note the name of it as I was a bit taken aback at the sight in the first place - and I was trying to turn left at the same time 😎

Interesting to hear this was a surprise - on recent travels there seems to be at least one or two in every town doing these kerbside pints. Assumed these were commonplace across the country

[spectoremg]

I played a gig near St Austell once with a covered outdoor stage. 

[chris_b]

2 hours ago, drTStingray said:

Unless I misunderstood, live performances are definitely not permitted . . . . . . . .  Interesting to hear the 'herd immunity' phrase trotted out again - hands up anyone who's ever had flu?

My understanding is that live performances are still not allowed.

I guess the herd immunity comment is aimed at me? We have 3 options. Apparently 60% is the number to achieve herd immunity and if the current killer strain doesn't mutate that's what we have to reach, from our current level of 5%. So that's somewhere in the region of another 40 million cases. Not a happy prospect. If this virus does mutate then it can become like the common cold and be an annoyance. If it mutates the other way, like the 1918 pandemic, it could come back more dangerous. The scientists don't know enough about the behaviour of Covid-19 yet so all possibilities are still on the table.

[Muppet]

looking at the published guidance/rules

"At this time, venues should not permit indoor performances, including drama, comedy and music, to take place in front of a live audience."

So gigs inside should not happen. 

"Venues should not permit indoor performances, including drama, comedy and music, to take place in front of a live audience. This is important to mitigate the risks of aerosol transmission - from either the performer(s) or their audience. There will be further guidance setting out how performing arts activity can be managed safely in other settings, for instance rehearsing or broadcast without an audience. There is an additional risk of infection in environments where you or others are singing, chanting, shouting or conversing loudly. This applies even if others are at a distance to you. You should therefore avoid environments that require you to raise your voice to communicate with anyone outside your household. All venues should ensure that steps are taken to avoid people needing to unduly raise their voices to each other. This includes - but is not limited to - refraining from playing music or broadcasts that may encourage shouting, including if played at a volume that makes normal conversation difficult. "

Gigs outside? Not specifically mentioned but seems unlikely.   Further guidance expected for 'rehearsals'.

 

 

[BassBunny]

It appears the pub industry has known about this announcement for a while as one of our locals has been busy over the last week.

Carpark is now virtually covered with bench tables and a large pull up banner at the entrance with the "rules". They used to have Solos on but even if allowed, they now haven't the room due to the table layout that cannot be changed.

[Rich]

12 minutes ago, Muppet said:

Gigs outside? 

 

I imagine that if permitted, they would be possible at very well isolated pubs out in the sticks, well away from any dwellings likely to be annoyed by noise. There's probably about a dozen of them in the country.   

[hiram.k.hackenbacker]

30 minutes ago, Drax said:

Interesting to hear this was a surprise - on recent travels there seems to be at least one or two in every town doing these kerbside pints. Assumed these were commonplace across the country

Yes, I’ve since learnt there are some doing roadside pints. It was just a little odd in that I spent a good few hours walking around London yesterday waiting for my mate to have an MRI. I passed loads of pubs and there wasn’t one that was open - apart from the one I passed on the way out.

[fretmeister]

19 hours ago, chris_b said:

There's going to be a second wave no matter what, and a third and a fourth until something like 60% of the country has had the virus, then herd immunity kicks in. Right now about 5% have had it, so there are a lot of "spikes" to come, unless it mutates into a common flu virus.

Right now I just think, let's get it over and done with. Some people will die, most won't and the survivors can get back to living. If the current situation carries on, and the country tries live on credit for much longer, our kids and grandchildren will be paying for this into the next century.

Herd immunity without a vaccine is a myth. Ask any epidemiologist.

As it happens one of my mates is working on this at Oxford.

 

There is no indication that those who catch it keep sufficient antibody levels to help the next time round. No long term immunity at all.

And the other thing - organ damage. Most won't die as you say, but a large amount of the survivors will end up on the transplant lists and some will be on oxygen for the rest of their shortened lives.

So if a person survives it once a 2nd run will hit harder as the lungs are already damaged from the first time round. Kidney damage is also massively common.

 

I haven't posted the actual picture from the first Covid related lung transplant as it is really nasty. But it's in this link.

This is the type of damage even survivors can be left with. Obviously not as severe as the pic, but nevertheless life changing. No work. Benefits. Treatment costs etc etc.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/11/health/coronavirus-lung-transplant.html

 

It really isn't as simple as the "let the weak die" approach some seem to be keen on.

 

[paul_c2]

25 minutes ago, Muppet said:

looking at the published guidance/rules

"At this time, venues should not permit indoor performances, including drama, comedy and music, to take place in front of a live audience."

So gigs inside should not happen. 

"Venues should not permit indoor performances, including drama, comedy and music, to take place in front of a live audience. This is important to mitigate the risks of aerosol transmission - from either the performer(s) or their audience. There will be further guidance setting out how performing arts activity can be managed safely in other settings, for instance rehearsing or broadcast without an audience. There is an additional risk of infection in environments where you or others are singing, chanting, shouting or conversing loudly. This applies even if others are at a distance to you. You should therefore avoid environments that require you to raise your voice to communicate with anyone outside your household. All venues should ensure that steps are taken to avoid people needing to unduly raise their voices to each other. This includes - but is not limited to - refraining from playing music or broadcasts that may encourage shouting, including if played at a volume that makes normal conversation difficult. "

Gigs outside? Not specifically mentioned but seems unlikely.   Further guidance expected for 'rehearsals'.

 

 

Thanks, I thought there would be official advice offered to underline the announcement yesterday. It makes perfect sense from an epidemiology point of view, although I can understand why some people would have associated pubs reopening with gigs starting again. As has been said, things are going to be different, for a while yet.

I've already seen the shambles in the car dealership sector - they reopened car dealers, but didn't reopen car auctions until 2 weeks later - which resulted in bizarre prices, shortage of stock and there's severe logistics issues with transporting cars safely. Oh, and DVLA are still on holiday too which doesn't help.

Similarly, they pragmatically ought to allow rehearsals at least a few weeks before they allow gigs, otherwise its going to be a similar, but musical, shambles. (Perhaps not as musical as it ought to be!)

[fretmeister]

32 minutes ago, Muppet said:

looking at the published guidance/rules

"At this time, venues should not permit indoor performances, including drama, comedy and music, to take place in front of a live audience."

So gigs inside should not happen. 

"Venues should not permit indoor performances, including drama, comedy and music, to take place in front of a live audience. This is important to mitigate the risks of aerosol transmission - from either the performer(s) or their audience. There will be further guidance setting out how performing arts activity can be managed safely in other settings, for instance rehearsing or broadcast without an audience. There is an additional risk of infection in environments where you or others are singing, chanting, shouting or conversing loudly. This applies even if others are at a distance to you. You should therefore avoid environments that require you to raise your voice to communicate with anyone outside your household. All venues should ensure that steps are taken to avoid people needing to unduly raise their voices to each other. This includes - but is not limited to - refraining from playing music or broadcasts that may encourage shouting, including if played at a volume that makes normal conversation difficult. "

Gigs outside? Not specifically mentioned but seems unlikely.   Further guidance expected for 'rehearsals'.

 

 

Lazy man alert...

 

Have you got a link please? 

[paul_c2]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5eb96e8e86650c278b077616/Keeping-workers-and-customers-safe-during-covid-19-restaurants-pubs-bars-takeaways-230620.pdf

[Muppet]

6 minutes ago, fretmeister said:

Have you got a link please?

Headline advice is here for the 'visitor' economy.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19/the-visitor-economy#shops-4-1

 

The document for pubs is here. Section 4.5 covers Entertainment

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5eb96e8e86650c278b077616/Keeping-workers-and-customers-safe-during-covid-19-restaurants-pubs-bars-takeaways-230620.pdf

[fretmeister]

2 minutes ago, Muppet said:

Headline advice is here for the 'visitor' economy.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19/the-visitor-economy#shops-4-1

 

The document for pubs is here. Section 4.5 covers Entertainment

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5eb96e8e86650c278b077616/Keeping-workers-and-customers-safe-during-covid-19-restaurants-pubs-bars-takeaways-230620.pdf

Thank you!

[la bam]

I suppose I understand the governments theory. As well as reopening everything they are also trying to work out the things that cause the spread too at the same time.

So, let the pubs go back - seated and distanced. If that works well, let people stand. If that works well allow live music. Kind of keep just pushing the boundaries and see what works. If they all work then great. If one item causes a spike you know to isolate that. It's a much more sensible approach to letting everything go straight back to normal. If they did that and there was a spike, theyve no real way of knowing what caused the issue and how to deal with it.

Small steps, but we'll get there.

[mcnach]

1 hour ago, chris_b said:

My understanding is that live performances are still not allowed.

I guess the herd immunity comment is aimed at me? We have 3 options. Apparently 60% is the number to achieve herd immunity and if the current killer strain doesn't mutate that's what we have to reach, from our current level of 5%. So that's somewhere in the region of another 40 million cases. Not a happy prospect. If this virus does mutate then it can become like the common cold and be an annoyance. If it mutates the other way, like the 1918 pandemic, it could come back more dangerous. The scientists don't know enough about the behaviour of Covid-19 yet so all possibilities are still on the table.

 

I don't think there's evidence of any long term immunity, so I'm pretty certain all those early speeches about herd immunity are irrelevant right now.

It looks like Covid-19 is here to stay. Vaccines, when available, may have only limited effects and would need to be renewed.

So much uncertainly. This winter is going to be interesting... will we have a massive surge? or maybe just a minor increase of deaths over the usual winter levels?

  

[gjones]

I'm not holding my breath.

Well not for a whole gig.

I wish I could.

[Happy Jack]

1 hour ago, chris_b said:

Apparently 60% is the number to achieve herd immunity and if the current killer strain doesn't mutate that's what we have to reach, from our current level of 5%. 

I note that this 5% figure gets quoted endlessly at the moment as if it's a fact.

In practice, the (almost) complete absence of effective testing - both now and especially when this thing was peaking - combined with the extensive evidence that very many people have had Covid-19 whilst displaying either very minimal symptoms or none at all means that the 5% stat is almost certainly wildly understated. 

5% is one in twenty. I live in London, the most heavily-affected place in the UK. I can easily identify 20 people who I see very frequently, and pick out 10 of then (including me, of course) who have had Covid-19. Not only is that a 50% hit rate, but NONE of those ten have been captured in any sample. 

Can I prove that? Of course not, but I'd much rather rely on my own direct experience than the panic-stricken pap provided by the media over the last three months. When the Public Enquiry into all this finally happens, I suspect that it will make for some very interesting results.

 

[mcnach]

28 minutes ago, fretmeister said:

It really isn't as simple as the "let the weak die" approach some seem to be keen on.

 

 

I think that approach is just another way of saying "I give up, I don't have a solution".

It may actually come down to that, largely, at least for this first winter. 😕

[gjones]

1 minute ago, mcnach said:

 

I don't think there's evidence of any long term immunity, so I'm pretty certain all those early speeches about herd immunity are irrelevant right now.

It looks like Covid-19 is here to stay. Vaccines, when available, may have only limited effects and would need to be renewed.

So much uncertainly. This winter is going to be interesting... will we have a massive surge? or maybe just a minor increase of deaths over the usual winter levels?

  

What's a minor increase in deaths, I wonder?

50,000 more people died than usual, in the winter of 17/18, due to that season's flu vaccine being ineffective.

My whole family got it.

There was no lockdown then, and the general public weren't made aware it was happening, until it was all over.

[mcnach]

My first non-cancelled gig is on the first weekend in September, with an 8-piece band. 

I'm not entirely sure it'll happen.

 

[Happy Jack]

This really isn't about "just letting people die" any more than it's about "no person left behind". The disease isn't a government policy that can be changed, or a dangerous behaviour that can be outlawed ... it's a thing that exists and that we now have to deal with, like cancer. 

We currently have no cure. We currently have no evidence that a cure will ever be available. We currently do not know whether herd immunity exists or whether you can get hit by this twice. We don't know how many different but related strains of Covid-19 exist or whether there can be cross-immunity between them. In fact, there's a staggeringly long list of things we don't know.

What we DO know is that our entire approach to civilisation has had to be modified, and not everyone is entirely happy with that. We also know that our current approach to that modification involves spending unbelievably massive amounts of money that we don't have, which then impacts on every other aspect of life for decades to come. 

I've spent my entire life so far aware of the risk of dying from a very long list of potential causes. As far as I'm concerned, I've now added Covid-19 to that list and I want to get back to living my life. Many others feel the same way, but of course there are plenty who disagree.

I'm not saying that I'm right at this precise moment, but I do know that eventually we WILL have to get back to living our lives. All we're doing is bickering about the timing.

Will people die? Yes, of course they will, just as they always have. 

[mcnach]

1 minute ago, gjones said:

What's a minor increase in deaths, I wonder?

50,000 more people died than usual, in the winter of 17/18, due to that season's flu vaccine being ineffective.

My whole family got it.

There was no lockdown then, and the general public weren't made aware it was happening, until it was all over.

 

I have no idea, and I find it uncomfortable to think in terms of 'tolerable' death rates, especially when you have a few people in your family that would be at high risk of severe illness or death if they catch it.

A lot of it will be down to us, as individuals. We do not need to be 100% effective at avoiding being infected, but if we're mindful enough we may just reduce the transmission of Covid and other common viruses enough that things don't get out of hand. Hopefully there will be noticeably fewer people coughing and sneezing openly in the (near?) future. I once kicked someone out of our shared office at work because he kept coming to sit and ask people questions while constantly sneezing and often not even attempting to cover his mouth. I was the 'bad guy' for a day but I don't care even if it was 'just a cold'... and this is in a biology laboratory that works with viruses so it wasn't a simple matter of lack of knowledge. I can't imagine that situation will arise anytime soon at work again because now it's very much not accepted, socially, which is not a bad thing.

[paul_c2]

Gigs of amateur bands clearly fall in the "high risk, low economic value" category. My main fear is if areas such as gigging, and many others, are introduced earlier rather than later, the R value will be (for example) R=0.9 instead of R=0.7, which results in the pandemic dragging on longer than it otherwise could do. 

[drTStingray]

1 hour ago, chris_b said:

My understanding is that live performances are still not allowed.

I guess the herd immunity comment is aimed at me? We have 3 options. Apparently 60% is the number to achieve herd immunity and if the current killer strain doesn't mutate that's what we have to reach, from our current level of 5%. So that's somewhere in the region of another 40 million cases. Not a happy prospect. If this virus does mutate then it can become like the common cold and be an annoyance. If it mutates the other way, like the 1918 pandemic, it could come back more dangerous. The scientists don't know enough about the behaviour of Covid-19 yet so all possibilities are still on the table.

60% of 66 million is just under 40 million - given the current number of known infections is around 300,000 (I know that figure is only those tested and lots more will have had it) and 43,000 have died so far it, at that rate it suggests to reach herd immunity will require millions to die - that is very scary indeed - and the lack of people and 'productivity' even if that is simply buying stuff, would make the economy bomb also. 

The very phrase 'Herd Immunity' sounds like something a head political adviser might dream up.