Coronavirus

[molehill]

The reporting, or lack of in depth reporting frustrates me. On Anglesey there is an outbreak in a chicken processing factory, so far 158 positives from 400 tested.
I would like some info on how they think this was transmitted so widely, were they ignoring distancing, all using a canteen, from the toilets? The virus doesn't have little wings and flying about.

I would also be interested in the reactions of those infected. How many have very mild symptoms, severe, hospital, age and general health. There is lot that could be looked into and investigated.

[Mike T]

The reporting, or lack of in depth reporting frustrates me. On Anglesey there is an outbreak in a chicken processing factory, so far 158 positives from 400 tested.
I would like some info on how they think this was transmitted so widely, were they ignoring distancing, all using a canteen, from the toilets? The virus doesn't have little wings and flying about.

I would also be interested in the reactions of those infected. How many have very mild symptoms, severe, hospital, age and general health. There is lot that could be looked into and investigated.

So about 40% positive - almost certainly more have it, given the false negative rate of the tests. There have been lots of similar high %s in enclosed spaces - choirs, factories, clubs, restaurants, call centres. This makes the idea that most of the population is resistant very unlikely to be correct. The incidence is falling in some countries because of closed businesses and distancing, not because of resistance or because the virus is fading away. Look at South America - awful.

[Mike T]

Interesting data from Florida - the median age of those testing positive has gone from 65 to 35 in 16 weeks - this would mean huge reduction in the death rate. So the older folk and the younger folk must be behaving rather differently.

[Graham Breeze]

Interesting data from Florida - the median age of those testing positive has gone from 65 to 35 in 16 weeks - this would mean huge reduction in the death rate. So the older folk and the younger folk must be behaving rather differently.

Now they are informed: older people are careful because Covid 19 might kill them - which concentrates the mind.

Young people believe that it won't - so are indifferent to any risk.

It is old people who are wearing mouth covering - not teenagers.

[Witton Park]

Now they are informed: older people are careful because Covid 19 might kill them - which concentrates the mind.

Young people believe that it won't - so are indifferent to any risk.

It is old people who are wearing mouth covering - not teenagers.

I think it's slightly different. When lockdown came in, which was March 23rd, I went out on my daily walks, mostly long ones, and it was mostly people older than me that I saw out there. My wife and I often commented that we'd be the same in their situation, refusing to stay at home and veg out in front of the TV.
My next door neighbour in her 80s has been out on the canal for a walk every day. I've "caught her" doing more than one activity a day as far back as week 2. She's also had people to her house for company, sometimes sitting in her garden with them long before the guidance was relaxed.
The lady across the road, in her 70s, has been a little more careful, but I took her bin in one day in April and the gate at the side was open, so I went around the back and there she was with a lady who lives about 5 houses away, sat out on her patio having a glass of wine in the sun and feeling a little embarrassed I'd rumbled them
I noted even yourself Graham has weaved your way up and down the canal on your bike and on the canal of course it's nigh on impossible to keep to the 2m.

So the elderly have responsibly pushed beyond the guidance from the start.

I think in the last few weeks in particular, young folk have got fed up. Sat at home, watching the BLM crowds and no action taken, and we have now had quite a few old style raves across the North West.

I note even in Portugal, in Lagos on the Algarve, there was a huge party which has caused a mini, localised breakout and that was mainly the young.

This was always the concern of an extended lockdown from the start. It was felt it could be maintained for 3-5 weeks.
We are now in to week 14.

I'm just amazed it's held together at all for so long.

[molehill]

[I
This was always the concern of an extended lockdown from the start. It was felt it could be maintained for 3-5 weeks.
We are now in to week 14.[/I]

I always understood this being the reason the lockdown was not called earlier, all about timing to cover the potential peak and how long the public would comply with it.
Unfortunately this was never taken into account by the critics of government policy, "if lockdown had started a week earlier it would have saved"....etc. Well of course it would, in theory, but that doesn't take into account projected public response to lockdown. I don't think people took it seriously enough anyway, look at the countrywide scenes the weekend before official lockdown.
Much has been about timing, only in retrospect long after the crisis is over will they be able to see where and when all countries got decisions right or wrong.

[Fellbeast]

I always understood this being the reason the lockdown was not called earlier, all about timing to cover the potential peak and how long the public would comply with it.
Unfortunately this was never taken into account by the critics of government policy, "if lockdown had started a week earlier it would have saved"....etc. Well of course it would, in theory, but that doesn't take into account projected public response to lockdown. I don't think people took it seriously enough anyway, look at the countrywide scenes the weekend before official lockdown.

As proven (not) by countries that did take action sooner like Germany? New Zealand? They locked down earlier and could therefore un-lockdown sooner

[Witton Park]

[I
This was always the concern of an extended lockdown from the start. It was felt it could be maintained for 3-5 weeks.
We are now in to week 14.[/I]

I always understood this being the reason the lockdown was not called earlier, all about timing to cover the potential peak and how long the public would comply with it.
Unfortunately this was never taken into account by the critics of government policy, "if lockdown had started a week earlier it would have saved"....etc. Well of course it would, in theory, but that doesn't take into account projected public response to lockdown. I don't think people took it seriously enough anyway, look at the countrywide scenes the weekend before official lockdown.
Much has been about timing, only in retrospect long after the crisis is over will they be able to see where and when all countries got decisions right or wrong.

Some people and the occasional troll will point to countries that locked down earlier. They might mention New Zealand, that cul-de-sac on the opposite side of the world; what a great example!
A bit like comparing Ashness Bridge and Thelwall Viaduct for vehicle movements.
They might mention Germany, which is a more relevant comparison to UK, but still has a population density lower than UK and almost half of England and they also have a International Air Hub at Frankfurt that is 10% of the population of London and doesn't attract tourist stop offs.
They probably won't mention France, Italy, Belgium, Spain...

[Fellbeast]

Some people and the occasional troll will point to countries that locked down earlier. They might mention New Zealand, that cul-de-sac on the opposite side of the world; what a great example!
A bit like comparing Ashness Bridge and Thelwall Viaduct for vehicle movements.
They might mention Germany, which is a more relevant comparison to UK, but still has a population density lower than UK and almost half of England and they also have a International Air Hub at Frankfurt that is 10% of the population of London and doesn't attract tourist stop offs.
They probably won't mention France, Italy, Belgium, Spain...

In many ways we could’ve learned from Italy and Spain and chose not to. Also South Korea and Japan. Wasn’t South Korea’s pandemic playbook copied line for line from our own? But they just chose to actually implement it?

[Graham Breeze]

A bit like comparing Ashness Bridge and Thelwall Viaduct for vehicle movements.

Well that's a change from "apples and pears"

Thoughts from the towpath:

Hindsight is not 100%.

You can't change the past.

Anecdote is an inadequate basis for decision making.

People making decisions are flawed and if they are politicians corrupted by political self-interest.

There is always a reason for a decision/ action - although it may not be a sound or laudable one. The reason is rarely discovered or revealed or admitted.

Everyone including Governments, plcs,... temper the message to what the recipient will accept. There is no such thing as truth (I recommend the book Corporate Discourse on the subject - not only because I am thanked in the preface for my insights!).

People often prefer to be given a simple message so they don't have to think or research for themselves and accept responsibility for their own actions. (Think fell runners and navigation!).

It is naive to think that Ministers are really very clever people with huge brains that know far more than ordinary mortals and always make the right decisions - even supposing there is such a thing as the "right" decision - ie "right" for whom?

For the government to issue "guidance" that was equally applicable to rush hour crowds on the London Underground and walkers on the top of Pen y Ghent in a gale, might have been inherently slightly flawed: but then even "Thou Shall Not Kill" is not always applicable.

One should not generalise from the particular but equally generalisations do not apply in all circumstances!