Mutating Corona Virus

[hightail]

9 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

They expect volunteers to make up for the shortcomings of people or rather their systems whose companies are being paid millions?

Local knowledge is probably key on the ground and I believe local volunteers would be highly effective if such an ‘army’ were still possible.  It isn’t now that people are returning to work.  What’s left available is the group needing to shield.

As with everything through this ‘too late was the cry’.

[hightail]

2 hours ago, tobyjugg2 said:

Even with that and lack of testing we are up around a 1000+ a day new cases, 'despite compulsive serial liar Johnson claiming we are winning.

I suspect all Boris cares about is those cases which become serious enough to warrant hospital treatment and they do seem to be tailing off.  They're obviously worried about the normal winter rush coinciding with a further spike but beyond that it's the economy matters more.

[hightail]

2 hours ago, London1971 said:

Herd immunity might still be a few extremist’s wet dream but, if the lid isn’t kept on Covid 19 this time around, Johnson is done

Lid kept on or not I think he's done.  Herd immunity has to be the aim surely, if not why the race for a vaccine? 

[hightail]

2 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

My understanding is that herd immunity can be achieved if there's an effective vaccine, cj.

Mine too.  Isn't that exactly what it provides?  That's why % take up is so important, without the required number there's no herd immunity.

[hightail]

17 minutes ago, cjcregg said:

I can't see Johnson going anywhere myself.

I think he looks awful and very probably quite damaged by the virus.  I could see him stepping aside on health grounds.

[hightail]

The only possible solution IS herd immunity however it’s achieved.  It is herd immunity which controls/prevents spread.  I’m struggling to see what other option exists other than us all cowering inside our homes for evermore.

[hightail]

1 hour ago, tobyjugg2 said:

It just seems like the systems are doing stupid things, particularly when you see reports of people just turning up at local test centers and there is no one waiting to be seen - and some who asked are just allowed in to take a test.

Some centres are designated 'walk-in' and there is confusion as to whether an appointment is needed.  Sometimes it hasn't been and more recently they are turning away even those who do have a QR code.  Some don't open at all, or do so hours late with no reason given.  Some stop testing/close early even when there are booked appointments outstanding.  This does seem to be recent, roughly since the schools went back. About three weeks ago my daughter managed to book a test at a local centre for the next day.  Now there's nothing.

[hightail]

12 hours ago, London1971 said:

Ok. Their screw up isn’t as bad as ours; or is ? I don’t know., don’t really care that much. I just want someone to get a grip!

 

 

It isn’t even the constant failures which annoy me most, I accept this is not a situation with absolute and easy answers.  It’s the automatic response of lying to me at every turn which means I’ve lost any and all faith in government.  We all know politicians lie but this shower have surpassed themselves and then when the lying doesn’t work they blame us for their failures. 

 

They’ve lost whatever grip they ever had because success always depended on trust and compliance.  I think that’s gone for good.

[hightail]

39 minutes ago, brassnecked said:

What really takes the biscuit is they followed a Flu plan and even assumed Herd immunity would work for SARS. Mammoth fail. But don't assume Labour or Lib Dem would have done anything different, thney all approved the Flu Plan and ignored possibility of any other disease like SARS.

I completely accept that.  Would they have turned on the population the same though?

We now have some of the most entitled individuals in the country telling us the problem is that the rest of us are clogging up the system because we aren't 'entitled' to tests without symptoms.  I obviously misheard when it was all 'we can open up because test and trace is the answer'.  How is it the answer if there's no entitlement to testing until you've already passed the virus on to others?

[hightail]

1 hour ago, London1971 said:

This is escalating very rapidly, I'd not be surprised if by the end of next week it's another lock down

I’d called it for mid October a couple of weeks ago and have been much ridiculed by friends for doing so.  Seems I wasn’t pessimistic enough.

[hightail]

1 hour ago, tobyjugg2 said:

 

Everyone ... except for dear and grouse shooters,

and the essential national requirement of horse droppings being spread along footpaths by horses being riden

...  who are all exempt

... Oh and of course Cummings and Jenrick and families who need to continue to travel between their various homes to test their eyesight or whatever

 

... oops - and of course Johnson The Liar Senior who needs to internationally travel to manage his holiday lettings, but he has assured his son Johnson The Liar jnr that he will hop from country to country to ensure he 'legitimately avoids any lockdown.

 

I’d take a wild guess you’ve just listed many who have been tested more than once and will also be exempt from any form of rationing going forward.

Edited September 17, 2020 by hightail

[hightail]

Boris claims to be against a full lockdown but surely it would be better while furlough is still in place.  Can’t see them reintroducing it as they’re so determined to cut off support for all sectors at the end of next month.

[hightail]

11 hours ago, London1971 said:

The thing that gets me is what good does closing a pub at 10pm do? Does the Virus only work nights?

That does make some sense to me.  The drunker people get the less likely they are to attempt any level of social distancing, behaviour in general deteriorates. It’s also why ‘table service only’ is introduced.  

 

 

[hightail]

20 minutes ago, London1971 said:

All for nought , the only way to stop this now is by imposing a national lock down

Maybe they're hoping the threat of it is enough. 

The next major issue will be the collapse of Universal Credit as many thousands of jobs are lost once furlough ends.  They'll claim they couldn't see that coming too.

 

Edited September 18, 2020 by hightail

[hightail]

22 hours ago, tobyjugg2 said:

assume theres still an interpretive element to the fine to allow necessary get outs for the privileged?

I guess we can expect ‘clarification’ from the PM tonight while the sky fills with flying pigs.

My best guess on further measures:

You can cross parish boundaries as long as you hop on one foot whilst humming happy birthday 

Cars can move between different boroughs with differing restrictions as long as the combined ages of the occupants total no more than 90 years

If your journey involves crossing county boundaries you need to download a government approved eye test chart and use this as your permit to travel.

 

 

 

[hightail]

53 minutes ago, cjcregg said:

Nor do I but it isn't something I would allow myself to get hung up about. If you don't mind me saying you do have quite a pronounced populist political view. It's not my thing at all, I don't give a damn about class.

 

 

I thought I didn't until this year but it's painfully obvious that we definitely are NOT 'all in this together' and the rules are not simple at all.  Take for example the rule about table service, does this apply in places like MacDonalds where waiter service doesn't exist and it's OK to go up to the counter to order a takeaway?  According to a govt minister on the radio this morning it does - maybe/sort of/couldn't actually answer.  For those who can choose the Savoy Grill over such places it isn't an issue, for the vast majority it is and it's an example of how they don't think when making the law/rules/guidance.  It's all just the fault of the public for catching the disease if they dare to venture out - as they were told to do.

[hightail]

22 minutes ago, cjcregg said:

 

When trying to apply blanket rules to multiple scenarios there will alway be anomonlies, it's inevitable. But if it gets clarified quickly as it has then it's hardly a major issue in my view.

 

 

 

 

IF it gets clarified quickly.  How long did it take for all those charges to be dropped which had been brought under the new legislation, not one of which was legit.  The one case which could have stuck because it was someone deliberately travelling whilst infected was Cummings but excuses were made for him whilst others were wrongly charged.

 

Why is the public being blamed for the increase in infection rate when Boris was adamant that people should get back to work?  The demographic of those infected this time round includes a significant number of relatively young women, the very people in the kind of jobs which expose them to a high viral load - underpaid and undervalued jobs in the main. How blameworthy are they?  MPs did a pretty good job of spreading it around at start but nobody suggested it was their own fault.

Edited September 23, 2020 by hightail

[hightail]

Apparently Eton has sent infected pupils home rather than quarantine in situ.  Overseas pupils are being farmed out to UK families.  Does that mean that whole household has to quarantine or only those who develop symptoms?  Do the details hit any database if the initial infection is recorded at one location and then the infected individual moves to another?  Are other individuals allowed to do this once they've tested +ve?

 

 

 

 

 

[hightail]

I particularly like this bit

"Given the numbers involved, medical advice was clear that these pupils could not safely isolate at the school."

Meanwhile hundreds of students at a time are being locked into halls of residence with police and 'security' guarding them to ensure they don't return home.

 

So which is it then?  Is it safe for large numbers to isolate together or not?

[hightail]

1 hour ago, brassnecked said:

I don't think they know.

It’s a case of pick your ‘expert’ I suppose.  That’s been the case from the start - formulate policy and then choose the science which backs it up. 

[hightail]

53 minutes ago, tobyjugg2 said:

"In recent weeks, COVID-19 positivity rates have been higher among people who have travelled abroad, although increases are seen in both those who have and have not travelled."

Higher than what - higher than before or significantly higher than in people who haven't travelled abroad?  Put together with the accompanying phrase that increased rates are also seen in people who have and haven't been abroad it makes the whole statement utterly meaningless.  I could just as easily say recent rates are higher in people with blue eyes but they're also higher in people with brown eyes.

Edited October 12, 2020 by hightail

[hightail]

1 hour ago, tobyjugg2 said:

half of entire local infants school closed after positive covid cases

Hardly surprising.  If Eton is finding high rates of infection when testing 100% of symptom free pupils (repeatedly I believe) then why should we suppose other schools are any different?  From what I've seen in the media most, or at least many, infected students are symptom free.  I'm honestly confused as to why testing is targeted at those who show outward signs of the disease

[hightail]

3 hours ago, cjcregg said:

Speculative testing doesn't serve any purpose as apart from anything the data that tests provide has a shelf life of a nano second.

It quite clearly revealed high rates of infection  at Eton and at other locations where it’s been used such as universities.  If such testing only ever returned -ve results I’d agree with you that it was nothing more than a pretty useless snapshot.  However, it clearly doesn’t and the most dangerous individuals are those who are symptomless and +ve.  

 

Someone with symptoms already has all the information they need to take appropriate action.  Many, if not most, who then choose to be tested do so for financial rather than health reasons - to continue to work or to at least know when they can earn money again.  Having people go to testing isn’t enough once things open up. Testing needs to go to the people, consider it speculative testing if you like.  Any testing is speculative, if it weren’t why bother with a test?  Schools are an obvious target, children may not get ill but they would be a useful indicator of households to then test.  

 

 

[hightail]

12 minutes ago, cjcregg said:

Testing people with symptoms is critical to determining the extent & spread of the virus and as such the appropriate measures to take either nationally or locally.

That's exactly what we've used the testing process for.  Nothing more than documenting the spread among those who choose to be tested.  What an utter and complete waste.  Testing only those with symptoms who a. choose to get tested and b. can actually then book a test guarantees we can't get ahead of the game to curb the spread, only chase it.  There's no merit in knowing the numbers if you don't use the information to do something useful in a timely manner.

 

Meanwhile thousands of council and other publicly funded employees have been furloughed (on full pay for all those I know) and instead of sitting at home they could have been doorstepping, and preferably testing, as part of the test and trace system.

[hightail]

5 minutes ago, cjcregg said:

Somehow I'm not sure that compulsory testing carried out by idle refuse collectors would prove too popular or successful if I'm honest.

And if you need to go to a testing centre staffed by the military do you think you'll be able to insist you only interact with the officer classes? 

 

Of all the council employees you could have mentioned - the bin men have been among the most important to keep working and you'd have been in a bloody mess without them just like the rest of us.  Highly qualified librarians and the like have been sat doing nothing - more professional types I'm sure you wouldn't mind dealing with.