Re: Coronavirus
 

Ultimately if someone puts you on a ventilator they can extend life and treatment. Some will make it and others won’t.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...195-X/fulltext

If someone died at the end of this timeline (and weren’t re-tested during it) they’d now no longer be in the figures.

The 28 days is simply a best guess.

---------- Post added at 07:53 ---------- Previous post was at 07:43 ----------

For Spain the percentage is about 11%.

These are “poor comparisons” because you don’t like them, not because they are inaccurate. Stadium gate receipts are far from “superfluous” and even if they were there’s hospitality and retail (jobs) built around them in shops, bars, restaurants. Aggregated over hundreds of football matches that’s a lot of money now no longer flowing through the economy.

Independent cinemas and theatres aren’t viable with the virus in circulation. Again these are jobs, and customers in Rishi’s service economy.

Again you’re viewing my post as binary - nobody is disputing it’ll have some effect but you’re overstating it.

You’re assuming the virus will behave differently without mitigation - this is no different from “it’ll burn itself out in the summer”.

And that’s a big if.

People can question restrictions all they please. When they breach them cases will spike. There’s no science, or even pseudoscience, that I’m aware of that demonstrates this will go away by itself.

You’re also assuming people won’t selectively question restrictions. If the middle class decide they quite like working from home, and going down their local, there are huge parts of the economy in city centres that will never recover.

There’s no return to normal without elimination.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m working from home so can’t bore my colleagues with said wisdom. :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Coronavirus related, as it’s the pandemic that’s causing the issue with Uni Admissions.

A colleague of my daughter (who works in University admissions) wrote this post, and I found it informative and relatively balanced.

Re: Coronavirus
 

On the other hand less foreign students due to the pandemic could (should) result in more places available on the whole. That said not necessarily for everyone.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Here in Scotland it should be a positive benefit this year, as EU students starting studies at a Scottish university this September would still be entitled to free tuition.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Positive numbers for the pupils but less so for the Universities.

Unless much has changed the vast majority of foreign students I encountered were non-EU students (mainly Asian countries) and those bring in the big bucks. They’ll be looking for the public sector chequebook to bail them out soon.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Published to-day by Imperial College London.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/2018...ibody-testing/

Re: Coronavirus
 

Unfortunately, that means a substantial drop in income for the Unis, as the Overseas student fees are substantially higher than Home students (and as they were 20% of total Uni students in the U.K., and 14% of undergrads, that’s a big hole to be filled).

Also, the Uni’s can’t go over the Home student numbers to replace the missing international students - my daughter says they’re allowed X amount of home/EU and Y of international. So might well have vacancies for some courses for international but not home...

Re: Coronavirus
 

There’s no way that’s a sustainable position for Unis to take, in particular if they’re wanting the public purse to make up income shortfalls.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm not sure that the public purse will be making up income shortfalls but the Government may encourage mergers to take some of the weaker players out. They believe the sector as a whole is strong financially, but the financial strength is uneven between universities.

Universities may have to re-think the balance of international students, but it's probably too early in the day to assume that international students are not coming this academic year. Other countries are taking similar approaches to ours and if they don't take a course, what will they do instead, given that many countries' job markets are tough right now?

Re: Coronavirus
 

It is probably because they took the people who died due to other means, but had the coronavirus as cause of death adjusted. IIRC someone had CV but died after being hit by a bus, the COD was CV. Clearly not the case.

Re: Coronavirus
 

They don’t take that position - it’s the Government funding position...

If the Uni’s take more Home students than the Government limit, they get hit by a double whammy - the Govenment reduces their funding, fines them, and they would have to support more students with less funding.

That’s why the ”Mocks" appeal isn’t going to work - the Uni my daughter works at aren’t actually accepting mock results today - prospective students can phone up and say they’re appealing the results on the basis of mocks but because they’re not verified by UCAS (yet) they don’t have a place; some courses won’t be taking any successful appeals later as they’re already full.

Re: Coronavirus
 

There’s no way that’s a sustainable position for Government to take ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Couple of interesting points from that ;

Re: Coronavirus
 

The shielded group would naturally be least likely.

Re: Coronavirus
 

which would suggest you can employ shielding of at risk groups as opposed to the blunt instrument of lockdown of all groups

Re: Coronavirus
 

You could employ the strategy but it’d fail.

Re: Coronavirus
 

All groups? So who operates all the essential services?:rolleyes: The shielding group would still be at risk from uncontrolled contact with those supplying those essential services. For some sections of the shielding group, not even a vaccine is a viable solution. The only viable solution is for everybody else to gain "herd immunity", either with or without a vaccine.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Why?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Hasn't been put to the test, so thank you for your opinion. I disagree.

---------- Post added at 13:55 ---------- Previous post was at 13:51 ----------

Not if they're shielded from them, which is the whole point of shielding.

We're still a long way off, I think estimates were al 3million exposed? approx. 4% of the population

Re: Coronavirus
 

A vaccine requires a functioning immune system, not everybody has one.
Link

Re: Coronavirus
 

Strategies “not put to the test”’ often fail at the desk based assessment. Either because they’re impractical, unworkable or frankly laughably bad.

4% of the population and 50,000 deaths. So are 800,000 deaths acceptable to get to 80% for a level of long term immunity that’s unknown?

As I’ve said before if any of these ideas were any good someone, somewhere would be putting them to the test and having neither the health nor soggnificant economic impacts. Yet, nobody does.

There’s work to zero or accept years of uncertainty and economic downturn.

In decades to come people will look back and ask why with all of human accomplishment to date they couldn’t keep 7 billion people apart as much as possible for 3 months give or take but instead accepted years of uncertainly and economic failure.

Madness.

Re: Coronavirus
 

41,000 dead, but let's not quibble over your 20% uplift. and of those only a very small number had no other contributing factor in addition to Covid.

I'm saying that we know the is a much lesser impact to the generally fit, not obese, younger (say u50 but not ltd to that) population.

Instead of Lockdowns which are just to much of a blunt instrument, These people should be able to go about their business, whilst still undertaking mitigations, if they are infected ride it out, it is unlikely they will die, or overwhelm the NHS.

Meanwhile all at risk groups should continue to shield.

We can't all be visionaries

we tried the 3 months is up. time to think differently.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

We didn’t try hard enough for three months evidently. And we tied our hands behind our backs during herd immunity week with exponential growth in cases.

I look forward to further absurd propositions that fundamentally ignore the prime human instinct which is to survive and for their loved ones to survive.

There’s no normal without elimination or a vaccine and there never will be.

Middle class video conferencing users drive the hospitality sector. :)

---------- Post added at 17:32 ---------- Previous post was at 17:25 ----------

That’s because Oxford are essentially an arm of the British state. If there’s ever a story needed to deflect from Government scandal they will gratefully oblige.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Bolleaux - it’s because these things take time, and the last update was around 3 weeks ago, which isn’t very long in vaccine development time.

Re: Coronavirus
 

They do take time. But if you map news releases they’re mostly politically expedient. It got the alleged rapist off the front page for one.

It’s also statistically unlikely they’ll be successful with the vaccine anyway. But it’s patriotic.

Re: Coronavirus
 

We rode out the wave, there is no second wave coming, we need to look a different ways of addressing fluctuations without primitive lockdowns.

it’s a sensible proposition to avoid lockdowns, which actually people are now just ignoring anyway.

I’m suggesting normal and never have, I’m suggesting different.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Entirely speculative. Avoiding a second wave means significant ongoing restrictions.

No normal = entrenching the recession and mass unemployment. Consumer behaviour is, and will remain, significantly different. Once we are done an early, proper, longer lockdown and eliminating the virus (plus effective test, trace, isolate) will look like the cheap option.

Instead trying to do it on the cheap, relying on luck, speculation and the virus “not liking warm climates” will cost more.

I do wonder who benefits from longer term instability. Those who speculate on the financial markets obviously, this is a once in a generation opportunity. And some of them get to work from home.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Is there any information on how long a person 'carries' the virus if they're asymptomatic? Does it just go away after a week or two?

Re: Coronavirus
 

In other news, the new 'Knee Jerk' government causes more chaos.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not really, restrictions have been eased since June and lockdown was lifted well over a month ago.

Thousands have been congregating on Beaches, pubs and rallies, infection rate has stayed steady around 1000 or less. It was announced again today that it has levelled off again after a slight rise.

The Manchester council leader on R4 today advised that infection rates in Oldham are double, yet hospital admissions have halved.

It was predicted months ago, and posted on here by me, that a second wave would not happen and it would be a plateau with the odd ripple, and that is what is happening.

As much as you would to see Rome burn, it ain’t going to happen

I’ve already said there won’t be “Normal“ but restrictions should continue to lifted and local fluctuations should be dealt with by just shielding the at risk groups.

I know who benefits from further lockdowns, no one. We need to be smarter.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Why are idiots complaining that they haven't been given enough notice about the new current quarantined countries?


We were all told that this could happen, yet these idiots still travel.

My sister chose to lose £800 in lost flights (as Ryan air still flew to the country, but their accommodation had been cancelled). Ryan air would have transferred them for £900.

---------- Post added at 19:43 ---------- Previous post was at 19:27 ----------

My only issue is the companies raise prices by 400%, they should be massively find by regulators.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

As you know the biggest restrictions are schools and the middle classes working from home.

I’m sure it was announced today that R is above 1 in England. That road leads one place. Lockdown.

You need to be right about that every day. I only need to be right once. And we are at or near the limits of what we can ease.

Far from. I’ve been advising that short term pain = long term gain. Old normal back in action. Despite its failings it was/is achievable.

And we will not be smarter by following strategies discounted by the entire world.

I don’t think that you fully understand the precarious nature of almost every capitalist business working in competitive markets. They can’t afford small single figure drops in trade, let alone the levels of shift we will see as the middle classes, and thanks to technology many administrative working classes, shield over the winter, absolutely rationally. You sanction the over 50s shielding - a further sizeable proportion of the consumer base.

These fundamentally undermine the entire economy and will continue to do so in the long term. It is not me advocating Rome burning. I’m advocating throwing the volume of the Atlantic Ocean over it. You seem to think if everyone opens a window and urinates out of it that this will cause the flame to subside. If I am certain of anything it will not.

If you end up right on this it will be by pure chance.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

:LOL:

---------- Post added at 20:11 ---------- Previous post was at 20:05 ----------

It wasn’t

R remains the same

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...-show-12049175

Re: Coronavirus
 

Unfortunately they are the only Airline that flew to their holiday destination from our local airport on the day they wanted.

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-517682...wshealthcvd%5D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

It’s really irrelevant if R is 0.99999 or 1. Restrictions ease, more human contact, R increases in the absence of steps to mitigate.

Who knows maybe the virus doesn’t like the cold? It turns out it wasn’t that bothered by the heat so let’s wager on that. My magic 8 ball (ask8ball.net) says it’s “most likely” we will defeat coronavirus so some other acts of chance must go in our favour in the absence of an coherent public health position.

Some “insights” into the Swedish Socrates of herd immunity and his lack of expertise have been revealed in some emails.

https://www.thelocal.se/20200812/why...egnells-emails

“Over in one or two months“. Old Boy may yet have a career in epidemiology if he has the right to live and work in the European Union. I’m confident Sweden will be recruiting soon.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Wibble, Take the pencils out your nose, the underwear off your head and keep off the gin.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Scroll to the bottom of the article, just above the last chart - the final paragraph says why SAGE don’t have confidence in the previous measurements.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well let’s wait for the coming weeks then.

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...-a9671156.html

The ONS stats might be behind the curve.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Interesting snippet in my favourite newspaper today. Wales & Scotland forced Boris to agree to bring the deadline quarantine for France forward by 24 hours.
https://www.ft.com/content/210e42d7-...8-7ed6f1dfdd67

Re: Coronavirus
 

Oh of all the rotten luck, that link seems to on one of those super secret highly confidential (probably communist) pages that require the payment of monies in order to proceed.

Well I'm not falling for it Baldrick, they can jolly well keep their cunning plan to lure me into debt by a promise of an article 'too good to miss' :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Same information about the cutoff being brought forward 24 hours can be read here for free Carth.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ce-begins.html

Re: Coronavirus
 

Here's a more accessible link
If would be preferable for any quarantine conditions to not only be applied immediately, but retrospectively. The increased risk doesn't magically start after the start date and time, the risk existed before then. It's just crazy that people can rush back before the deadline and somehow not be an infection risk.

Just as when closing of the pubs was announced, and people went out for a "last drink". The increased risk didn't magically start after they closed.

The responsible thing for those having arrived back in the past few days is to go into a self-imposed quarantine for a few days, and then get tested. They certainly shouldn't be going out everywhere.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Any comment about the alleged knee-jerk reaction everyone was going on about re Spain (I think)? Could both the Welsh assembly and Scotland have been behind that?

Oh damn, I forgot, it doesn't fit your agenda. Poor me.

I suppose it really irks you when Boris takes decisions based on what the whole of the Union wish to do.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Anyone would think he was the head of the Union(United Kingdom).:rolleyes:

As it's an external international related health matter and not an internal local one, shouldn't it all be decided at UK level? Border related issues are decided at UK level, and this is a border related issue.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Nobody in Scotland or Wales is attempting to control the international border. They are mandating the behaviour of people within their area of control, on public health grounds.

Re: Coronavirus
 

What part of "the whole of the union" don't you understand? do you think Scotland and Wales shouldn't have any input at all on any decision made which may/may not affect them?

Scenario, someone arrives from France at Heathrow, gets a connecting flight to Glasgow or Cardiff. All of a sudden it becomes an internal border issue.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And that is exactly why it's a UK matter. People could also land at Glasgow airport and cross into England. It is a UK-wide border issue because it is setting conditions for entry into the UK.

Perhaps the EU "Qualified Majority" principle should be applied?
As England accounts for around 84% of the UK population, whatever England says, goes.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

It is not setting conditions for entry.

It is telling people what to do based on their recent behaviour.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The first condition would also need to be met, not just the second one.

---------- Post added at 11:03 ---------- Previous post was at 10:52 ----------

Interesting article here analysing Boris Johnson's policy reactions to Covid and how they seem close to Jeremy Corbyn's manifesto. Below is an extract.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/124118...n-in-disguise/

Re: Coronavirus
 

That's a very muddled article..

Re: Coronavirus
 

Agreed Maggy, it's almost as though someone threw it together as a page filler . . . has The Sun run out of booby pictures? :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

There’s a difference between wanting to spend money and having to spend money. Unfortunately the end result is still spending money.

The difference will be in the plan, whatever that is, to recover the expenditure.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Seems kind of pointless to compare it as well considering the GLOBAL PANDEMIC that has happened in the interim.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm not sure how much of this a new news but I thought the last 2 paragraphs were interesting.

https://clicklancashire.com/2020/08/...-covid-19.html

Re: Coronavirus
 

So if JC had been in charge, they money we needed to cover lockdown would not have existed, he would already have spent it :erm:

Good job no one wanted that moron in power then. :dozey:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Which bits do you find unclear?

I think the conclusion is that Boris is implementing a lot of policies close to what Corbyn promised, though of course this is largely due to the pandemic eg junk food advert ban before 9pm, railways nationalised, review of capital gains tax, biggest increase in spending since WW2.

---------- Post added at 00:54 ---------- Previous post was at 00:54 ----------

I doubt JC would have been organised enough to spend the money!

Re: Coronavirus
 

A reminder to our self employed forum members, the second HMRC covid support grant is now available for claiming ... same procedure as last time, although they're paying out 70% of average profit rather than 80% this time.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's far too early to judge whether these vaccines will ever make it past the testing. Other drugs for coronavirus have looked positive at this stage but ultimately failed for one reason or another.

The swine flu vaccine made it through the tests but was later found to have an unacceptable side effect - narcolepsy - and had to be withdrawn..

I hope very much, with the whole world racing for a vaccine, we will be successful this time, but I won't hold my breath. Over many decades we have attempted to find a vaccine for coronavirus and we have not succeeded. So fingers crossed that this major effort will see results.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Nothing to see here, move along, please...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...o-Harding.html Can I just point out the so-called "failing NHS Test and Trace system" is outsourced to Serco, so it should be the "failing Serco Test and Trace system"...

btw, Dido Harding's husband is Boris Johnson's "anti corruption champion" - amusing when his wife was appointed without going through a normal hiring process.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Maybe Boris should outsource the whole of his Government, then they don't need to take responsibility for anything !

'Simples', which should appeal to Boris.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Transparency seems to have done a disappearing act.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Sadly, Boris's actual grades are turning out to be as bad as predicted.

Re: Coronavirus
 

They say for mink as well as cats but maybe...

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...0&d=1597753302

:D

Attachment 28490

Re: Coronavirus
 

Is he encouraging us to see his softer side? I really didn't know he had one, I'm not convinced!

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

It’s a loaner.

The pupil contract (I do solemnly swear that this device will be returned to school in pristine condition when I leave, ha ha ha) was circulated last week, along with a menu of parts that might break, and the charge for repairing them. The devices have started coming home this week (youngest has just got hers) and they have LEA asset numbers on the bottom. The startup screen also states that it’s a “managed device”. She doesn’t care, because they haven’t blocked Youtube :rofl:

So our LEA’s Covid resilience plan is well underway - Chromebooks as of now replace handwritten homework, and a lot of handwritten class work as well. It won’t be long before kids all forget how to write. :disturbd: At least it’ll be easier if her class is forced to self-isolate at any point.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Some more changes to the quarantine list:
https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...0#post36047160

Re: Coronavirus
 

The daily infection has remained pretty steady since late June 800 < 1000 ( apart from 1 week).

The daily hospital admin rate is 70 - 90, 280 admins a day for heart attacks........

Daily death rate....4.....about the same as road deaths..........

Can we all agree to just get on with it and not being scared of our shadow.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Been shift work, home in time to catch a little of the main news . .

4 more deaths today from Covid 19

then struck by the absurdity of:

. . . the sentence below it which read similar to* "deaths under any circumstance within 28 days of a positive Covid 19 test"

Just pointless and a waste of time reporting those figures, keeps the statisticians happy I guess :rolleyes:


*can't recall exact wording

Re: Coronavirus
 

Probably 4 road deaths Pierre mentions.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes, but heart attacks and road deaths aren’t infectious....

If you (well, me anyway) visit someone’s house, you’re unlikely to give them a heart attack or a road death..

Re: Coronavirus
 

Depends on who I visit .. :erm:

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's not about being infectious or not, it's about the reporting of Covid deaths.

If I had flu and got knocked down by a bus, would flu be the cause of death?

If I had asthma and was fatally stabbed during a mugging, would asthma be what killed me?

If I had asymptomatic covid 19, but got electrocuted by bad wiring in my guitar amp, I'd be reported as a Covid death . .

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

With that face :shocked:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes let's just become blase about the whole Covid thing..:rolleyes:

Re: Coronavirus
 

4 road deaths per day with the roads operating normally, millions of vehicle movements per week, is hardly comparable with the restrictions that have been necessary to get Covid transmission down to its present level.

Re: Coronavirus
 

But these deaths are so low because the peak of the pandemic is past and is precisely why we felt safer to slowly open up again. At the peak we were seeing deaths of over 1000.

Anyway I think for now we should open up and try to 'live with the virus' but keep an eye on cases to ensure we don't see what we saw in April.

Re: Coronavirus
 

how many road deaths would there be without,driving standards,the highway code ,seat belts ,air bags , car safety standards.......... it took a lot of time and effort to get road deaths down to today's low levels.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So to keep Covid deaths at the present rate you’re saying we should keep the safety standards that have been imposed on people’s pedestrian activity - social distancing, face masks etc?

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm saying don't diss the low road death stats it was a long road getting there,and yes keep the safety standards that have been imposed re covid but get on with life until the restrictions are no longer needed, we can't just go into panic mode at the drop of a hat.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Especially when the hat is a 'one size fits all' type ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Could be worse - you could just be posting ad hominem attacks, rather than debating the point... ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

But if infections are low will the precautions actually have much effect? That is if people moving around "normally" aren't infectious they wouldn't pass on Covid anyway so we don't know if masks are helping.
Thing is that masks are more like speed limits, bumpers etc to help protect others rather than belts, airbags that are to protect driver (and occupants).

Re: Coronavirus
 

Being the naturally selfish society we are, thats why masks have taken some persuading to wear

It is weird that when the virus was rife, the Govt said masks were no use, now the virus has abated they say we have to wear them... Sums up the shambolic approach.

Re: Coronavirus
 

They did say there was no scientific evidence to show masks had a real effect,maybe it's just about giving people a false sense of security to get life back to normal.
story in the local paper said over 100 people without masks went into a local nisa shop in one day .

https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/n...people-4449618

Re: Coronavirus
 

The World Health Organisation were saying the SAME thing, so the government were just following LONG ESTABLISHED WHO advice.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes, agreed, our knowledge in this area has come on leaps and bounds this year though I'm surprised that there wasn't research to hand from the Asian countries that have used face masks routinely.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Is there actually any proof that masks helped in those countries? Or did they simply not too many infected people coming into the country in the first place? Eg A small island/country can either not have a single case or could be completely overwhelmed, depending on whether any infected people go there.
Not going out at all, is preferable to going out with a mask. The masks aren't 100% effective and there is contact transmission. The more people go out, even with masks, the greater the chance they will pick up the virus.
It's only recently that it's recognised that merely breathing spreads it, rather than the previously thought coughing and sneezing. Sneezing and wet coughs are NOT symptoms of Covid-19, but are more generally symptoms of flu.
The previous mask advice was based upon actual studies. They didn't suddenly pronounce it from nowhere.
UK Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Strategy

Re: Coronavirus
 

Seeing some people wearing masks in an almost empty outside area is laughable.