COVID-19 — Coronavirus

Status
Not open for further replies.
You also fail to note that the reality is the government (and any sensible person who understands science) want our youth to catch it - just not at the explosive infection rates that are currently seeing. This is essential for herd immunity and managing bad virus mutations. For example, we should have been running Covid-19-30 holidays on cruise ships since May.
Sorry but I think this is not right. The massive flaw in that argument is that pervasive infection rates in the young, inevitably lead to much higher infection rates in the vulnerable. We cannot segregate 18 to 25 year olds completely from the 25 to 50 year olds nor them from the 50 to 90 year olds. We are something like 92% NOT infected yet and look how it spreads already. With many more young people infected, the infection rates in the vulnerable groups - and the associated critical illness and death WOULD get out of control.
 
Massive amounts of COVID money that was allocated to local councils seems to be being spunked on the councils pet projects they always wanted to do but never had the money or power to get done. Here in Sheffield it's seen bike lanes being put everywhere, parking spaces being replaced with planters and all manner of anti-car, pro green nonsense that's costing a fortune and making everyones lives more difficult. All projects they'd attempted before but got hugely opposed by the communities as they are terrible ideas that just make traffic worse and hurt local businesses.

Emailed the councillor and he essentially replied that under the COVID rules he has the power to do whatever he wants until the end of April without any consultation or appeals process, pretty much as long as he can pretend it has anything vaguely to do with COVID. Talked to the trade group we're a part of and apparently it's going on up and down the country.
 
Wales data - also I guess not starting a second wave . But in reality, sadly.....

2 deaths and 389 cases (highest ever) at 4.0% of tests. Also a record.

Versus last week 0 deaths v 2 deaths, 199 cases v 389 cases and 2.0% v 4.0%

That looks to me like a doubling here in 7 days just like Scotland and England.
 
That isn't at all what I said. I was asked what I believe would consist of a 'second wave' and I said a wave would only be a 'wave' if the numbers were over and above the normal seasonal deaths we have. People on here are aware that human beings did die before covid-19, right?
Well the general idea of preventative medicine is to stop excess deaths some countries in Scandinavia and Germany barely had any but that does not mean they just had a 'seasonal variation' in March they had a wave of Covid which they took control of promptly.
 
Edit @twosips : this answers your post too.

The issue with crime and punishment is you need either very high levels of detection, combined with modest punishment. OR lower detection rates combined with massive punishment. You need one or the other.

If you have low detection rates - little chance of being caught - and light punishment if you are caught, then too many people will think "fuck it - they won't catch me and it's not the end of the world if they do".

People speed on roads because chances are there isn't a speed camera around the corner, and even if there is, it may not be active and even if it is, then it's only like £60 and not the end of the world. If we had a fixed £1,000 fine for speeding, most people would not speed: The chance of being caught might be slim, but the consequences if you are caught is severe. Or alternatively, we could have cameras everywhere. So it's only £60, but you ARE going to have pay it every day. That would work as well.

But if you combine bugger all chance of detection and bugger all punishment if you are caught (which is what we have with breaking COVID rules) it just means whole swathes of tossers choose to ignore the rules. We don't have the police bandwidth to be inside every shop, cafe etc. So we need severe punishment when we find people wilfully flouting the rules. They need to understand these rules are not optional.

I don't like this Soviet style rabbit hole we're going down, it's deeply uncomfortable.

I'd rather go with community service programs, or just enrol them in the clinical trials. If they don't care about catching or spreading Covid, they'll have no issue being used a guinea pig, surely?

I don't like the whole "spying on your neighbour and bringing in the army" narrative. The selfish bastards should be targeted, but not through the threatening of threatening normal everyday folk and unravelling any semblance we have left of a democracy.
 
That isn't at all what I said. I was asked what I believe would consist of a 'second wave' and I said a wave would only be a 'wave' if the numbers were over and above the normal seasonal deaths we have. People on here are aware that human beings did die before covid-19, right?
I think it's unarguable that there is definitely a second wave of infections. The level is probably less than 10% of the first wave at present, and it's only just starting to be reflected in increased deaths. The ONS figures you shared earlier were from a week or two ago when the increase in deaths was statistically insignificant (or hadn't happened yet). Hopefully the improved measures most people are taking will prevent the infection rate getting anywhere near March/April rates and hopefully we can keep the Covid death rates to a fraction of what they were.
 
Sorry but I think this is not right. The massive flaw in that argument is that pervasive infection rates in the young, inevitably lead to much higher infection rates in the vulnerable. We cannot segregate 18 to 25 year olds completely from the 25 to 50 year olds nor them from the 50 to 90 year olds. We are something like 92% NOT infected yet and look how it spreads already. With many more young people infected, the infection rates in the vulnerable groups - and the associated critical illness and death WOULD get out of control.
Hence why I suggested 3 week isolation in a cruise ship. Plenty available till the idea catches on.
 
Age/sex distribution of the 389 Wales cases: M/F

10 - 19 M 1.7% / F 1.8%
20 - 29 M 5.3% / F 9.6%
30 - 39 M 5.5% / F 9,0%
40 - 49 M 5.4% / F 10.2%
50 - 59 M 6.5% / F 12.0%
60 - 69 M 4.0% / F 5.1%
70 - 79 M 4.5% / F 3.6%
80 - 89 M 4.4% / F 5.3%
90+ aprx 1% / F 3.2

The others to make up 100% are under 10

You can see two things here - there is a higher number of 60 and over testing positive than elsewhere. Which will feed into increased deaths in Wales sadly. May be care home problems.

And also the sex make up is different now than earlier in the pandemic. More women in pretty much every age range are testing positive. That was always true in the older ages simply as women tend to live longer and so numbers were higher over 80. But in the middle age groups it used to be the other way round.
 
Age/sex distribution of thw 389 Wales cases: M/F

10 - 19 M 1.7% / F 1.8%
20 - 29 M 5.3% / F 9.6%
30 - 39 M 5.5% / F 9,0%
40 - 49 M 5.4% / F 10.2%
50 - 59 M 6.5% / F 12.0%
60 - 69 M 4.0% / F 5.1%
70 - 79 M 4.5% / F 3.6%
80 - 89 M 4.4% / F 5.3%
90+ aprx 1% / F 3.2

The others to make up 100% are under 10

You can see teo things here - there is a high number of 60 and over testig positive than elsewhere. Which will feed inti increased deaths in Wales sadly. May be care home problems.

And also the sex make up is different now than earlier in the pandemic. More women in pretty much every age range are testing positive. That was always true in the older ages simply as women tend to live longer and so numbers were higher over 80. But in the middle age groups it used to be the other way round.

maybe a reflection on more women in hospitality and retail roles?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.