It's clear to me that, much like the guidelines for pregnant women, the government

[Burney]

Of course. My plan is to ensure we are all (me, the missus, the kids and my dad) virtually house-bound for 7-14 days and providing none of us have symptoms I'll green light him to pack his bags and drive down for a few weeks.

That seems fair enough. The whole problem with this lockdown stuff is that it simply isn't sustainable for more than a few weeks.

[Monty92]

That seems fair enough. The whole problem with this lockdown stuff is that it simply isn't sustainable for more than a few weeks.

It doesn't need to be sustainable for everyone for it to work. They are banking on sufficient numbers adhering to it for it to achieve the required results. I think that as the sense of risk remains high (and that sense will continue rising for the foreseeable as death stack up) most people will simply be too spooked to not do it.

Also, lockdown doesn't stop you leaving the house for a walk or run, or even seeing friends/family as long as you're sensible. And we all have plenty of home comforts to keep us busy/entertained.

[Burney]

It doesn't need to be sustainable for everyone for it to work. They are banking on sufficient numbers adhering to it, which I think they will as the sense or risk remains high (and that sense will continue rising for the forseeable).

Lockdown doesn't stop you leaving the house for a walk or run, or even seeing others as long as you're sensible. And we all have plenty of home comforts to keep us busy/entertained.

Oh, I know it's a mitigation game rather than an attempt to actually stop the virus. And the fact that they're not shutting pubs and such suggests to me that they do actively want the virus to spread through the younger and healthier part of the population now while older, more vulnerable people are hidden away. It's all about controlling the rate of spread.