unicorn
Well-Known Member
Seemed to be more in the ground than they'd get in a normal league match.Large numbers of people sat behind the goal too. Doubt they’d have got away with this back in April.
Seemed to be more in the ground than they'd get in a normal league match.Large numbers of people sat behind the goal too. Doubt they’d have got away with this back in April.
Seemed to be more in the ground than they'd get in a normal league match.
Yes, echoing this thread about 3 days ago, interesting. If Boris hits the 13 mill target and infections begin to wane from now to then, you can expect around 40 to 45% to have had covid or had jab number 1 by mid febThis article in the Guardian suggests around 22% of people in England have had Covid. Some areas are at 40% with Manchester at 36%.
One in five in England have had Covid, modelling suggests
Analysis shows 12.4 million people infected since start of pandemic, against 2.4 million detected by test and tracewww.theguardian.com
In my total ignorance surely this should mean the R rate and hospitalisations and deaths should start to come down, unless people can and are catching it again soon after and immunity is short lived?This article in the Guardian suggests around 22% of people in England have had Covid. Some areas are at 40% with Manchester at 36%.
One in five in England have had Covid, modelling suggests
Analysis shows 12.4 million people infected since start of pandemic, against 2.4 million detected by test and tracewww.theguardian.com
That's a really helpful piece.@Healdplace re the guesses on % infected, new modelling suggesting about 20% nationwide, Manchester near 40%
You can look at any local authority.
One in five in England have had Covid, modelling suggests
Analysis shows 12.4 million people infected since start of pandemic, against 2.4 million detected by test and tracewww.theguardian.com
Hasn't a City player had it twice a few months apart? Or tested positive which may not necessarily be the same thing.In my total ignorance surely this should mean the R rate and hospitalisations and deaths should start to come down, unless people can and are catching it again soon after and immunity is short lived?
That's a really helpful piece.
With an estimated 1 in 5 infected in England and c.70,000 deaths to date in a population of 53 million I make that a death to infection rate of about 0.7%. Obviously long-term effects significant and potentially far harder to count.
Does that sound about right ?
In my total ignorance surely this should mean the R rate and hospitalisations and deaths should start to come down, unless people can and are catching it again soon after and immunity is short lived?