So any answers? or are you just all going to bicker amongs yourselvesQuote:
Originally Posted by MattPo
Printable View
So any answers? or are you just all going to bicker amongs yourselvesQuote:
Originally Posted by MattPo
Matt, I raised the same question above #2695 and suggested a possible reason (your later power suggestion) in #2717. See above.Quote:
Originally Posted by MattPo
Are you discounting the possibility that it's due to the the rates of COVID infection?Quote:
Originally Posted by MattPo
It's easy to say it's due to those in power not wanting to face restrictions themselves. However, you could only claim this if the rates in London were as high as they are in Manchester, Leeds, etc. Which they're not (yet). Let's revisit this in week or two when the rates in London climb higher.
I also notice there are areas with high rates in certain southern cities on the latest map:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappvi...2c5f6912ed7076
Portsmouth, Bath, Bristol, Oxford etc.
Again, it's easy to point the finger at universities and students. I see some unis are moving to online teaching only in response to the recent spike. I'm not sure how much of an effect that will have. I suspect it's not so much about what students are doing in classes, rather what some of them are doing outside classes. Notice I say "some". I'm sure there are lots of very responsible students doing the right thing regarding social distancing. But it only takes a few...
And BTW: bickering amongst ourselves is what we do best. :p
Are you discounting the possibility that it's due to the the rates of COVID infection?Quote:
Originally Posted by MattPo
It's easy to say it's due to those in power not wanting to face restrictions themselves. However, you could only claim this if the rates in London were as high as they are in Manchester, Leeds, etc. Which they're not (yet). Let's revisit this in week or two when the rates in London climb higher.
I also notice there are areas with high rates in certain southern cities on the latest map:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappvi...2c5f6912ed7076
Portsmouth, Bath, Bristol, Oxford etc.
Again, it's easy to point the finger at universities and students. I see some unis are moving to online teaching only in response to the recent spike. I'm not sure how much of an effect that will have. I suspect it's not so much about what students are doing in classes, rather what some of them are doing outside classes. Notice I say "some". I'm sure there are lots of very responsible students doing the right thing regarding social distancing. But it only takes a few...
And BTW: bickering amongst ourselves is what we do best. :p
Surely the whole point of being a student is to be irresponsible, otherwise you might as well do an OU course from your bedroom rather than incur huge future tax liabilities for shitloads of sex, drugs, booze and joining a band.
No it isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
I posted this link a week ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by MattPo
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...453-7/fulltext
It was described as about improving accuracy and reliability, and I agree. There are huge question marks over the accuracy and reliability of testing.
The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be somewhere between 0·8% and 4·0%
Of course any issue with testing would be national and not localised and you have asked for thoughts on localised problems.
Is there an issue of case chasing? Find a few cases, track and race, hit the hotspots with your mobile testing teams.
If you do that, and particularly if you are focussing on the student population, and there is a problem with the test, that is going to be amplified.
September is always the start of the respiratory illness season as we move in to Autumn. I don't know if there are historic records for regionalised effects of this. I've only seen national ones which indicate that in a bad Septmeber we can see >20,000 hospital admissions for respiratory conditions.
I'm assuming this is partly weather, partly back to school, back from holidays. That being the case the weather would certainly bring that forward in Scotland and the North.
Finally, the North and Scotland have had strciter lockdown measures. Maybe those measures are more of a problem than a solution?
For those prolific posters on this thread, who persist in quoting statistics and proffering correlations, you really should visit this website first.
Urgh! :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGrump
welcome back The Grump. Haven't seen you since....er, the "Numbers on Shorts" "debate"? :pQuote:
Originally Posted by TheGrump
Why don't you take a few minutes and actually listen to the section on testing and false positives on this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
You might learn something about how testing actually works in reality.
Profilic? Where's spelling bee? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGrump
Interesting link. I like this one too: https://xkcd.com/552/
I do wonder how people (ie you!) come across sites like this (even recognising the sheltered life I lead) - unless you work in computers or are a statistician or an actuary. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
xkcd was pointed out to me by a friend who's a geology lecturer. Randall Munroe, the author of the site has written some very funny books. I'd recommend "What if?".
Well with that recommendation..I've just ordered a copy.Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
So, the science driven Covid policy is that I can't go to my local, The Absurd Arms, and sit on the table to the left of the door with just a pint. But, I can go to my local, sit on the same table, with a pint PLUS a plate of 'pie and chips' (if I'm among those lucky ones who can afford the extra cost of the meal).
I think science is wonderful and I wish I'd been part of the controlled experiment that proved 'pie and chips' offer immunity to Covid. And it's not like a policy that encourages more eating of pub grub could have any unintended consequences which might exacerbate one's susceptibility to Covid (obesity) :confused: !
You couldn't make this up. Only THEY have!
At the same time, I'm guessing the law of averages says that people who have a meal and a drink in a pub are more likely to be a bit more sedate and are less likely to be rowdy and on a session. Like any rules, it's the edges of the rules that will always bring out seemingly daft contradictions but the line has to be drawn somewhere. You know another alternative might have been to say the pub can't sell any food or beer for instance which is not nearly 'as good' as a pub that can sell beer but only with food.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mossdog
What I think is most telling about Boris's announcement yesterday is that he coincided it with all of the SAGE meeting minutes that had been recommending much harsher restrictions being brought in 3 weeks ago. Boris, presumably with his mind only on the anti-restriction, anti-lockdown part of the tory party, clearly thought this was him showing how 'restrained' he's been in not following the SAGE recommendations... seemingly forgetting entirely everybody else who are sat there gawping open mouthed at his astounding recklessness
If the last lock-down taught us anything when viewed across multiple countries it's that early harsh lock-downs lead to fewer deaths and can be eased sooner - probably with less effect on the economy.
It's looking like the scientists learnt that lesson, but not the politicians.
Having said that, politicians also know (more than scientists) that you need to wait until public opinion is on your side. A harsh lock-down three weeks ago might have led to lots of people ignoring it.
Yes, I think there's truth in that. But I'm mindful that there are a lot of (mainly older, perhaps single, guys/gals) who rely on pubs, during the day, as their only point of social contact. I think we've all seen them in city centers, nursing their pints, watching the telly and just people watching. I feel for these 'fellahs' who don't have the cash for a meal. This is feeding a burgeoning mental health issue (no pun intended) . Especially when those who can't now afford a pint (and the obligatory meal) have to watch those who can, sit in their pubs scoffing and quaffing. A form of unintended social exclusion, increasing the sense of heightened social alienation for some more vulnerable members of our society.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellbeast
The mayor of Middlesborough also made a salient point on the radio this morning, commenting how pubs in his area (inner city/urban) who cater for 'our fellah' above, or who don't have the clientele inclined to eat out, have to close effectively due to a devastation of their customer base. As they're not in Tier 3 they also don't receive any financial support from the Government. It's lose-lose.
Maybe a complete closure of all pubs (with all receiving financial support)would have been a better option and less divisive between the better of and those less well financially equipped, as well as dealing the virus a more effective blow? Not an easy call I appreciate.
I missed those early, hard lockdowns that worked in the Western world. Of course if you look in the Far East which have probably don ebetter for different reasons, or you consider the cul-de-sac New Zealand maybe.Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
But New Zealand will have to lock down until the arrival of the messiah vaccine. At what cost?
It's not just early lockdowns, it's what happens when you lift it. We came out of lockdown when there were still too many deaths and infections. But the key to success seems to be a track and trace system that works and people who will self-isolate when told to. Two things we don't seem to have.Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
Sweden, (remember them, the country that didn't lock down), are also experiencing a second wave, or more of a ripple in their case. Anyone able to explain how a country that didn't lock down also has a second wave/ripple, and at roughly the same time as us?
Good question. Is it just because people are returning to more "normal" ways of living after initially being more cautious? I'm guessing you can't blame it on movement of people from other countries.
Are you sure its a cul-de-sac? Sure their tourist industry, airlines and airports will suffer but their full in country economy and exports and imports and whatnot will all carry on and, to a degree, some of their tourism will be filled by New Zealanders staying in country. NZ are also working with Australia to at least open up travel between themselves tooQuote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
Because ultimately, when the rules forbid normal behaviour, it becomes normal behaviour to break the rules. Particularly when the rules are accompanied by a range of half-hearted, contradictory, self-defeating messages. So infection rates (sorry WP, 'cases') inevitably rise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
The succession of lockdowns and restrictions, across the world, won't be ended by an effective vaccine (there won't be one any time soon, if ever) or some other miracle. They'll be ended by the sheer economic necesiity of it all, when countries can no longer afford to ban or restrict commercial behaviours, that provide employment and also tax to the treasury.
I also don't think there will be a 'messiah' vaccine but there will be an effective vaccine which will allow countries to gradually open up, albeit still I'm sure with testing and quarantining in certain circumstances. They will be the same for us as with any other country but with certain other countries protecting their population much much better than others
Their economy has still suffered along with everybody else's and they've had 10 times the mortality than their neighbouring countries in the process. I read somewhere (an article in the Times I think) that they had been hoping that they'd have reached circa 40% herd immunity by now, following their covid strategy, but when recently estimated its now more like 6% of their population have anti-bodies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
That said bravo to Sweden but they're not out of the woods yet. I do think the far far far lower population density and their cultural stand-offishness go a long way to explain their success (if you can call it that) so far
He's got a downer on NZ, for some reason. Rugby, I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellbeast
Eeeeeee...Stolly. That's a bit close to the knuckle lad! I love Swedes, me!Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellbeast
I prefer a turnipQuote:
Originally Posted by Mossdog
Haha to be fair I’d plonk myself firmly in the ‘culturally stand-offish’ camp too :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mossdog
This conversation is bring back bad memories of the 1992 European Championships and Graham Taylor.
Swedes 2 Turnips 1
Good memories of Abba for me.:pQuote:
Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever
Really? On the same measurement base?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellbeast
Or is that Stolly Hyperbola?
When you won't be able to see the woods for the Swedes? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellbeast
There you go:Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EkMpMuNX...g&name=900x900
In particular look to see where Norway, Denmark and Finland are ;)
Thank you. That is a very interesting chart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellbeast
Particularly if you are a resident of Norway or Finland.
I'm not sure it has taught us this. Peru locked down hard and early and has the worst death rate in the world (bar tiny San Marino). In Europe, Belgium locked down hard and early and has the worst death rate in Europe. It also hasn't prevented them having a second wave, with case numbers which are at the moment worse than ours proportionate to their population. Meanwhile, Japan only had restrictions on a par with Sweden and didn't bother overmuch with any of that testing malarky. They have 1,629 deaths from Covid, which is less than Ireland despite having 25 times the population.Quote:
Originally Posted by noel
So it suggests there are many other factors at play which determine the success or otherwise of a country in coping with the virus. Certainly population density, which is one of the reason why we have done badly (like Belgium) and perhaps some acquired immunity in the far east from exposure to previous coronaviruses.
Lockdowns if they are complied with or enforced do seem to suppress the virus eventually but only for a while. Even if you get numbers down to very small numbers the virus will just pop up again once restrictions are eased as is happening all over Europe. And at what cost to livelihoods, mental health and other medical conditions?
Yep, with the U.K. pretty going for maximum bungle on both axesQuote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
Presumably because the fundamentals eg population density, societal behaviour...have not changed?Quote:
Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever