Re: Coronavirus
 

Not this current level. If you look here at the % of positive tests we've gone up from 0.6 to 0.8 in a week: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing

But compared to March/April the testing is dramatically higher so 3000 cases is nowhere near as bad now than then when almost every case was a hospitalisation.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well, we don't know yet, do we? The later lockdown we entered into may have come too late to avoid the peak, and that being the case, we should not get the substantial second wave that other countries who locked down earlier are experiencing.

If we do get a big second wave, it would clarify that the only way to avoid the virus is a permanent lockdown, which no-one in their right minds would support.

Re: Coronavirus
 

We didn’t know all of your previous speculative efforts, but any reasonably intelligent person would accept that Covid-19 doesn’t care about the British stiff upper lip and that what we see elsewhere, all things being equal, would happen here. What is going to make the difference?

There’s no evidence that supports your contention that locking down a week, or two, later than other counties prevents a second wave. Unless we developed herd immunity (no laughing at the back!) by our chance as a result of that extra week or two.

The good news is a second lockdown, or regional lockdowns to the extent many can’t really tell the difference, are inevitable regardless of what those in denial think. Companies will continue to work from home, and the economy will tank in any case for longer and the rental incomes of property magnates that own the Daily Mail will be done. So every cloud has a silver lining.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You’re predicting 35000+. Deaths?

I don’t think so.

Infection rates can go up all they want, the death rate is the key metric. I don’t see death rates getting anywhere near the initial wave.

When this whole thing started scientists ( and I posted it in here) said a second wave was unlikely and that it would plateau and would possibly be followed by the odd “ripple“, and I don’t see anything to disagree with that.

Re: Coronavirus
 

We will see where we are in a month or so. We've got near exponential growth in some areas, test, trace, isolate not identifying the majority of close contacts. We're now fudging the figures against counting Covid-19 deaths - while counting everyone who has ever tested positive was clearly not the best way to do so we are now in a position where unless you get tested again between initial diagnosis and death at greater than 29 days you aren't counted on the totals. The onset of symptoms, complications and time spent on a ventilator can easily extend life past this arbitrary cut off. The ONS (and excess death rates) will provide a better metric as a result.

We are however better at treatments - which kills off the myth that they'd die anyway once and for all - which could improve mortality. Either way, numbers are going up and the demand side of the economy are staying home.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Numbers go up, numbers go down, that's life for you.

You really do sound like the paranoia about CV19 has got to you.

Despite the best efforts of the Media and Social Networks to convince you otherwise.

1. There is little chance you will catch it.
2. If you do, there is little chance it will do anything more than annoy you.

Far more people are dying of other causes than the 'virus'.
No one is worried about the Flu now the winter months are coming.
Yet you are almost certainly more likely to catch that, and it can be just as fatal, especially in the same high risk groups.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Can you explain how going into lockdown later means we get a less substatial second wave?

There's plenty of ways to avoid the virus without going into permanent lockdown:

Practice social distancing. Wear a mask. Wash your hands.

Super simple stuff, but too many people aren't doing it, too many people think they know better, or that it's a scam, or that there's worse things to get. If you want to avoid lockdown after lockdown, get people to do the super simple stuff and fine/arrest those who refuse.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I really don’t believe almost all the countries in the world are simply acting out of paranoia. Italian hospital beds weren’t filled by paranoid people in February, they were filled by pneumonia patients.

I do recognise that on a personal level my risks are extremely low. However that isn’t true of everyone in my social circle, family and friends (or indeed, for a significant amount of purchasing power in the economy). If the herd immunity advocates got their way statistically the chances would be that some of them would catch it with a higher mortality level based on age and underlying health issues.

If this was just a flu we are back to the circular conversation where nobody would have noticed. Hospitals wouldn’t have been busier, it’d just be normal, as generally they are equipped to cope with flu every year.

Numbers go down because of significant effort and mitigation. They go up without. At £210bn in cost to date, that’s a lot of Government paranoia. Would have been cheaper with a super-injunction, a D-Notice and hoping nobody noticed.

Re: Coronavirus
 

We have a vaccine for flu. That's the difference.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

This doesn't sound good, not being reported here yet even though it's the UK vaccine.
https://www.news.com.au/world/corona...71da8a135ac814

Re: Coronavirus
 

The majority of the UK do not have/get the vaccine, and at best, its generally about 30 - 40% effective.

Well, except that isnt what I said.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Doesn't actually tell us much does it?
One person in 'tens of thousands' has had a suspected adverse reaction . . that may require hospital treatment, and could result in death :rolleyes:

Pretty poor attempt at instigating mass panic, but will probably draw the usual crowd in for some hysterical doom laden wittering

Re: Coronavirus
 

:D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Possibly because the Australian news website chose not to wait for experts located in the U.K. to get back to them with a bit more context, given the time difference. The Beeb on the other hand went with the story first thing this morning, with a little added analysis:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-54082192