Coronavirus (2021) thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Healdplace said:
Nicola announces raft of new stricter measures.

Click and collect on all but essential items will be banned.

And stricter rules on collection of those still allowed introduced as these are considered key areas where the virus is spreading.

Takeaways will also ONLY be allowed to use a hatch and serve people stood outside. Not allowed in the premises at all.

All alcohol drinking out doors will be banned too as you should only leave home for essential purposes not to socialise. She knows it will be unpopular but 'a necessary means to an end'.

Also introducing statutory measures to make working from home the rule where possible not an option companies allow or disallow at their choice.

I know people on here dislike her but we need strong leaders at times like this not waffle and dither.

You cannot say she declines to do the hard things if indeed necessary.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately some on here will never give her credit for anything. She has shown more leadership than Johnson ever will.
 
Healdplace said:
My bet is its way more than that.
Click to expand...

Without wanting to be too churlish, Bluemoon bets rank lower than published science in my hierarchy of knowledge!

Best estimates of UK population infected are around 20%. So around 80% still susceptible. Quite a bit of uncertainty around that number of course.
 
Healdplace said:
You cannot say she declines to do the hard things if indeed necessary.
Click to expand...
With Scotland having a subsidised economy, of course she can appear stricter. Locking down earlier and re-opening later.
She comes across like somebody on benefits or who get paid regardless, telling people like me who are self employed that i should stop work to protect others.
I'm not being political, but in the real world, these decision affect some more than others.
 
Sc
BlueAnorak said:
I'm going by the
Click to expand...
Yes I understand those tests are a good guide. But so are the numbers who have definitely had it and urban areas very obviously will be much higher than an average across the UK as this is a virus that thrives on people being close together.

Then there is the mortality rate. IF the 5 or 6% for Greater Manchester we know from the tests is true then the mortality rate here is well over 2%.

It is very unlikely that it is anywhere near that high. Which most medical sources agree.

So that alone allows a calculation of the likely extra numbers who must have had it to create a credible mortality rate.

Either way you look it has to be a lot more than actually know from positive tests they did have it.
 
Eds said:
More good news by the sounds of it https://www.hsj.co.uk/coronavirus/u...ast-for-first-time-since-xmas/7029235.article
Click to expand...
That fits the England hospital data I posted last night in here where I noted that this was happening (London ventilator numbers have noticeably slowed).

The other story in that data I posted last night was it is still going up in the South West and both the Midlands and the North West are now more at risk of being overwhelmed.

North West is a day or two away from exceeding the number on ventilators in April at the peak. And already has many more in hospital than then.

Most Southern regions had already surpassed their April patients and ventilator numbers but are starting to stabilise.

There is a complete list of all England regions and patients and ventilated patients and increases in past 24 hours and past 7 days if you want to check it out.

JUst search on my user name above. It will likely be on page 2 of the list as it was from evening last night.
 
Rammy Blue said:
Out of interest, funny how comments about alcohol always get my notice, but what is this “drinking alcohol outdoors” bit all about? Can’t say I thought it was currently allowed and where the fuck would you do that?
Click to expand...
Swigging from a bottle of Buckfast at a bus stop. That's not a stereotype, I've seen it first hand on visits to Scotland.
 
Healdplace said:
Either way you look it has to be a lot more than actually know from positive tests they did have it.
Click to expand...

For sure, nobody would dispute that. In wave one, you didn't even get a test unless hospitalised.

Seroprevalance (blood antibody tests) are generally used to assess how many people have had it.
 
roubaixtuesday said:
Without wanting to be too churlish, Bluemoon bets rank lower than published science in my hierarchy of knowledge!

Best estimates of UK population infected are around 20%. So around 80% still susceptible. Quite a bit of uncertainty around that number of course.
Click to expand...

Yes but rural areas will have much lower percentages than big urban areas so an average of 20% might well be true with nearer 50% in big cities.

This is not a pandemic that spreads equally.
 
Healdplace said:
Yes but rural areas will have much lower percentages than big urban areas so an average of 20% might well be true with nearer 50% in big cities.

This is not a pandemic that spreads equally.
Click to expand...

Sure, agree entirely. And there will likely be big differences between cities too.
 
roubaixtuesday said:
For sure, nobody would dispute that. In wave one, you didn't even get a test unless hospitalised.

Seroprevalance (blood antibody tests) are generally used to assess how many people have had it.
Click to expand...
But does that not assume they would still have evidence or even got sick enough to mount a response visible months later?


Its a better guide to a minimum level. But I think that may be all it is.
 
fulabeer said:
With Scotland having a subsidised economy, of course she can appear stricter. Locking down earlier and re-opening later.
She comes across like somebody on benefits or who get paid regardless, telling people like me who are self employed that i should stop work to protect others.
I'm not being political, but in the real world, these decision affect some more than others.
Click to expand...

No disrespect, but I think you place far too much weight on this supposed subsidised economy. Westminster treasury has the money. It's posed no problems when donating billions to their pals for ridiculous contracts which serves nobody, so don't let them kid you they're so hard pressed whilst Holyrood can squander money on whatever they like - it doesn't work at all like that.
 
fulabeer said:
With Scotland having a subsidised economy, of course she can appear stricter. Locking down earlier and re-opening later.
She comes across like somebody on benefits or who get paid regardless, telling people like me who are self employed that i should stop work to protect others.
I'm not being political, but in the real world, these decision affect some more than others.
Click to expand...

You are being completely political. Your opening sentence sets the tone and you stick to it in the rest of the post.
 
I guess we will find out as if the level is way below 50% still we have a race on and many weeks of awful numbers.

If they do start to wane before the vaccines take effect either lockdown really is working or the numbers of those susceptible are lower than we suspect.
 
Healdplace said:
But does that not assume they would still have evidence or even got sick enough to mount a response visible months later?
Click to expand...

There's problems with any methodology, yes. Assumptions have to be made, and models used to fill the gaps. But there seems to be good agreement that however assessed, the vast majority of people are yet to be affected nationwide. And then there are second order questions like how much protection having been infected gives both soon after and into the future.

As you point out, of course, that doesn't mean in some localities, infection has been quite different, both up and down.
 
I agree we cannot assume anything on immunity or levels of 'herd immunity' but they may well yet prove the hidden factor that gets us out of this. Like in War of the Worlds humanity being less susceptible to a cold virus than martians because we had lived with it for so long ended up turning the tide when all looked doomed
 
Healdplace said:
I guess we will find out as if the level is way below 50% still we have a race on and many weeks of awful numbers.

If they do start to wane before the vaccines take effect either lockdown really is working or the numbers of those susceptible are lower than we suspect.
Click to expand...

Numbers are a function of social distancing as well as prevalence.

The last week's case numbers strongly suggest that the social distancing imposed by lockdown has had a strong effect (there's no way the *total* infected has changed significantly in a week, even with current transmission)
 
Scotland figures pretty bad in every aspect today, last few days had looked a bit more positive in some aspects but today's a dampener.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top