[Oldmanmatt]

Will im not sure what your hoping to achieve here but if your worried about being shamed for climbing why don't you just go climbing and keep quiet about it. I dont think the bmc or anyone is going to start surveilance on your house ready to shame you if you venture outside to one of your local boulders. Hopefully that sounds reasonable and we can all go climbing again soon.

Well, Tom asked so I answered.

On the subject of those big runs and rides, what is it that makes it wrong? To me it's the risk of having a mechanical or accident or injury far from home and having to call on someone to come out and help you. If you're running and going through stiles and gates then you're possibly aiding transmission beyond your community.

But I suspect that some (kac/Nick/TT?) would say that additionally we should all be sacrificing as much as we possibly can?

Are you just being contentious for the sake of it Will? Most people have pretty much said “you do what you think you can justify as reasonable”.

Plenty have given you their interpretation of “reasonable”.

Ru has given you a pretty clear and as close as possible, legal, definition of “reasonable” (Why would you question a learned opinion? It carries a fair bit more force than anybody else’s blathering).

Are you expecting people to come around to your way of thinking?
Do you need that to proceed?

If your doubts are that strong, you haven’t convinced yourself.

Doesn’t that answer your questions?

[galpinos]

On the subject of those big runs and rides, what is it that makes it wrong?

What makes them wrong is that government guidance (though the messaging from them has been anything but clear I agree) currently encourages us to stay at home as much as possible and to only go out for essential tasks. Exercise is included as a reason to go out, but we are also encouraged to keep it as short as possible and to not stray far from home. 20 mile runs and long rides don't conform to this guidance in my opinion.

I believe that we need to keep within the spirit of the guidance in order for the lockdown to work. The more we nibble away at the edges, start staying in less and less, the sooner the lockdown falls apart.

My opinion is very much clouded the fact my wife has had people accusing her of leaving them at home to die as the treatments they thought would be available are not being offered anymore and friends are already making those tough decisions re patients (who are not all old, i.e. 40+) with Covid-19. They are really feeling it and my way of support them/doing my bit is going along with the government guidance.

A post from ChrisBrooke on the other channel struck a chord:

Fifthly, and probably most importantly, out of support for and solidarity with both the vulnerable people in our society who might die of CV19, however unlikely it is they'd get it from me, and our NHS workers who are literally putting their lives on the line (and some have already paid with theirs) to help and serve us. They are asking us (and some on here have done so explicitly) to stay home, follow the advice, social distance, don't go climbing or do owt daft. Ignoring their pleas is a rather unbecoming middle digit to those who are making actual sacrifices at this time, not just staying away from the crags.

[Will Hunt]

Matt, why does anyone discuss or debate anything on here? I'm interested in knowing why the people who think differently to me think that way. Perhaps they've thought about it in a way that I haven't?
I'm not saying that I'm going climbing, nor asking permission from UKB, I'm just using my own circumstances as an example. I'm actually a model citizen here. Nobody in our household has been to the shops in about a fortnight and I haven't exercised beyond home since some time last week.

If you read the last few posts again you'll find that I haven't questioned anything that Ru said.

[teestub]

I haven't exercised beyond home since some time last week.

Your posts make it sound like you could do with a bit of fresh air 😄

[Will Hunt]

Not for me, thanks. Wouldn't touch the stuff.

[kac]

Thats great will that you want to hear different opinions. You just dont seem very open minded in how you are receiving them. For example if someone offers an opinion that differs from yours you assume that is just because they can't get out. Now you seem to be saying that I have some agenda where I want to maximise the sacrifice. I really dont but as lots of others have said I just dont personally feel it would be right to go out climbing at the moment.

[ashtond6]

We are all allowed to go out to undertake reasonable exercise. We've had lots of examples on this thread of how climbing could be considered reasonable exercise - neither increasing the risk of infection or of becoming a burden on the NHS.

Amen.

Not suggesting people go to stanage. I have some very obscure rocks within near walking distance and it covers the almost zero risk part option.

Although I do acknowledge something was probably required to reduce traffic. It is hard to get the balance. It just grates on me that people can go for 20 mile runs, or massive rides and I cant go bouldering 5 mins from mine.

So walking to the boulders with a crash pad on, in my opinion, you are basically just putting two fingers up to the rest of society.

Ahhh I totally agree with that. Pre all this, when I planned to go out with a low profile, I had planned to go without pads and do outrageous lowball traverses.

Again not really different to those traversing brick edges in Sheffield city at the moment.

[tomtom]

What kac, OMM, Galpinos, Stubbsy and Dan said...

[SA Chris]

Long 20 mile runs and massive bike rides are not in the spirit of the guidance either. One could argue that both could be classed as "reasonable", as we are doing with bouldering, but in reality, they aren't.

Agree with this, much as I would love to do either, guidelines I'm working to are; don't run any further than I can hobble home from if I sprain an ankle. Tempting though it is, I'll probably avoid bike altogether, as it's all a bit too hilly round here, and the temptation to blast it would be a bit too much. That may change though, once the madness sets in, might find a flat road or two near home and just do laps.

[mrjonathanr]

Again not really different to those traversing brick edges in Sheffield city at the moment.

I expect Broomgrove is probably the most dangerous place in the city right now.

I haven't read every post here but really, it seems fairly simple to me. We all know what the restrictions are in place for and want this attempt to slow the pandemic to work.  We all know it takes compliance from every member of society to succeed. We all take a dim view of idiots who undermine this, knowing that their selfishness results in somebody else's suffering or death.

If you are a halfway decent person the little compass in your head will always point the right way when you ask it which way to go

edit: when, not if.

[Bradders]

Again not really different to those traversing brick edges in Sheffield city at the moment.

I expect Broomgrove is probably the most dangerous place in the city right now.

Are people actually doing this? Doesn't seem much different to what Will was asking about.

[mrjonathanr]

Sorry, no idea, semi-flippant response to ashton's comment above. my comment below it is serious though.

[Footwork]

Thats great will that you want to hear different opinions. You just dont seem very open minded in how you are receiving them. For example if someone offers an opinion that differs from yours you assume that is just because they can't get out.

I get this from Will quite a lot. All my FA names are shite but Will's are all Booker Prize nominees   

[Oldmanmatt]

Again not really different to those traversing brick edges in Sheffield city at the moment.

I expect Broomgrove is probably the most dangerous place in the city right now.

Are people actually doing this? Doesn't seem much different to what Will was asking about.

We were spraying down the holds at the wall, every night, with Milton Hospital disinfectant.
But, we realised, that wasn’t going to cut it.
Even with lingering residue and assuming it was still effective, dried onto the holds; it had a 15 minute contact time for disinfection to occur.

So, since rain has been in short supply, UV takes a couple of days to be effective at this time of year and I’m fairly sure nobody’s spraying down the holds with Milton; buildering where a bunch of other climbers have been fondling your holds...?

Well, up to the individual, of course. After all, very few people below the age of 60 and without underlying health conditions have died, right?
Well quite a few more than I think we were expecting. I mean 13 years old? 19?
Still, it’s like the lottery, nobody really wins that...
I mean the odds are better (not the right term) than the lottery, but still pretty remote, obviously.
Dig out.
Fill yer boots.
Just wash your hands and try not to breathe on your loved ones when you get home.
 

[nik at work]

But I suspect that some (kac/Nick/TT?) would say that additionally we should all be sacrificing as much as we possibly can?

Me?

[galpinos]

But I suspect that some (kac/Nick/TT?) would say that additionally we should all be sacrificing as much as we possibly can?

Me?

No I'm Spartacus/Nick!

[SA Chris]

There can only be one! You two need to fight to the death on top of the Cioch (Burbage one will do, no visitors allowed on Skye). Long swords required to maintain social distancing. And you need to cycle there.

[abarro81]

Well, up to the individual, of course. After all, very few people below the age of 60 and without underlying health conditions have died, right?
Well quite a few more than I think we were expecting. I mean 13 years old? 19?
Still, it’s like the lottery, nobody really wins that...
I mean the odds are better (not the right term) than the lottery, but still pretty remote, obviously.
Dig out.
Fill yer boots.
Just wash your hands and try not to breathe on your loved ones when you get home.

We all do things which have risk - loads of driving around to go climbing, DIY, drink, drugs... Unless you can give me some stats I'm currently relatively unafraid for myself, precisely because it's news that a 13 and 19 year old with no underlying conditions got killed by it (and no, stats of how many hospitalisations are in a certain age group are not v useful unless you know infection rates by age group).

To those giving Will shit for relentlessly asking "why do you think x", I have to say I'm sympathetic to Will on the general approach. When people disagree with me I either do the same, or call them a moron. That said, we do seem to have got the the point where we've hit the bottom of the "why" barrel on most fronts.

[petejh]

What barrows said.

I find it interesting to see different views on liberty/authority on this thread.

And I don't think Will is closed-minded, I'd say the opposite. Questioning isn't closed-mindedness, it's curiosity. If he was reading your replies and then going 'fuck you all, you're wrong' and posting pics of himself going climbing then I'd say he was closed-minded.

[Will Hunt]

That said, we do seem to have got the the point where we've hit the bottom of the "why" barrel on most fronts.

I agree. And as I said before, I still swing back and forth in my opinion of this. I think the most compelling arguments that have been made recently are a) that lots of individuals making small stretches to the rules leads to more and more non-compliance (though the police should be stepping in and maintaining the lockdown when things become unreasonable); and b) Dan's point about carrying a bouldering pad. Bouldering pads are not very discreet and being seen walking around with one isn't going to help with point a). I wouldn't go so far as to say it was sticking two fingers up at society though. And Dan could definitely walk from where he lives to Rylstone with a pad and not be seen by anyone!

I find it interesting to see different views on liberty/authority on this thread.

This is also why this debate is so interesting. What if we were talking about stop and search powers? Or identity cards? Or a surveillance state? Most people on here would argue that these impositions on our liberty should be used in a limited way that is proportional to the threat (knife crime/terrorism/etc). This pandemic is a much bigger threat than stabbings or terrorism (so obviously requires unprecedented measures), but if you are a home secretary or a police officer, or a victim's loved one then you might think quite differently about what civil liberties we should surrender. And (not wanting to open up the argument again), I do think that some people's point of view on the lockdown goes a little beyond a proportional response.

[Oldmanmatt]

Well, up to the individual, of course. After all, very few people below the age of 60 and without underlying health conditions have died, right?
Well quite a few more than I think we were expecting. I mean 13 years old? 19?
Still, it’s like the lottery, nobody really wins that...
I mean the odds are better (not the right term) than the lottery, but still pretty remote, obviously.
Dig out.
Fill yer boots.
Just wash your hands and try not to breathe on your loved ones when you get home.

We all do things which have risk - loads of driving around to go climbing, DIY, drink, drugs... Unless you can give me some stats I'm currently relatively unafraid for myself, precisely because it's news that a 13 and 19 year old with no underlying conditions got killed by it (and no, stats of how many hospitalisations are in a certain age group are not v useful unless you know infection rates by age group).

To those giving Will shit for relentlessly asking "why do you think x", I have to say I'm sympathetic to Will on the general approach. When people disagree with me I either do the same, or call them a moron. That said, we do seem to have got the the point where we've hit the bottom of the "why" barrel on most fronts.

I am “doing a Will” in that post.
Like him I often feel obliged to argue a counter point, beyond my own “actual” view.

But, on infection rates...

Surely that’s bunkum? Infection rates in different age groups, would be a meaningless lump of data?
How would you ever know what caused the discrepancy?
Maybe, say, 24-27 year olds (for some strange reason related to a popular early 2010’s pop video) don’t pick up canned goods to check ingredients, in supermarkets and that turned out to be a significant vector? But 20-24 year olds always do because of some weird viral Insta post...

I hope that was obviously random.
What I’m saying is, infection rates don’t speak to physiological responses, by age group.

To determine that, you’re going to have to set up a trial or twenty and deliberately infect a good number in each bracket etc etc and see how they responded.

😉

[Rob F]

Will, I think you should log off ukb for 5 min, fire up your laptop and get that amazing guidebook finished for us all to use once we're finally allowed out.

(As an aside there is one 7b+ that everyone thinks is well soft touch that doesn't seem to have a downgrade on your logbook?!?!?!!!)

[kac]

Pete if you read what I said you will see that I didn't call will close minded. I have no interest in giving will shit as Alex puts it. I said the way he is receiving arguments was not open minded in that he dismisses alternative views based on his prejudice ie. Other views are to be dismissed because he suspects they cant get out climbing - he could just ask if he thinks thats the case and in some way relevant to the issue. Anyway this seems to be going round in circles now so before I get called a moron I'm gonna quit posting. Hope everyone stays healthy.

[abarro81]

Matt -
1. No you weren't asking why, you were just rather flamboyantly trying to state your view.
2. I don't think you understood my post. My bracketed point was simply preempting someone posting a news article stating that a high % of those in hospital are young people; my point is that without knowing how many there are of each age group in the general population and how many in each age group are infected, that data isn't worth much

[Oldmanmatt]

Matt -
1. No you weren't asking why, you were just rather flamboyantly trying to state your view.
2. I don't think you understood my post. My bracketed point was simply preempting someone posting a news article stating that a high % of those in hospital are young people; my point is that without knowing how many there are of each age group in the general population and how many in each age group are infected, that data isn't worth much

I asked about the value of the data, full stop.

All of it is too contingent on unknown factors.

The only reasonably concrete data is the number of deaths and even then we don’t know how many are actually C19 caused. Plenty will be deaths that might have occurred in short order anyway.
My point, overall, is that much of our speculation is, well, not much use.

You, Alex, appear to be on the “it’s not worth it” side. That is you seem to suspect the economic damage of current measures out-weigh  the benefits. Seem to.
My point is, I don’t think that’s true. I think the economic costs AND the human costs of not doing this will be higher.
Because I don’t like the death rate, doesn’t mean I think it’s the most critical aspect.
Because, in the long run, the number sick days, critically ill, knock on deaths and illness, would probably be much worse.
As I have said several times, least worst.