Covid-19 Virus

Discussion in 'Taylor's Tittle-Tattle - General Banter' started by Hornet4ever, Jan 30, 2020.

  1. Simmos

    Simmos First Year Pro

    I don't want to say that one group deserves it more than others but the quicker it is rolled out to the most vulnerable and all key workers the better. I haven't kept pace with the figures but I seem to recall hearing that there a 2 million doses of the vaccine available each week. I don't know how many vulnerable and key workers there are but even if there are 10 million we should be able to find a way to make sure that they are all (or at least those that want it) vaccinated within the next 2 weeks on the assumption that the process started in mid December and a high proportion have already received vaccinations.
     
    wfc4ever likes this.
  2. Keighley

    Keighley First Team

    We haven't hit the 2 million yet. In the next couple of weeks, hopefully.
     
  3. Simmos

    Simmos First Year Pro

    Yes I believe that the decision on PPE is down to the school but SEN schools really don't conform to the norm. I agree that representation could be made but if the school and governors decide that it is best not to use PPE for the benefit of the children, do the teachers walk out hurting the key worker and vulnerable children or do they stay at great personal risk? I wasn't making a political point but there is a difference between what you can do and what you have to do in reality.
     
  4. Keighley

    Keighley First Team

    Mmm. That still doesn't clearly state why a different position was taken on schools on Monday from Sunday. It just underlines the justification for closing schools (and, more broadly, the lockdown) in general.

    Just to be clear, I'm sure the goverment made the right choice but it really does seem puzzling why it wasn't simpler just not to reopen them after the holidays. And even if, as you say, not all kids who were due to return actually did so on Monday, it certainly inconvenienced some teachers and parents for no obvious reason.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2021
    WatfordTalk likes this.
  5. Simmos

    Simmos First Year Pro

    I was watching BBC breakfast with one eye also on CNN coverage of what is happening in the US so I may be wrong but I believe they said that the cost of not making a decision earlier regarding schools means a loss of £3 million to business supplying school dinners. The suppliers had already bought the food to make up the dinners for the primary schools returning on Monday but as most of the ingredients have a short shelf life they have to throw away the food. They cannot send it out to food banks as most items require refrigeration and food banks have tiny refrigeration for essentials such as milk. There is also no mechanism in delivering such vast numbers of dinners to vulnerable around England. This could easily tip more businesses over the edge simply because the decision came too late to close schools when it felt obvious to most that the sensible way forward was to keep them closed in the short term after Christmas taking into account how staggeringly quickly the new strain was being transmitted.
     
    miked2006, Keighley and WatfordTalk like this.
  6. miked2006

    miked2006 Premiership Prediction League Proprietor

    I'd blame most of the mask delay on the WHO, but of course the vast majority certainly screams of incompetence. And that's before we even discuss PPE/ procurement of contracts. My point was not that the government has done a good job.

    But I do think there is a link between both leaders changing their view on the same Monday morning and changing data, as I think they quite rightly wanted to do everything they could to keep schools open as long as possible (due to the unseen costs to a generation of kids). I don't think it rationally benefits Starmer politically to follow Boris, and its more likely that the data changed (or didn't change enough).

    I'm not sure the message, of retaining full confidence in the safety of schools, made sense, if the government warned that schools could shut at any time.

    I personally think that one of the principle aims of government should be to be as transparent as possible and seek truth, but given some of the hysteria over vaccines and children, I can see why they didn't want to undermine their message that schools were 100% safe and open until the moment where it was impossible to remain so.
     
    WatfordTalk likes this.
  7. Keighley

    Keighley First Team

    Right, but I'm really talking about transparency after they were shut on Monday ie why it was impossible to keep them open then, when it had not been on Sunday.

    Boris has made a rod for his own back by unequivocally stating on TV on Sunday that it was safe to send for schools to open the next day and then reversing that position about 30 hours later. You may very well be right that there was good reason for that change, but couldn't we have been told what it was? It's understandable that people might be put out, or at least puzzled, by the change.

    I suppose your argument regarding public confidence could still make sense given that some children are still attending school...
     
  8. hornmeister

    hornmeister Tired

    The thing is Boris isn't going to say "it's not safe" or "given the probability we think the risks are acceptable". There's nothing he could have said really other than we have made the decision given the data to hand... but that is never good enough for the interviewers that just want a soundbite to keep their viewers up. Catch 22 really.
     
    Otter likes this.
  9. WatfordTalk

    WatfordTalk First Team

    Personally don't think you can make much of Starmer's flip flop. He's made it a point to come across as supportive of the government throughout, so he doesn't look opportunistic. The merits and (lack of) morals in that strategy are a different discussion so won't go into that.
     
  10. Simmos

    Simmos First Year Pro

    According to the BBC website, in early/mid December the rate of infection in Watford was around 200/300 per 100,000 people. That is roughly one in 500. At that point Watford was in Tier 4 with the highest level of restrictions at the time. Within 4 weeks that rate has now risen to 1000 in every 100,000 which is of course 1 in 100. I cannot believe that Watford is an isolated case in the South East and East Of England region. Why am I able to access data which shows that the rate of infection was getting out of control but Mr Johnson isn't? The Prime Minister was elected for his leadership yet we seem to only react after the event. Other leaders around the world have been far quicker at dealing with the problems in their country and far more severe in taking the necessary action to keep the spread of the virus under control.
     
    wimbornet likes this.
  11. hornmeister

    hornmeister Tired

    Don't forget that tiers are calculated based on more than just a crude infection statistic. They were adjusted up or down according to infected demographics, trend and also NHS capacity.

    I had this conversation with my Sister in law back when where she lived was a lower infected rate than London but she was in Tier 3 and we were in Tier 2 at the time. It was because the hospitals where she lived were near capacity and it's a bit of a retirement area.

    I'm not saying the situation has been well managed, just that we do not necessarily have all the facts to make judgements.
     
    Simmos likes this.
  12. Bwood_Horn

    Bwood_Horn Squad Player

    Yesterday my son was supposed to be part of the 1st cohort to undergo test & trace.

    "...those pupils on site...." would be the children of key workers or those classed as vulnerable (which I don't fully get as it's a school for SEND children who are all, by definition, vulnerable).
     
  13. Keighley

    Keighley First Team

    There weren't any interviewers when he made his speech on Monday night.

    I hear what you say but you can surely understand why people are confused about this since he was so unequivocal in saying that it was safe just 36 or so hours earlier. In my view, it would have been better politically for him to have bitten the bullet and announced closures on the Marr Show on Sunday morning, using the same (quite vague) language he used in the speech on Monday night. I think most people would have understood that given the way the figures were going. And it would have looked quite decisive, even if it was at the 11th hour. What they didn't understand, and which inconvenienced many, was to change tack on the very day the schools went back.
     
    hornmeister likes this.
  14. Simmos

    Simmos First Year Pro

    That sounds great that the testing is available and seems to be working. Just out of interest I wonder how many children were tested successfully? A number of the children at my wife's school would strongly object to being tested despite the parents having given permission. The teachers have been told that they cannot test children who refuse to be tested. Tests at my wife's school are available next week which is why only key workers and the most vulnerable are attending this week before the school is opened up to all the children next week. Could you also let me know if the teachers are wearing masks and other PPE in the school as I will pass this on.
     
  15. hornmeister

    hornmeister Tired

    I don't disagree in an ideal world. I just think we don't want to be too quick to judge when we don't know the timing of the data that goes up to make the decisions. I'm damn sure they don;t do it to deliberately pee people off.
     
  16. Keighley

    Keighley First Team

    No but it does add to a perception of dithering. Especially when Boris seems to be following what Nicola Sturgeon does.

    The way the data was going it was pretty certain this decision would have to be made, and he would have looked more decisive if he had made it a day sooner.

    Still, better late than never...
     
  17. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    A sobering 1,162 deaths recorded for today.
     
  18. zztop

    zztop Eurovision Winner 2015

    But he didn't have the data on Sunday morning. Senior schools were already goingt to remain shut, as were the London primary schools, as were many of the schools that had inset day on the Monday. There was a good chance that they were close to the threshold on Sunday, and they were hoping that the earlier increased measures would have started to take effect, but Monday's data showed it hadn't.

    I am sure that Boris was saying on Monday that he wished he had Monday's data on Sunday as it was obvious that it left him wide open to criticism. At that stage, he could have delayed announcing the lockdown and then said, "After a few days of increasingly alarming data, we have no option..." as that may have been more palatable. Instead, knowing that he was going to get flack, he went ahead on Monday for the good of the country, at personal cost.

    As others have said, I don't honestly know what else he can say, until the school closure, that the schools are "safe". It is only total idiots that actually believe that anywhere where people are meeting other people - is totally safe, but unfortunately it is those idiots that make the most noise.

    As for his speech on Monday night, I do not think that is the time to start talking about the nuances behind the data or the decision. It was a time for clear guidance that the lockdown was required, and that was what he provided.
     
  19. Diamond

    Diamond First Team

    I know you've talked abut this before, but if there is a single child on site without permission for testing then the whole thing is a complete waste of time.

    Personally I don't think I'll be leaving the house again apart from work as I'm just getting too angry every time. I'll end up smacking someone, (again).
     
    Ybotcoombes, Bwood_Horn and Simmos like this.
  20. Robert Peel

    Robert Peel Squad Player

    There's a story in your last sentence.

    I do agree that leaving the house does come with a high risk of encountering morons who make your blood boil.
     
  21. zztop

    zztop Eurovision Winner 2015

    No, it isn't a waste of time is it? Firstly, it could have uncovered infected people, and secondly, the school can take precautions around the poor kid. And thirdly, it must be quite a relief for staff, parents and children that it is almost certain that everyone is clear!
     
  22. Keighley

    Keighley First Team

    Well, the point in your first paragraph is what @WatfordTalk has been trying to drive at, isn't it?

    On the final point, I'm not suggesting nuance. But something along the lines of 'Regrettably, in light of the data we have received since yesterday, we have reluctantly taken the decision to close schools' wouldn't have hurt, imo.

    I think ultimately it boils down to whether he should have been more cautious on Sunday even if he had hoped for the best regarding the data, and avoided the inconvenience and risk of sending kids back for a day (and while I take the point that not all kids did go back, there is also the incovenience for teachers and parents). Perhaps that is a matter of prime ministerial character but I'm not convinced the choice he made was either right for him (in a political sense, that is) or the country. (And just to emphasise that this isn't party political, I don't think Starmer got it right either).

    That said, I fully take on board points that you have made that these are very difficult decisions.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2021
    hornmeister, WatfordTalk and zztop like this.
  23. Diamond

    Diamond First Team

    It's an opinion, you don't need to be permanently angry on a forum ZZ.

    If one untested kid is on site then how can the site be deemed safe? When the staff start losing taste/smell? I know BWood's child goes to a school where there's likely to be kids with underlying health conditions. To me the fact that some are untested would be difficult to accept.
     
    WatfordTalk likes this.
  24. zztop

    zztop Eurovision Winner 2015

    I'm not angry, I was asking a question, and explaining why I didn't agree.

    If one child is not tested, then there is something like a 2% chance he has covid, and next to 0% chance everyone else in the school has covid. In a school of something like 400 people, that must be about an absolutely tiny fraction of a % chance overall (in my head, that's about 1 in 20,000 chance of covid being in the school, isn't it?).
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2021
  25. zztop

    zztop Eurovision Winner 2015

    Well I don't agree with your first line, but do with most of the rest.
     
    Keighley likes this.
  26. The undeniable truth

    The undeniable truth First Team Captain

    We will have a "world leading" vaccination programme imminently, I'm sure.
     
  27. Keighley

    Keighley First Team

    Well, we already do in so far as we were the first country to vaccinate.
     
  28. The undeniable truth

    The undeniable truth First Team Captain

    Job done then. We’re saved :)
     
    Keighley likes this.
  29. Bwood_Horn

    Bwood_Horn Squad Player

    The pupils are strictly segregated in bubbles for all activities (designated areas for play/breaktimes/lunch). The staff don't wear routinely PPE in their lessons (SEN school one teacher is 'the' class teacher and very small class sizes >=10), but if they are teaching outside of their designated group (another class) they wear masks also when supervising 'mixed' areas such as the dining hall. Teachers dealing with multiple classes (PE, animal care, cookery, gardening etc.) will 'mask up'.
     
  30. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    No, the chance remains 1 in 50. 1 in 20,000 is the chance that any one random individual has it now. But it only takes one person for the school to have someone who has Covid and that reverts to the probability of the most likely person.
     
  31. Bwood_Horn

    Bwood_Horn Squad Player

    Fair enough but St Luke's is very 'different' to a 'normal' school. Due to the very small class sizes and strictly enforced bubbles if they get a case I imagine with the testing they can highlight where it's arisen and, if I was running the show (I only design the sensors used in tests like these), they would move to a much more stringent and targetted testing regime.

    FWIW @Diamond I'm not a clinician and my opinion is just as worthless as all the other cocksuckers who infest the internet but I would try to make the effort to get outside (taking suitable precautions) as the bad place you're in will probably lead to a far you to a worse place...
     
    Diamond likes this.
  32. zztop

    zztop Eurovision Winner 2015

    But Diamond said that one pupil was not allowed to take the test, not that one pupil has covid.

    I don't follow your logic at all, but I'm not bothered enough to argue. But on the basis that you have been on about how testing is the answer for nearly a year, I'm surprised that now you dont think it makes any difference unless 100% of people in an environment need to be free of infection.
     
  33. Ybotcoombes

    Ybotcoombes Justworkedouthowtochange

    In terms of schools and colleges (where I work) and testing of students , the tests taken are lateral flow tests which are not particularly accurate (especially when self administered) so even if the whole school / college is tested it doesn’t offer than much comfort , this is part of the reason people are being encourage to take weekly test (the more times you take the test the more change of getting at least one correct response).

    I was trying to explain to some people earlier why some people quote lateral flow as having a 99% accuracy and some quote it as 50%

    if 100 people take a test and 5 have covid

    if the lateral flow only detects 2 positive tests it could be describe as being 97% accurate (as it got 97 results correct) or 40% accurate as it only detected 2 out 5 people.
     
  34. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    Where did I write that last bit? You are completely inventing that. Naughty.

    I was simply making a comment on your maths in your post alone, which you got wrong. The chance of Covid in the school to which you refer requires only one person and that probability is that of the most likely one, not all of them.
     
    zztop likes this.
  35. miked2006

    miked2006 Premiership Prediction League Proprietor

    Think that’s a little unfair on Keir. I think he’s trying to not score political wins, but instead seems to be focussed on the evidence and going along with the government policy he agrees with.

    When he disagrees I.e. when he thought we should use a circuit breaker, he’s made that pretty clear.
     

Share This Page