COVID-19 — Coronavirus

[kevin horlocks wand]

It's gone. People just aren't complying, for whatever reason. Plus, all schools, unis are open so any and all other measures are rendered pretty much redundant.

some people aren’t , but most are.

when are we going to actually analyse whether the measures actually make things better At controlling the disease.

eg Manchester has had extra restrictions since end of July but has the highest cases and we are the worst In the country

now let’s compare to London with just the general measures and compare and contrast.

you're not suggesting the people in London are restricting their movements and activities even more than the restrictions in Manchester Are you?

why is london doing better than Manchester ?

 

[johnnytapia]

I would like to think that way but not convinced sadly, try stopping an EU national living here that has just been back to the continent to see how his new build is going, not going to happen.

National powers allow us to take actions without complying with statutory duties that we'd normally have to comply with. We could have allowed EU citizens with residence here to come back, but quarantined them in some shithole hotel miles from where they lived, a la New Zealand's policy. That soon weeded out the genuine folk over there.

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

Reinfection rate..... will dig out the 60% article, there has to be a reason why their reinfection rate is massively less than ours when compared to the overall population.

Sweden 4772 new infections over the last 14 days, the UK 116946.

Why is our current (over the last 14 days) infection rate 24 times that of Sweden when our population is only 6 times that of Sweden? The theory is the herd immunity principle - what else could it be?

There is a substantial difference in population PER SQUARE Mile, and according to google search engine, Sweden has a population of 57.5 people per square mile. Great Britain has a population of 1010 people per square mile, a substantial difference. From this I would deduce that Swedes have little reason to worry about social distancing except in towns and cities in the south of the country.

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

There is a substantial difference in population PER SQUARE Mile, and according to google search engine, Sweden has a population of 57.5 people per square mile. Great Britain has a population of 1010 people per square mile, a substantial difference. From this I would deduce that Swedes have little reason to worry about social distancing except in towns and cities in the south of the country.

so by your logic London is the most densely populated city in England why is it not so much worse than other less densely populated places in England , yet doing much better.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

some people aren’t , but most are.

when are we going to actually analyse whether the measures actually make things better At controlling the disease.

eg Manchester has had extra restrictions since end of July but has the highest cases and we are the worst In the country

now let’s compare to London with just the general measures and compare and contrast.

you're not suggesting the people in London are restricting their movements and activities even more than the restrictions in Manchester Are you?

why is london doing better than Manchester ?

Leicester had lockdown restrictions for over 90 days, with no idea what the plan is to get them out of it.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

some people aren’t , but most are.

when are we going to actually analyse whether the measures actually make things better At controlling the disease.

eg Manchester has had extra restrictions since end of July but has the highest cases and we are the worst In the country

now let’s compare to London with just the general measures and compare and contrast.

you're not suggesting the people in London are restricting their movements and activities even more than the restrictions in Manchester Are you?

why is london doing better than Manchester ?

its a weird one for sure. My daughter has caught it and has no idea how she has done. I think it is much more contagious than most of us realise.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

Reinfection rate..... will dig out the 60% article, there has to be a reason why their reinfection rate is massively less than ours when compared to the overall population.

Sweden 4772 new infections over the last 14 days, the UK 116946.

Why is our current (over the last 14 days) infection rate 24 times that of Sweden when our population is only 6 times that of Sweden? The theory is the herd immunity principle - what else could it be?

Any chance of comparing Sweden with New Zealand?

 

[Bovril]

National powers allow us to take actions without complying with statutory duties that we'd normally have to comply with. We could have allowed EU citizens with residence here to come back, but quarantined them in some shithole hotel miles from where they lived, a la New Zealand's policy. That soon weeded out the genuine folk over there.

The Eu if we took that stance would be outraged and demand Gibraltar or fear of repercussions in trade, we just have to take it on the chin it is what it is at the moment. We cannot do a NZ although we should if we could.

 

[True_Blue69]

so by your logic London is the most densely populated city in England why is it not so much worse than other less densely populated places in England , yet doing much better.

It has to be down to the number who caught it earlier in the year. I said this at the time that those 3 weeks that London was ahead of us (and Italy) may turn out to be a good thing in the long run and that's how it's panning out.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

There is a substantial difference in population PER SQUARE Mile, and according to google search engine, Sweden has a population of 57.5 people per square mile. Great Britain has a population of 1010 people per square mile, a substantial difference. From this I would deduce that Swedes have little reason to worry about social distancing except in towns and cities in the south of the country.

Although Stockholm has a population density of 13000 per square mile, which is more than Manchester.