Re: Coronavirus
 

Crap, I just installed a Huawei router. The Chinese brain controlling waves must have set him off.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No, that’s exactly not what anecdotal evidence is. What I’m saying is that because you know someone who has doesn’t mean that’s the norm across the entire country or that the sum total contributes significantly to the demand for tests.

I equally know, via social media, of people who got tests after being in pubs where there were positive tests. When the advice was to wait and see if symptoms materialised. Indeed, a test wouldn’t confirm that they wouldn’t go on to develop the virus anyway. Following the return of schools I know of entire families being sent for tests, on instruction of the school, and against NHS advice.

I’m sure there’s always been a percentage, I’m not convinced that is the reason for the current shortage.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You got that right.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Local council have sent out the latest COVID-19 infection rates in Leeds - 72.7 per 100,000, with 6.2% positive rate (According to criteria published by WHO in May, a positive rate of less than 5% is one indicator that the epidemic is under control in a country).

Re: Coronavirus
 

The infection rate as you post is 0.072% of local population..........ooooh.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yeah, it's extremely high :rolleyes: let's get on with our lives eh, by all means, protect the very vulnerable and the older population, but it's now becoming ridiculous.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No, it’s the new cases, and they have been doubling each week since three weeks ago...

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

It’s only low because of, and increasing despite, the restrictions in place. Open everything up and it goes through the roof, NHS overwhelmed, see Italy in February.

Unless of course we’ve hit herd immunity by accident - but if that was the case the test positivity rate would be falling and R wouldn’t be increasing.

I’m really not sure what the urgency is to test this, be wrong, cause unnecessary deaths and be in a second lockdown.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Wonder who really is at fault, MP's who request increase in testing and approve budget, civil servants who are tasked to implement it, the companies/units who need to ramp up capacity, the engineers doing the tests. What's the betting someone somewhere is earning nicely from the situation and at each phase "difficulties" will mean slower response or more cost.
Do we really want the government to micromanange each stage and every aspect all the time?

---
Reporting groups of 7 or more - our archery club now has added signs to the effect that archery is an organised sport and that we can have bigger groups (with distancing), sad we need to.

Re: Coronavirus
 

If you go grouse shooting you are exempt from the rule of six..Sorry can't provide a direct link but it's available here.

https://twitter.com/CAupdates?ref_sr...me-in-12071480

Re: Coronavirus
 

That's because of a general exemption for sports though, not specifically grouse shooting.

Re: Coronavirus
 

TBF the countryside alliance is doing itself no favours by framing it as it has ... the support of 'pro-shooting MPs' ...

Re: Coronavirus
 

Hancock says it’ll take “a matter of weeks” to resolve the testing problems. Bad news for the “shield the vulnerable” brigade if we can’t quickly and reliably identify who has the virus and what areas are most at risk such a strategy, despite its inherent flaws in any case, would be doomed.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No longer anecdotal it would seem.

Link

Re: Coronavirus
 

Would be particularly interested to see the source data. Not a Government spokesman, unsurprising, deflecting blame from the Government.

Are they asking people as they arrive at testing centres? If so, why are they not turning them away?

Is there a survey they send out with postal tests?

Re: Coronavirus
 

How do they reconcile "lots of people who shouldn’t be going to the centres are, which is why people can’t get tested" and "The testing centre was empty, but we couldn’t book an appointment online" & "Clare Oxenbury-Palmer went to an empty site at Oxford Parkway Park and Ride just outside Kidlington*"?

*from the linked article above

Re: Coronavirus
 

There is a question asking if you have symptoms when registering for a test but until recently you were allowed to get one if someone else had symptoms or you were a key worker. Looking at the site now it's changed to only if you have symptoms.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Of course we can criticise government, when it is justified, and I can understand people being frustrated. However, running around like mad men telling everyone they should resign is just childish. This whole coronavirus emergency has completely disrupted everything, and we are all learning as we go.

The testing thing has been a problem from the get-go because the tests have not been accurate and there was no point developing a system which was flawed. The government have been working with the experts on this and finally, it looks like we will have a quick and accurate system in place within a few weeks.

If you really think the other lot could do any better, you are delusional. The government has to rely on the civil servants to get things done - the government tells them what is required and they are supposed to get on with it. To listen to some of you on here it's as if you seriously believe that Matt Hancock is responsible for developing the tests single-handedly! On the contrary, he has recognised that the tests were inadequate and he has moved as quickly as possible to ensure that those responsible rectify the position.

As for the app, I'm not sure whether or not the blame should lie with the government but I am sure we will find out. Civil Servants have been providing some pretty dodgy advice to ministers about so many different things, and it is no wonder that the PM wants a shake up. Sometimes I do wonder whether the Civil Service are trying to set the government up to fail or whether they are simply incompetent.

There will be an inquiry about all of this in due course, and then it would be appropriate to criticise - when we know the facts. What we don't need at the moment is smart alecs trying to trip them up at every turn when they are having to deal with urgent problems in unprecedented circumstances on so many fronts.

Re: Coronavirus
 

In a few weeks. Oh my sides, Old Boy.

Should someone resign if it’s not available within a few weeks? If tens of millions are siphoned off into the private sector (again) with no tangible outputs?

You’re absolutely gullible. Probably self-selecting yourself into that category because of who you vote for.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Evidence?

I'm not sure if you are just being annoying or you are simply not understanding.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Old Boy it’s you leaping from hopeful optimism to hopeful optimism and have done so for months on this subject.

You’ve also made a pile of accusations against Civil Servants above without any evidence whatsoever, so you have an almighty cheek asking anyone else on the forum to provide any.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-boris-johnson

Hospital cases up, ICU cases up. Herd immunity/cases remaining in the young not looking good for you Old Boy.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Ah, I wondered where you were getting your information from! :D

I will rest my case.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm not seeing any smart Alecs trying to trip them up. I'm just seeing people like Kushan trying to get one for his child so they can return to school.

The solution seems to be to put in an Aberdeen post code, but Nick Hancock says this is gaming the system. So says the person who voted to break international law last night! What parent wouldn't put in an Aberdeen post code to get a local test for their child?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-54157983

Re: Coronavirus
 

Hospital admissions remain very low. The virus passing through the younger generation is to be welcomed as this will not generate a lot of increased deaths. We do need to protect those who are vulnerable though.

What is worrying is the increased number of cases in care homes. We still need to step up there.

---------- Post added at 17:49 ---------- Previous post was at 17:42 ----------

Nice to see you almost admitting that herd immunity is the only practical way of defeating this virus apart from your 'lockdown for as long as its necessary' solution.

The easing of restrictions is having the inevitable consequence, which we are already detecting amongst young people. Where this ends, I agree, depends on the extent to which herd immunity has now been achieved.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Straw man Old Boy, either that or you are incapable of reading and appreciating context.

Re: Coronavirus
 

l wonder if you would rest your case with other media outlets out there reporting on the testing shambles?.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/126749...g-coronavirus/

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/13...ocument-Europe

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-fiasco.html

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’ve not admitted anything of the sort. Maybe the sarcasm isn’t coming across but if it helps I can refer to “herd immunity”.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Pesky left-wing press. :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

The Times and the Telegraph two other papers from the left have been highly critical as well.;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

They can't be trusted either! :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

We'd still be in lockdown now if the pesky left-wingers were in power...;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

They all must have political agenda's.;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

@Seph I'm sure someone will do their best on here - not your good self though as you're more objective.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's the labs that have problem .just throw more money at it. If you are not a key worker stay away. Moaning does not help anyone.

Re: Coronavirus
 

On R5 this morning, the issue seemed to be the co-ordination between the private labs and the existing NHS labs. There is no overall awareness of capacity and the two sets of labs are working independently, even if they share peaks and troughs of capacity in each group, they do not share it between NHS and non-NHS labs.

Total testing capacity is apparently fine, it just needs allocating properly between labs regardless of ownership structure. Plenty of lab capacity in Aberdeen area hence recommended to use that post code to be tested in Teddington testing station.

However, that's just a radio report. it could be far off the mark.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Big governments dream.

Re: Coronavirus
 

They would have ‘followed the instincts of every father and every parent"

---------- Post added at 20:19 ---------- Previous post was at 20:17 ----------

Unless you are a Mod or an Admin, it is not appropriate to be giving orders to other CF'ers - kindly desist.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m not sure big government has anything to do with it. I’d hardly consider the Tories “big government” fans, or Macron.

While it suits some to politicise it the simple explanation is that the public won’t stand for tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of deaths because the Government is negligent. So the government needs either a competent plan or a lockdown as an emergency brake. The latter is absolutely inevitable unless the former comes into being, fast.

Re: Coronavirus
 

There is absolutely zero, and I mean zero, evidence to back that up.

If, and it’s a big if, there is a second wave - I personally don’t see it - it is highly unlikely it would surpass the wave we had in April given the heightened status of the country, hospital admissions and deaths remain low. There is no way “ hundreds of thousands” of deaths would ensue. That is sensationalism of the umpth-degree.

As has been said no many times in recent weeks/days, people can now see The direction of travel. Shield the vulnerable, but the general healthy population should just get on with it. Infections will rise, but if -as seems to be the case now - hospital admissions and deaths remain low.

You can call it “herd immunity” if you want, I don’t, but I would just call it living with it.

Thousands more, anymore that may succumb to any other illness, are not going to die in this country.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Zero evidence = the scientific modelling the Government - a Conservative Government - used to go into lockdown and making the largest amount of public expenditure supporting the economy that we’ve seen since the war.

The bad news Pierre is this situation will not unfold on the basis of what you consider “likely”. If you were right in your speculation the numbers wouldn’t be going up at all.

At least you accept “herd immunity” is accepting defeat, working from home the norm, social distancing encouraged like in Sweden and the economy tanking anyway.

There’s no evidence that hospital admissions will remain low, it’s pure conjecture, and in the absence of a functioning testing mechanism there’s no way to track or control the spread of the virus. Much like February the outcome is inevitable without any mitigation at all.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Get a grip, as you always ask on here, provide evidence to back that up!

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’ve pointed out before the scientific evidence we followed in March pointed to that. There’s no real evidence to discredit that modelling that anyone has made available.

You can ignore the evidence as often as you please as it’s particularly uncomfortable for you, however in the absence of improved treatments or mitigation (of which lockdown is the ultimate mitigation) that’s where we end up.

I’m at a loss to who wins by wilfully ignoring the science. We aren’t going back to normal so we are stuck in limbo, where the village idiots think it’s a deep state conspiracy, and rational people want to avoid death for them and their loved ones. Is there someone out there hoovering up or shorting stocks? I’d genuinely like to know...

I’ve got a perfect grip of the issue at hand. It’s others floundering from one stance to another in denial, to what end is a mystery.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I had to check that this wasn't dated April 1st!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-54158100

Re: Coronavirus
 

The mitigations that have been taken by most people are helping,wearing masks, social distancing,you cannot say that those are not helping, we didn't have those at the start of the pandemic, there has also been dexamethasone which has helped many people who suffered badly, so you cannot say that there has not been any improvement in treating this virus, also why did we not have hundreds of thousands of deaths at the start of the pandemic, and what about the thousands and thousands of people who have been out and about, on the beaches, at the pubs etc etc, this all happened months ago but the deaths from all of these people who were out and enjoying themselves hasn't materialised, has it?

Re: Coronavirus
 

You’re again using anecdotal evidence to justify your position. Those on the beaches it’s now almost universally accepted that outdoor risks are extremely low. The vast majority of pubs have put mitigation in place in respect of distancing.

So while you’ve witnessed these activities demonised in the newspapers they don’t amount to being the greatest opportunities for the virus to spread. It’s no coincidence that testing has broken when the schools have gone back - many children/young adults in close proximity with minimal distancing. Colleges and universities present the same risk.

Mass commuting crammed like cattle onto public transport and 40 hours a week in air conditioned offices all add the greatest opportunities for the virus to spread other than in your own home. Millions of close human contacts every day exchanging germs. A day out at the beach or a Saturday night on the tiles (in particular aggregated over the whole population as many will opt out) bears no comparison to commuting 10 times a week.

It does, at face value, appear treatments are helping and yes mitigations in place are helping just now, and have kept figures low over the summer. Removing these mitigations, however, ends one way.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No I'm not, so you're saying that all those people crammed on beaches doesn't have an effect on the spread of the virus? Outdoors does lessen the effect of the spread, I will agree on that, but when you have so many people close together like that i'd say you are still at significant risk, It's you who is trying to justify your outrageous claim that hundreds of thousands of people will die, so tell me this, why haven't hundreds and thousands of people died in the last six months?
Let's just see if all those being infected at the moment start filling up the hospitals and dying, I think not in my opinion.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Mitigation. Which in your post above you have agreed has had significant effects.

You’re only at significant risk on a beach if others on said beach are carrying the virus AND you are in close contact with them for a period of time. When the numbers were driven low in the summer it was statistically unlikely that you’d encounter a person at the beach with the virus, and statistically unlikely you’d catch it from them in an outdoor setting.

It’s already acknowledged that those carrying the infections at the moment are in the lower risk age group. They cannot be reliably isolated in the medium to long term from their wider families or from their older colleagues, especially in the absence of an effective test, trace, isolate regime. It’s inevitable then the virus will be in care homes and hospitals.

In uncontrolled, unmitigated circumstances exponential growth is inevitable, the NHS overwhelmed and that means deaths. I don’t think you disagree with that statement. It’s wishful thinking that the events of Italy in February won’t happen here if we did/do nothing. The only variable is the mitigation.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just getting back to testing for a sec ..

A mobile test centre turned up in our local town centre today.
All our local schools have also been provided with at least 10 tests for staff.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Which will probably be taken up by people that don't need them and fancy a test.... Any kid with the mildest of return to school sniffle. Any returning holiday maker, with no symptoms, but reckons they're owed a test just to be sure, even though they were advised not to travel.

It always falls down the Great Thick British public.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Most people who have had a test I feel would not regard it as a pleasurable experience and certainly not something to "fancy"

I've had 2 in the last 11 days and was provided with a sick bowl........

Maybe if people knew they might think twice.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Here you go.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...s-in-disgrace/

Re: Coronavirus
 

Opinion pieces by people who disagree does not constitute the model being inaccurate in and of itself.

Sweden did not have a formal lockdown in legislation but there were plenty of behavioural changes that would impact on the model - working from home remains the norm in Sweden, social distancing is encouraged, school years were educated from home.

Would that be a satisfactory outcome for the property developers for 40% of the UK workforce to remain working from home? I suspect not.

Re: Coronavirus
 

To be fair, "opinion pieces by people who disagree" seems to be a large number of links used as 'proof' posted by many here . . . on both sides of an argument ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

That’s very true. :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

This guy adder good idea :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

But the worst case scenario of the model, also assumed no behavioural changes and no smaller rule changes. Those things happened before full lockdown. It wasn't a case of lockdown being the first action of any sort to take place in the UK.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m not really sure the point you are making. We’d lost control of the virus, exponential spread was already out there. The behavioural changes instructed by the Government started on 16 March. Boris stood there and said we needed to stop all unnecessary human contact and those who can work from home should.

Lockdown was decided upon by this point it was simply a matter of when.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Au contraire mon ami

If working from home becomes the 'new norm' in many cases, we would see a sudden glut of unused - and unprofitable- office space.

Now look at the prices people are paying for the opportunity to have a roof over their head, and anyone with the cash/contacts/entrepreneurial background to put both of these together may well find themselves with a new and longer lasting bucket of wealth to enjoy ;)

If you can turn a few old pubs/shops/hotels into flats, an office block is childs play

Re: Coronavirus
 

Very good...:D

Re: Coronavirus
 

You didn’t write the new planning laws did you? :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

As is often pointed out on here, various laws and legislation can be 're-written' if financial gain is in the mix ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Already happening, and more will follow.

https://www.ocealife.com/projects/furness-house/

Re: Coronavirus
 

Bloody hell, they’re tiny!

Re: Coronavirus
 

They're big for SE England!

---------- Post added at 18:59 ---------- Previous post was at 17:42 ----------

Surely not? :angel:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...?ocid=msedgdhp

Re: Coronavirus
 

I can see a better headline:

EU's Barnier scraping barrel in desperation after losing out to Boris :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Future Minister for Housing or headline writer for the Daily Telegraph. The world is your Oyster as they say, Carth. :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not sure about that, one mans Oyster is another mans Barnacle ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

With all the recent resignations, there's bound to be at least one position in government for you to fill, Carth. ;)

If not, Dido Harding is always greatful for a bit of help on track and trace. :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

All the resignations?

I count 2 hardly significant ones so far.... :rolleyes:

You do like to "window dress" party contempt where none for the government seriously exists.

Re: Coronavirus
 

In fairness, although I’m sure it’s not really for this thread, I’m sure Andrew is also referring to senior civil servants and department heads. While some will no doubt dismiss them as being politically biased etc. many will have careers that go back as far as Blair, if not Major, and have served under Cameron and May.

Re: Coronavirus
 

A little light relief in these troubled times harms no one. ;)

The recent resigatiions that come to mind are:

• Lord Keen of Elie, the Advocate General for Scotland, 16th September
• Jonathan Jones, the Treasury solicitor and permanent secretary at the Government Legal Department, 8th September
• Simon Clarke MP, 8th September
• Rt Hon Anne-Marie Trevelyan MP 2nd September

Re: Coronavirus
 

That’s extra.

Re: Coronavirus
 

PPE required these days.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I have too much self respect to even consider a role in any Government . . :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-54166256

I suspect it's going to spread.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Unsubstantianted rumours that the CMO Chris Whitty is deeply concerned and as such was advising the prime minister that a short national lockdown might be needed.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Almost inevitably. The point of an effective test, trace, isolate regime is to make data driven decisions in real time. If it’s taking days to get a test and days to get results once tested, decision making is based on out of date evidence or projections in both numbers/geography.

Asking people to self isolate while waiting for test results will have a diminishing level of compliance the longer it goes on. Unscrupulous, and low paying, employers will insist that low paid staff still attend work or go without pay, etc. Without a safety net greater numbers will take risks more often.

---------- Post added at 09:42 ---------- Previous post was at 09:42 ----------

If so, a solid move for the inevitable public enquiry.

Re: Coronavirus
 

100% agree on the bold section, lots of places already running on the edge of 'breaking even' and can't afford another hit.

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-54188766

So it starts.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It started in my area a while ago Maggy. Most of Greater Manchester has had increased lockdown restrictions for some weeks. Whist the areas you link have infection rates uo to 103:10000
Greater Manchester has rates of up to 189:10000 with 3 of the 10 Boroughs in Gtr Manchester being higher than the rate recorded in Sunderland.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...eater-18946255

Re: Coronavirus
 

I have lost count walking around my supermarket where people refuse to wear a mask or wear it under the nose.

Sorry I see no valid reason for someone to be walking next me without a mask possibly spreading this disease.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well who'd have thought it? Send everyone back to work, school and open pubs, restaurants and cases spiral...
Rocket science, it isn't.

Re: Coronavirus
 

We went to Dorset for the day yesterday and it was exactly the same in some of the places we went into..

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes. Now making the news:

https://www.ft.com/content/77a1e3b6-...f-df19fd22f235

Re: Coronavirus
 

It’s going to be glorious. A little bit of history repeating as the hope in March was to cling on to the Easter holidays.

Re: Coronavirus
 

We need to see death rates and hospital admission rates first.

The only reason for the initial lockdown was so the NHS was not overwhelmed. Yes we are seeing more CV19 cases, but if hospital admissions are not going up to say, “ amber alert” levels then there is no need for a lockdown.

A rise in recorded infections in itself is not an issue. Perspective is being lost here.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Those are simply a matter of time. Spain had 239 deaths today. if you’re clinging to Old Boy’s speculation that making a mess of it the first time will benefit us in the long run then you’re both in for a rude awakening.

Tracking and testing has proven insufficient. The Government has lost control of the virus for a second time. The people will be far less forgiving.

The emergency brake is therefore imminent. If only someone could have saw this coming.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Let's wait and see. Having a plan for a national lockdown is prudent but as Pierre said some perspective is needed. I think we can see alarm bells ringing but we're not yet at the point of extreme measures being required.

This is actually where the testing screw up is bad since right now is when we need it. If everyone could get a test when they need it and we could flood problem areas with tests then we could accurately judge the scale of the problem. For the testing system to fail just as the cases rise and schools go back is sort of a perfect storm - not that they're entirely unconnected.

I don't want another national lockdown, it would be so damaging to the economy as well. It really needs to be the last resort.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The economy tanks anyway when the virus is out of control. It can’t be isolated from the health issue. Rational consumers stay home and spend less. The workforce that can work from home will continue to do so if they and their employers have no confidence in the virus response.

The lesson from the first lockdown was it was too late, cost lives and lasted longer as a result. When the virus is doubling every 3-4 days a week is a long time to hesitate. I’d say we aren’t at the 3-4 days stage yet, but we could easily be there with no way of knowing within a couple of weeks with this testing shambles.

The longer it takes to get results the greater the risk of non-compliance.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Limited and specific should be the guiding philosophy for our lockdowns and not for our law-breaking. ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

It was lost a long time ago.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Surely you mean "Difficult and highly exceptional circumstances"?

---------- Post added at 00:07 ---------- Previous post was at 00:02 ----------

Unfortunately, as hospital admissions and death rates follow on from infection in a 2 to 4 week cycle, and if the infection rate gets back to doubling every 3 or 4 days, by the time you see the effects, it’s too late...

It’s like only applying your brakes after you’ve hit someone, rather than when you saw them beginning to cross the road.

Epidemiologists - what do they know?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Leeds and Lancashire look like they could be in line for the next local coronavirus lockdowns.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...irus-lockdowns

Re: Coronavirus
 

Downing Street press office out warming everyone up to some ideas.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54199642

Sorry I meant Laura K.

Hancock on Sky News:

Let’s wait and see if miracles happen and it goes away by itself.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I have been into a couple of places without a mask, sometimes I didn't have one BUT I looked inside first - no other customers and then asked the store keeper if it was OK - all times it was just popping in for something already decided (this was mostly on way back from beach and seeing icecream shop open - we gave our order that they fetched the goods for us and we paid).

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

To be fair there are numerous people who are exempt from the mask rules.

4.3 million adults with asthma for example.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It might be worth remembering that not everyone has to wear a mask,some people are exempt, so perhaps instead of whining about who isn't wearing one people should mind their own business, just a thought :)