Mutating Corona Virus

[honeybee13]

Does anyone *get* the air bridge scheme that ministers want? To me, it just looks like smoke and mirrors.

 

They want Brits to be able to go on holiday, presumably the focus groups have mentioned this. Has any of this bunch considered whether other countries will want an air bridge when the rate of cases and fatalities isn't looking terribly smart?

 

If I was in a European government that has a low number of cases, I'd be thinking very carefully about letting people in from certain countries. The US press were saying this morning that other countries aren't keen on people from Russia, Brazil and the US. It might not take much for us to be on the same list.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jun/23/uk-ministers-talks-create-air-bridges-european-countries-italy-spain-holidays

[tobyjugg2]

a little dated now, but the real issues rather than Johnson jibberish

 

 

https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/news/can-british-holidaymakers-travel-to-eu-this-summer/

[cjcregg]

As I understand it it's the R number that the UK is looking at. The reason that the Government has only recently put in the 2 week quarantine rule is that it wasn't worth doing when our R number was above 1. Now it's hovering below that the UK will consider airbridge deals with nations whose R number is lower, though I doubt other countries will want them if the UK's rate is higher. So I can't see too many airbridge agreements anytime soon.

[tobyjugg2]

so how do you actually assess the R number when testing of the  population is avoided?

especially when in addition to that, what selected stats are presented simply dont add up

(no pun intended)

 

oh - and that when even the fudged stats start to look bad - they simply stop presenting them

 

 

The R number presented by the UK gov pretenders would appear to be the R number mostly; but not exclusively; for symptomatic people

Edited June 24, 2020 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

correction

 

significantly symptomatic people ...

[honeybee13]

I'll leave the R number discussion to you guys. TJ, it does make me think of Trump's genius solution the other day that if they don't test, they won't have as many cases.

 

This is an interesting comparison between the way the UK and Germany handled the epidemic. When the Paris area and eastern France had huge numbers of cases, Germany had sufficient beds available to take some patients.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/24/germany-coronavirus-britain-health-spending-test-trace

[tobyjugg2]

Some might think it 'Britain Bashing'

 

but its isn't.

As stated in the article

 

"In the summer of 1908, David Lloyd George did what Rishi Sunak should also do as soon as he is able. He went to Germany to discover in detail how they did it. In Lloyd George’s case, the purpose was to find out about Germany’s social welfare system. This was to provide the underpinning of his thinking for what became the “people’s budget” of 1909. Britain’s welfare state

– the lasting foundation stone of progressive politics in this country to this day – owes its origins to a government that was humble enough to learn from others. More than a century on, Johnson’s government lacks any equivalent understanding."

 

 

Johnson blusters something immaterial will be 'world beating

Others get on with examining whats needed and doing whats necessary, something Johnson and populists in general are simply incapable of.

 

 

[tobyjugg2]

Regarding the R number, when you look at what is being avoided JUST in 'untested 14 day lockdowns (who would largely only be tested if they end up ill enough to be rushed to hospital) is that the R number quoted by the gov is a minimum that they could half arguably claim 'thats all they know and what the (selected) stats were telling them

... at best

... even without fiddled stats.

 

[cjcregg]

Anyone with symptoms, including those in quarantine, can get a test. Just putting that here so people aren't misinformed.

[honeybee13]

If you mean a posted home test, the results aren't always conclusive.

[cjcregg]

24 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

If you mean a posted home test, the results aren't always conclusive.

 

Maybe, maybe not but that's irrelevant to the consideration of when people can get tersted. I'm just correcting the misleading statement that ''Regarding the R number, when you look at what is being avoided JUST in 'untested 14 day lockdowns (who would largely only be tested if they end up ill enough to be rushed to hospital)'' which is factually incorrect.

 

Anyone with symptoms can get tested  https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-getting-tested

 

Is that clear enough for you?

[tobyjugg2]

1 hour ago, cjcregg said:

 

Maybe, maybe not but that's irrelevant to the consideration of when people can get tersted. I'm just correcting the misleading statement that ''Regarding the R number, when you look at what is being avoided JUST in 'untested 14 day lockdowns (who would largely only be tested if they end up ill enough to be rushed to hospital)'' which is factually incorrect.

 

Anyone with symptoms can get tested  https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-getting-tested

 

Is that clear enough for you?

 

My statement is entirely factually correct.

 

 

YOU seem to be completely missing/avoiding the simple fact (as made) that lockdown is whether you are symptomatic or not

 

 

... with guestimates ranging from 50-80% and beyond for infected people being asymptomatic

 

 

 

So how can you even START to confirm the R number when you AREN'T testing the people that confirmed infected people are coming into contact with unless they get symptoms and those are considered 'valid' symptoms?

Let alone anyone the contacts come into contact with?

 

 

 

Is that clear enough for YOU?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-for-contacts-of-people-with-possible-or-confirmed-coronavirus-covid-19-infection-who-do-not-live-with-the-person

 

 

"You should not arrange for testing unless you develop symptoms of coronavirus (COVID-19). The most important symptoms are: a new continuous cough, a high temperature, a loss of, or change in, your normal sense of taste or smell (anosmia)."

 

 

 

https://patient.info/news-and-features/covid-19-who-can-get-tested-for-coronavirus-under-the-new-uk-guidance

 

Edited June 25, 2020 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

In another short form

 

as they are LARGELY only testing REPORTED symptomatic people for actually having the infection and NOT testing asymptomatic contacts

... despite locking down asymptomatic people with no tests whether they have it or not, let alone their contacts

.. and undoubtedly people walking around asymptomatic and mild symptomatic (covid or hay fever or cold) infected but undeclared

 

 

They are actually getting

 

R-0 (Covid.symptomatic -> Covid.symptomatic)

NOT

R-0 (Covid.transmission)

 

a subset of the subset they are starting with.

 

 

Is THAT clear enough for YOU?

 

Edited June 25, 2020 by tobyjugg2

[honeybee13]

This was forseeable. Beaches on the south coast are over-run.

 

Is this what happens when you come out of lockdown without a plan and without easily understood guidelines. Telling the public to just use their common sense means it's the public's fault when it goes wrong, rather than the government.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/25/major-incident-declared-as-people-flock-to-england-south-coast

[cjcregg]

10 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

 

Is this what happens when you come out of lockdown without a plan and without easily understood guidelines. 

 

Yeah I mean being told you can't meet in groups of over 6 and must remain 2 metres from others is awfully difficult to understand. As are the established criminal offences of illegal overnight camping, littering and fighting. I struggle to get my head around that myself.

 

It's quite clearly a government messaging issue and public are entirely blameless.  

[tobyjugg2]

6 hours ago, cjcregg said:

 

messaging issue and public are entirely blameless.  

 

mmm

[London1971]

Nope, the public are being idiot. Even pre pandemic going to Bournemouth is a vision of hellish 2 hour jams, zero parking, zero shade . Anyone who would actually think it’s a better idea than their own back garden or local park has something loose up there .

[cjcregg]

If there's one thing that the pandemic (should have) taught us is the importance of collective responsibility. Blaming the absence of it on the Government is singularly pathetic.

[honeybee13]

I think a lot of people saw Demonic Cummings and others blatently flout the rules and thought 'If they can do it so can I'.  Scientific types who did the wrong thing at least had the good grace to resign.

 

IMO the safety message has been lost because ministers and at least one SpAd didn't lead by example when they made the rules.

[cjcregg]

44 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

I think a lot of people saw Demonic Cummings and others blatently flout the rules and thought 'If they can do it so can I'.  Scientific types who did the wrong thing at least had the good grace to resign.

 

 

You had said that the guidelines were not easily understood. You're now saying that they did understand the rules but knowingly broke them because Cummings did.

 

Either way there is no acceptable reason to abdicate social responsibility during a pandemic. How can there be?

[honeybee13]

I don't see how 'Stay Alert' is easily understood, maybe I'm missing something. My point was that what the government says is completely undermined by what some people in authority have done.

[tobyjugg2]

13 hours ago, cjcregg said:

 

Yeah I mean being told you can't meet in groups of over 6 and must remain 2 metres from others is awfully difficult to understand. As are the established criminal offences of illegal overnight camping, littering and fighting. I struggle to get my head around that myself.

 

It's quite clearly a government messaging issue and public are entirely blameless.  

 

3 hours ago, cjcregg said:

If there's one thing that the pandemic (should have) taught us is the importance of collective responsibility. Blaming the absence of it on the Government is singularly pathetic.

 

mmm

 

So which do you actually mean, personal interpretations of sarcasm aside

 

.. Let alone that the Government is leading by BAD example whatever they say and demand of others ..

 

If Cummings is the Tory patron saint of lockdown rules with what he did, as praised by Johnson and Jenrick if not the UK's top nurse ...

 

.. are those beach lovers in the wrong because

They DON'T believe they are infected?

Perhaps simply haven't travelled far enough?

or is it just because they are not travelling to second and third homes?

 

Perhaps once infected, they can return to work etc and become a Cummings hero

 

 

 

 

Still waiting for your apology for your misrepresenting my statements on the R number for starters, or at least an acknowledgement that you somehow misinterpreted what I said?

We'll work our way through the rest.

 

..

Edited June 26, 2020 by tobyjugg2

[brassnecked]

48 minutes ago, cjcregg said:

 

You had said that the guidelines were not easily understood. You're now saying that they did understand the rules but knowingly broke them because Cummings did.

 

Either way there is no acceptable reason to abdicate social responsibility during a pandemic. How can there be?

Try living in Rural North Wales, technically  many have to break lockdown to go shopping as shops over 5 miles away, yes Wales still has 5 mile from home limit, but they are allowed to do so to go shopping but not to cycle further as exercise.

[cjcregg]

40 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

I don't see how 'Stay Alert' is easily understood, maybe I'm missing something.

 

Yes you are missing something, in fact almost everything - the actual substance of the guidance https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/staying-alert-and-safe-social-distancing/staying-alert-and-safe-social-distancing

 

 

[tobyjugg2]

 think this along with all the other examples of actually praising Cummings actions is far clearer

 

 

 

 

 

 

and this

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/coronavirus-news-dominic-cummings-cases-deaths/

 

 

and so many more

Edited June 26, 2020 by tobyjugg2