Coronavirus (2021) thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Churchlawtonblue said:
the fact remains it is much much less tranmissable outdoors. Thats the reason.
Click to expand...
Beach crowds and park numbers past pretty much confirm there's an extraordinarily low risk to the public outdoors.
My only concern would be the hygiene protocols adopted by bar and restaurant staff when handling empty glasses and cutlery. Other than that all should be good.
 
Healdplace said:
The truth is as I noted he just did not explain properly. He was telling the truth - cases likely will rise as we reopen - just waffling around it so much the message that came out was misleading and misguided.

The vaccination is not the main reason cases are low. But he ought to have made clear it IS why hospital data and deaths have flatlined and THAT matters much more right now.

It is the advisors I blame. The messaging through the pandemic has been a shambles at times.
Click to expand...

The government, especially the prime minister, need to understand they have to be very careful how they answer questions and the statements they make. A lot of people are on the edge and have really had enough right now. Don't keep telling us the vaccinations are our way out and then when over half the country have had one dose at least imply they're not. Whether that's what he actually meant or not he has to stop being so careless in his choice of words. As for the media they are just scum on the whole

Thanks though for your input. I'm sure I speak for many when I say your posts and those of a few others on here have kept many of us sane....just
 
abu13 said:
Quite sobering to hear Gordon Brown talking about the need to vaccinate world wide.

It's so easy to look at our vaccination success and how the numbers have dropped due to the lockdown, add in the lifting of some restrictions and the light nights things look to be quite rosey in the garden.

Then you realise that this could all be in vain if other countries can't do the same and the virus continues to mutate and in the worst case to a variation that is resilient against the current vaccines.
Click to expand...
To his credit he was actually calling for a global unified approach to the pandemic back last April and explaining how it was counterproductive to tackle the multiple issues in isolation- he’s one of the few politicians that actually seems genuinely to give a shit about the well being of other people.

Wouldn’t trust him with my gold though.
 
03 March 2002 said:
Does it?
Click to expand...
If the alternative is available. Clotting is the reason for severe COVID cases. This drug can also cause clotting. I really can't see why they'd risk that complication. The risk of two factors that affect the same mechanism can be far greater than the sum of the two. If the alternative is available, I hope they do move on.

Admittedly sometimes this sort of thing is ignored - suicidality in the young who are prescribed SSRI's, still they are prescribed. But the NHS is not already at risk of being overwhelmed by suicidal teenagers.

The decision is not easy. But I'm arguing, if the supplies are there, I think we really ought to take whatever advantages we can. And we really need as much and as high quality clinical and statistical data on COVID as soon as possible - the virus will not disappear, we have little idea what happens to people who get reinfected, or what the effect may be on those who 'escaped' with a mild infection. And vaccines will not end the war any time soon. The onus is surely on the 'other' side to justify using a vaccine that may interfere and complicate things.

TBH, I believe that's what will happen, it will remain in use, albeit in a restricted fashion. But it really has to be argued and thought through to the ends of the earth. Arguments have to be as strong as possible on both sides. I'm clearly of a mind that adding complicating factors and risk factors along the same lines as the virus would require all other options to be exhausted.
 
BlueAnorak said:
If it was the beach swarming and BLM protests would have created massive spikes last summer.
Click to expand...
We don't know that... honest to god. There's no way to quantify how the whole host of other epidemiological factors affected the situation at any one time.

Seems we're getting perilously close to just rehashing SAGE's infamous early assumptions.
 
Summerbuzz said:
We don't know that... honest to god. There's no way to quantify how the whole host of other epidemiological factors affected the situation at any one time.

Seems we're getting perilously close to just rehashing SAGE's infamous early assumptions.
Click to expand...
But we do.
Plenty of evidence on the CDC web site and elsewhere. This particular article is a report on a paper from the Robert Koch Institute in Germany:
www.dw.com

The risk of catching coronavirus outdoors – DW – 03/06/2021

As milder temperatures set in, the urge to flock outdoors is growing. Just how great is the danger of contracting the coronavirus in open-air settings? Does it make sense to wear masks? DW spoke to experts to find out.
www.dw.com www.dw.com
 
Gaylord du Bois said:
Beach crowds and park numbers past pretty much confirm there's an extraordinarily low risk to the public outdoors.
My only concern would be the hygiene protocols adopted by bar and restaurant staff when handling empty glasses and cutlery. Other than that all should be good.
Click to expand...
There's a few new pressures I agree, it's not quite as simple as "outdoors = way less risk" as some of the new activities create new choke points, so to speak, such as glass handling, toilets and infection control, drunken less inhibited behaviours, touching things in shops etc etc. I still think this is not going to cause a big rise in infection. There might a plateau, a blip, there might be nothing at all, but I don't think it'll trigger a full on wave. Give it ten days or so to get an idea then it's all eyes on May 17th, should it stick to that.
 
ctwrd said:
The fact remains that it is more complicated than outdoors versus indoors. That’s the issue.
Click to expand...
No its not, You asked why people couldnt meet up inside yet could outside and I explained why. Its you that are complicating the issue i think. Its been like this for a year, its staggering that you still dont understand the science behind this decision.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
No its not, You asked why people couldnt meet up inside yet could outside and I explained why. Its you that are complicating the issue i think. Its been like this for a year, its staggering that you still dont understand the science behind this decision.
Click to expand...
I didn’t ask anyone anything.
It’s been a year which is long enough for nuanced discussion and advice on this.
I do understand the science but thanks for being so patronising.
 
ctwrd said:
It’s an opinion not a question.

a bit like you just used a ? But did not actually ask a question
Click to expand...
The word 'Why' made me think it was a question.

Anyway I guess we are both bored of this so lets move on.

Here's a question for you and anybody else, if we look at the shockingly high infection rates now in India do you think its correct to assume that China had similar levels before their state gov covered them up. Given that they are both incredibly crowded societies with low levels of health care expenditure per person.
 
GM Weekly Pop Data after today:~

Borough / Pop Today / 7 days ago / up or down wk to wk/ Testing is % of local population who have tested positive for Covid over past year.

As ever with Pop going up is bad, going down good - the higher the number the better or worse depending on direction moving. The Pop is total cases in past week versus 100,000 POPulation to even out the comparison versus size and expected cases based on numbers living there.


Oldham 53 / 61 Down 8 Testing positive 9.7%

Rochdale 41 / 70 / Down 29 Testing positive 9.5%

Manchester 38 / 66 / Down 28 Testing positive 9.5%

Bolton 33 / 63 / Down 30 Testing positive 9.0%

Wigan 31 / 53 / Down 22 Testing positive 8.8%

Salford 27 / 49 / Down 22 Testing positive 8.9%

Stockport 23 / 50 / Down 27 Testing positive 7.1%

Tameside 19 / 68 / Down 49 Testing positive 8.1%

Trafford 18 / 43 / Down 25 Testing positive 6.9%

Bury 18 / 49 / Down 31 Testing positive 9.0%



Bury and Trafford neck and neck and Tameside right there too. Oldham having problems at the moment.



Weekly cases:-

Bury 33, Tameside 44, Trafford 44, Stockport 67, Salford 68, Rochdale 91, Bolton 98, Wigan 102, Oldham 125, Manchester 211
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
The word 'Why' made me think it was a question.

Anyway I guess we are both bored of this so lets move on.

Here's a question for you and anybody else, if we look at the shockingly high infection rates now in India do you think its correct to assume that China had similar levels before their state gov covered them up. Given that they are both incredibly crowded societies with low levels of health care expenditure per person.
Click to expand...
Yes.
And who is making money out of selling testing kits and PPE worldwide?
One of the weirdest things about this is how the coverage of covid in China appeared to just disappear after a few months last year and we are led to believe that they managed to get rid of it.
I suspect that the truth is that there has been a permanent lockdown and control that hasn’t been reported.
 
roubaixtuesday said:
Fuck off, he said no such thing.
Click to expand...
So why did he say that lockdowns are the reason death rates and hospitalisations are only falling due to lockdown and not vaccines?
Then he tells us that cases, hospitalisations and deaths are bound to go up and you think he’s not laying the foundations for another lockdown?
Fair enough, if that’s what you think, let’s just hope you’re right.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...-not-vaccinations-says-boris-johnson-12274266
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top