Covid-19 Virus

'Liked' for the fact that you've left England

 

No doubt your a brexit the sun ready tory. I can tell you are in a high risk category and has no respect for a virus that has killed thousands.

 

How does the forecast compare now? Vallance said we could see 200+ deaths a day in mid November, and it looks like we'll be around that mark this week. Things aren't looking good.

 

What does a “Brexit the sun ready Tory” even mean?

 

Perhaps he meant to type Troy instead of Tory.

 

We’re no where near doubling every 7 days. In fact the 7 day rate is still off the top of the chart.

 

But doubling every nine days according to the Imperial study:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54723962

 

Surely the most relevant statistic is deaths and ICU admissions?

 

Yup. But evidently we’re still not catching most cases through testing, as the actual numbers can’t keep pace with a 9 day doubling either. They did for a while at the start but have since dropped off:

The graphs I’ve been posting are about case numbers. As always through this pandemic though, the goalposts get moved and I’m sure now the Sage’s will move the debate onto another metric instead. R number looks like the best-placed candidate currently, but it’s facing tough competition from deaths, which have made an early break for the front.

 

Bobby Ball a Covid victim unfortunately.

Another of my comedy heroes bites the dust. Very, very sad, a genuinely funny man.

 

I find stats interesting (sorry) , problem with the death stat (a bit morbid) is that now they have moved to only counting deaths within 28 days I think it’s understated (but not sure by how much) , logic being you get tested , then you go downhill , then you get admitted to hospital, then you get worse and a good chance of this taking more than 28 days.Not suggesting this is why deaths are lower as a proportion to first wave - I suspect that is due to age / better treatment / sadly the most vulnerable went in the first wave.

To me, the two stats that seem to provide the best idea of covid are hospital admissions and excess deaths (again another morbid description).

hospital admissions is useful as your measuring against something tangible (hospital capacity) , excess deaths is interesting as you can use it to discount the discussion point that if they hadn’t died of covid then flu would have got them anyway.

 

very sad

What happened to two man comedy acts we had loads , cannon and ball , hale and pace, smith and Jones , 2 Ronnie , Morecambe and wise, vic and Bob etc, can’t think of any now

 

Eddie Large from "Little and Large" fame was also taken by Covid back in April.

 

Vic and Bob are still going, sort of. Mitchell and Webb still do some stuff together (well, they have done so fairly recently ).

 

Armstrong & Miller too ?

 

What about French & Saunders, we don't want to be accused of being sexist do we

 

Yeah, I thought about them but not sure they have worked together for a while, especially as 'Zander' is such a media tart these days.

"Prue, it's kicking off..."

 

Love ‘it’s kicking off Prue’ and this one.

 

The young "adults" in Nottingham demonstrating their maturity last night.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-54740707

 

I don't understand why there are these long notices of intended changes.

I'm not excusing these young idiot's behaviour but saying restrictions are going to happen several days in advance does encourage a "one last blowout" mentality.

When a decision is made is there a practical reason why it can't be "with immediate effect" rather than from midnight on a specific day in the future?

 

I don’t really blame these young adults if I’m honest. Being nearly 40 the restrictions don’t bother me much, but if I was their age it would be driving me mad.

Yes it’s irresponsible, but they’ve got the makings of quite a bleak future ahead of them, their freedoms are being curtailed and the virus isn’t directly an issue for them. Yes, I know it might be for their parents, or grandparents, but when you’re that age you don’t tend to think in those terms.

 

Fair enough but they should all be cut down by machine gun fire.

 

Depends who you speak to. Certain sections of the population think they should be getting more notice.

And just a few weeks ago you were advocating more scrutiny of such decisions (including parliamentary debates) and suggesting that doing anything else would be undemocratic.

In this case they talked for several days with the local authorities who wanted several days notice. I think that was fair enough.

 

No, I said "Government have to be flexible and responsive. But where possible, there should be parliamentary scrutiny."

And I specifically referenced levels of fines being set, without parliamentary scrutiny, being of specific concern.

Nobody expects each local or national lockdown to go through parliament (although the general criteria being used could have been debated and better defined).

I don't care if it is central government or local government that is causing the delay, publicly setting a date in the future when further restrictions are going to be implemented is bound to lead to scenes like those in Nottingham last night.

As I say, it doesn't excuse the behaviour but knowing it's a "last chance" to -"party" is going to encourage the feckless youth to be stupid.

 

My argument was that with the situation changing so rapidly, it would not be practical for MP's to debate such issues when they will not have been party to all the local discussions. And then, even when the local authorities are consulted fully, there will always be those that manage to find something to criticise the government over, and that criticism undermines the message.

But yes, when immature people see the opportunity to be naughty, they often tend to grasp the opportunity. Instead of three days notice, maybe they should have given 3 minutes.

 

Well, as I said, specific local discussion should not be subject to parliamentary scrutiny. But the general process, criteria and fines for non compliance could be.

And yes, some will always play politics if they see an advantage in doing so, whatever the national interest.

Of course local consultation and agreement should be sought but these discussions need not be public. And when agreement is reached there is no reason I can see why it can't be implemented immediately.

But anyway, I think we are agreed. 3 minutes notice would be better imo to stop the youth, and others, having a last hurrah.

 

I think a 3 hour total full lockdown starting 3am Sunday may be a sensible compromise. I will be unilaterally applying this this coming weekend.
NHS, this one's for you.

 

The incoherent government strategy takes another lurch as anonymous sources brief the Daily Mail and The Times that Boris will announce on Monday a national lockdown starting Wednesday. What absolute ******s we have in charge. The tactical leaking, basically to dip a toe in the water to see the reaction, should have stopped months ago.

The scientists aren’t much better - this week competing studies and sources (all bonafide reputable institutions and some government-backed) have suggested there are either 24,000, 34,628, 51,900, 55,600 or 96,000 daily cases. I mean, it’s basically pick your own pandemic. Would you like it to be a bad one or a plateauing one Prime Minister?

 

And if this attitude is matched by the parents with kids aged 18 to 25 ish, then I understand why their kids are acting so irresponsibly and selfishly.

 

Yes, it is so easy to snipe from the sidelines at those that need to make the decisions based on such conflicting evidence.

 

I'm sniping at the leaking to the papers as much as anything. Why did they keep doing it?

 

That's an easy one. They are gauging reaction. If national lockdown is too politically unacceptable then it won't happen.

To be honest I don't have a problem with that tactic. I'm sure governments of all flavours do it.

I would prefer the decision to be made on the data and science rather than what makes the government popular and re-electable though.

 

In honesty, I don't think it's that. I know that's the normal rule for officially sanctioned leaks, but the government has done this repetitively since February and I don't think it's changed tack once after doing it.

The data and the science seem to be wildly divergent too. That basically renders it a political decision.

 

Is that why I keep hearing on the news ‘pressure mounting on government to introduce national lockdown’.

Pressure from who, the scientists? I don’t know anyone who wants another lockdown, it wouldn’t actually affect me, but if we have one I can’t see the government reintroduce the furlough scheme, forcing mortgage holidays again, etc.

I don’t want one for the millions of people who will have their lives ruined, yes it will save some deaths, or will it just delay them?