Re: Coronavirus
 

Yup.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/footb...t-second-time/

I think he has still got it from the first time he was tested, but has since been tested again, so not sure if he's actually had it twice.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Ah, I was thinking he’d had it much earlier in the year rather than a few weeks ago. 2020 has all blurred into one.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You can still pick up the virus again, but shouldn't reach the infectious or affected by disease stages.
Presence of the virus doesn't necessarily mean you are able to infect anybody else. His immune system should deal with it quickly and get rid of it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Or it could just be a false positive.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Don't forget the death figure is people who have died within 28 days of a positive test or the figures I get pushed are. This could still include people going under a bus on day 27 if true. Still they can be comparable so if methodology and the percentages of bus fatalities is same. (And for those personally involved 1 is too high).

Re: Coronavirus
 

The number of hospital admissions for covid can't really be disputed, and that is going upwards.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Wife works in Adult Social Care . . the number of (elderly) people going into hospital with non threatening illness, and subsequently later testing positive (with no symptoms) while in there is probably - IMO - skewing the data.

Did they have Covid before admission, did they catch it while in hospital, or are the tests flawed?

You decide because no bugger else can :rolleyes:

Re: Coronavirus
 

They're being admitted because of a positive test and being badly affected by it, not testing positive afterwards.:rolleyes:

Re: Coronavirus
 

They could also die in ICU on the 29th day after their most recent positive test having never recovered from Coronavirus.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not always. :rolleyes: My elderly friend was admitted to hospital becasue her breathing had become very laboured, she is 87 and has COPD. They did a routine test for Covid-19 at her residential care home the week before and again on admission to hospital. Negative. They tested her again a week later and she is now positive.

The symptoms of Covid-19 aren't always as clear cut as we first thought and people are being admitted to hospital who have age related symptoms or preexisting condtion problems and not always because they have already had a positive test result. Luckily my friend is improving.

Re: Coronavirus
 

These figures are for covid admissions ONLY.
Link

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/s...-a4573267.html

---------- Post added at 15:46 ---------- Previous post was at 14:11 ----------

Airport testing helps Charles de Gaulle overtake Heathrow for the first time!

https://news.sky.com/story/pariss-ch...rport-12116818

Re: Coronavirus
 

BREAKING: Germany will enter a four-week lockdown from 2 November, Chancellor Angela Merkel has announced.

The details include:

• Bars and pubs to shut
• Restaurants to shut except for takeaway
• Gyms, cinemas and theatres to close
• Private gatherings banned for more than 10 people and more than two households
• Hotels to close to tourists and stay open only for essential reasons
• Non-essential travel discouraged
• Shops to stay open but with fewer than one person per 10 square metres
• Schools, kindergartens and day care centres to stay open
• Ms Merkel said she "wants to make sure" nursing homes can still receive visitors during the lockdown, which will be reviewed in two weeks.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It’s a spike, probably due to delays in reporting.

Across all metrics, admissions, ICU beds & deaths, we’re currently around 25% of the volume of the peak of the initial wave.

Looking at the numbers if this current increase continued to rise at it’s present rate we’d hit the same numbers of the initial Wave around June next year.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I doubt this post will age well. I'm only really commenting to make it easier to find at a later date.

Re: Coronavirus
 

BREAKING: Macron announces France will follow Germany into 2nd national lockdown from Friday.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The riots should be worth watching.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Meanwhile, they have changed their minds again about Notts :rolleyes:
Now all of Nottinghamshire will enter T3, from Friday (previously Thursday).

Oh, and add this to the latest of bizarre rules ;
I'm sure they no longer have any clue what they are doing, how is that rule going to help in any way. :confused:

Re: Coronavirus
 

If you're having a glass of wine with a meal, you're less likely to get leathered and then go out and flout the lockdown rules than if you just go down the boozer for eight pints.

That's the rationale, anyway. I don't know what the evidence base for it is.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It just means people will have to get the party booze in before they go to the pub,people have had enough of lockdowns and orders.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m only observing the numbers as they are currently and extrapolating from the slope of the chart.

As although recorded infections has gone off the chart, the other metrics have generally stayed on a gradual slope.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deaths

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/healthcare

Re: Coronavirus
 

So very true, get the children told. :rolleyes:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Hmmm, so 'Deaths with COVID-19 on the death certificate' are 109 per day, as opposed to the 'Deaths within 28 days of positive test' which is 310 per day. So why are we still using this meaninless second figure (other than to inflate the rate, and make things look worse).

Even using those inflated figures, the daily graph shows we are nowhere near the levels back in April.

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2020/10/9.png

Re: Coronavirus
 

I think we'll follow mainland Europe into lockdown tbh.

Re: Coronavirus
 

l cannot disagree with that viewpoint.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just in time for Wales to come out of one.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes, probably. Late again so as to inflict maximum damage on ourselves.

Christmas being cancelled will be good news for many. It's humbug, and families are tiresome as well as infectious/boring ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

You must be a great laugh at parties.;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

All we need is the holy spirit.

Link

LMFAO!

Re: Coronavirus
 

Trump being a 'christian' is the most implausible bit. I'm sure all the ladies he bragged about grasping by the nether regions would agree.

Re: Coronavirus
 

This is the same guy who went on and on about how he really needs a private jet.



Basically, they need one because when they're having full back and forth conversations with God (which they do obviously) they can't do it on normal airlines.

His face is so weird, it contorts itself into a caricature of a Disney villain.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Metro says that Whitehall sources claim that Johnson will resign in 6 months because his salary is too low, but first he wants to 'see us through the worst of the pandemic' and 'get Brexit done'.

https://metro.co.uk/2020/10/18/boris...xqZIOKMIQ0KSl4

Re: Coronavirus
 

Lifes hard being Boris. Maybe he can claim Universal Credit? Still no one, including him, seem sure how many kids he's procreated .

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well, that's what happens when you ignore Withdrawal Agreements that the other party thinks you've entered into in good faith :shocked:.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

R number nearly 3 in London, according to Imperial College London.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...ost-3-22923931

Re: Coronavirus
 

Interesting, it also shows the North East R number halving.

Is something working there?

Re: Coronavirus
 

That'll spring the Government into action. Prepare for school closures.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Party weekend in West Yorkshire. Why not just say Tier 3 from now?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Because the changes carry legal implications. They have to give fair notice.

Re: Coronavirus
 

When Boris closed the pubs did that not apply from 2 hours after he said it?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Nothing will change.

However, I can totally see why they are doing it when a very worryingly number of 8 people are in ICU with COVID in Huddersfield and Halifax hospitals.


8

Re: Coronavirus
 

8 people, the NHS must be near to collapse.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Indeed.

Just to back up my post

https://www.cht.nhs.uk/home/news/?tx...98788ef2ba2345

204 deaths, since the pandemic began!!!!!! Shut it down.

https://youtu.be/2RtDdctNOv0

Re: Coronavirus
 

Bradford Royal Infirmary

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm sure the other 95 inpatients with COVID are just there keeping the beds warm and using up NHS resources unnecessarily so they can save on their gas and electricity bills at home.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Indeed.

Leeds general Infirmary has more covid patients in beds now than at the height of the first wave.

Re: Coronavirus
 

148 in Pinderfields, at the height of the first wave was 170 but Wakefield are a week or so behind Leeds.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Interesting piece in the sun by Dr jon dobinson.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/130601...-act-humanely/

Re: Coronavirus
 

So finally it emerges that all this talk of, "we should be following Germany's example" is and was a load of nonsense.

Re: Coronavirus
 

In what sense? Less cases, less deaths, greater population?

We’ve had areas under lockdown restrictions for months now. They’re being proactive and, all going well, such measures will be taken at an appropriate time. On the other hand we continue to ignore scientific advice.

If, or more likely when, Germany ease restrictions we will likely be in the mire for a further period of time due to not taking quick and decisive action.

---------- Post added at 08:18 ---------- Previous post was at 08:16 ----------

Only interesting in the sense the British press usually enjoy stoking fear.

Struggling to reconcile points 2 and 4

“Second, all lives should be of equal importance and everyone should have a right to hospital treatment. “

“And in the case of Covid you are typically talking about lives which have already been long. “

So not equal then?

Re: Coronavirus
 

France and Germany are facing restrictions, whereas in the UK, everybody, especially the media:mad:, constantly whinge about restrictions. If only people and the media spent more time obeying existing rules and restrictions, rather than desperately trying to find loopholes.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Murdoch can be first..

Re: Coronavirus
 

The mask is slipping from the “herd immunity” crowd.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...box=1604006680

Notably they didn’t ask what threshold he would put on it.

He’s also invoked socialism. Someone should point out neither President Macron or Chancellor Merkel are politicians of the left.

Re: Coronavirus
 

This is a telling graph:

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...7&d=1604052468

The one country that decided to not to go lockdown mad but just follow sensible restrictions is avoiding the second wave and also the willfull destruction of parts of its economy.

Herd immunity?

Attachment 28637

Re: Coronavirus
 

I do enjoy a selective interpretation of what Sweden have done and an associated graph. I think Sweden is finding cases are rising. More cases recorded on 27th than at any time in the first wave.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Social distancing?

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3765

And anyway:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Everybody is seeing more “cases”, which has already been shown to be a red herring of a metric that doesn’t really tell you anything useful, only just how non-lethal the virus really is.

That graph shows deaths which is a much better metric to use.

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://time.com/5899432/sweden-coronovirus-disaster/
We're at 63.29 per 100,000 on the same date according to that article.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So they did less than we did. We shut schools, they didn’t.

Bottom line is, it is becoming more and more apparent that no matter what strategy any nation used there hasn’t really been any real successes. Just least worst.

So the one that keeps it’s economy going and doesn’t bankrupt itself will be the winner in the long run.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Too much is dependent on the population size and density, wherever an outbreak occurs, and the behaviour of the people in that area.
A remote area may be badly affected, if a large number of people bring it into that area, whereas a densely populated area may not be affected that much, if only one or two people bring it into that area, and the people behave responsibly.


Link

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not sure what point you’re making?

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...d-19-infection


---------- Post added at 10:39 ---------- Previous post was at 10:37 ----------
My point is that the argument was we should be 'open up' like Sweden. But even with the measures we have done we've got a higher death rate.

You can bet money it would be even higher if there had consistently been less restrictions as argued for.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And of course showing the “deaths” graph in the previous form is skewed because of the disproportionate amount of deaths in care homes due to the absence of measures to prevent this.

I agree deaths is a good figure to use though and in the UK that figure is most definitely going the wrong way. So how do you propose to cause less deaths by opening up further?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yay for Taiwan!

Not so much “open up” but don’t “shut down”. Have sensible consistent restrictions and guidance that people will adhere to.

---------- Post added at 11:02 ---------- Previous post was at 10:52 ----------

No denying that they are going up, but currently on a shallow trajectory.

In regards to “opening up”. As I said in the previous post I just don’t think that shutting down is the answer.

We also need to remove inconsistencies, how can theatres/ cinemas be allowed to open and outside sporting venues not?

Inside only families be allowed around a table, outside 6 from different households around same size table. Is a marquee inside or outside? My local thinks it’s outside.

I could go on, the contradictions in regards to kids/schools......

Shut downs are not the answer. I don’t think there is an answer, so we have think differently

Re: Coronavirus
 

"Dr" Jon Dobinson isn't a doctor - he's a Marketing Executive...

(amusingly, for a Marketing/Creative company, the latest news on their web-page is two years old..)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Taiwan did "shut down" to people coming into the country. Having a population that is much more likely to behave responsibly also helps enormously.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Surely hospital cases would be better - treatment is better, but people are surviving with medium to long-term effects.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So, what is wrong in the UK. Do we?

1. have sensible restrictions but a degree of the population fail to follow them because <answers on a postcard>

2, We don't have sensible restrictions a degree of the population fail to follow them because they're not sensible.

My thoughts are that as a society the UK is quite immature compared to other nations.

Re: Coronavirus
 

But this is the thing - the inconsistencies aren’t because activity X is safer than activity Y. It’s about minimising unnecessary social interactions while keeping open sectors that have been been deemed to be critical. A range of activities on any scale have to be discounted because of the numbers of people involved rather than the inherent risk involved in the activity.

If everyone lived their life on the basis of what they are doing in schools there’d be effectively no restrictions at all and we know where that leads.

Perhaps Nomadking is right and it’s our population that’s the problem. Instead of generally working within guidance we look for loopholes in legislation. Which is why any kind of Swedish approach appealing for people to take individual responsibility is doomed from outset.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Surely the UK population knows the score on CV. But are they immature as a whole? No, of course not. And I don't consider other European nations to be any different in that sense.

The immature minority, however, can cause infection chaos through their casual carelessness.

With regard to whether or not we have sensible restrictions:

I would say that the tiering system is eminently sensible as it does not introduce more restrictions than are necessary across the country. The challenge is, as you say, with maturity so that people in a a higher tier area don't go round contaminating their lower tier neighbours.

Because that can't be controlled, let it rip is the answer with special protection and support given to vulnerable people. That way the economy can continue recovery etc.


ns

Re: Coronavirus
 

We have inconsistent, sensible and not so sensible restrictions.

Re: Coronavirus
 

They’re only inconsistent if people are being wilfully ignorant.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And some as we know are being wilfully ignorant.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The number of professional footballers contracting the virus would suggest imposing tighter restrictions on the sport, but that would upset Sky and the big money boys, so it's exempt I guess :rolleyes:

No problem with those traveling the length and breadth of the country at least once a week, from Tier 3 areas too . . . essential business to whom? 'sigh'

Re: Coronavirus
 

They're inconsistent restrictions because in England we don't have the medically-advised single circuit break, we have on paper three levels in England with further sub-levels eg Nottingham 9pm alcohol rule plus autonomy in the four nations with different tiers in those nations too.
Plus a lot of the legislation is being made on the hoof hence how open does a marque need to be open to count as being inside and not outside?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Apply the same logic to a smoking shelter, there's your answer :p:

Re: Coronavirus
 

A classic example just coming up there from a journalist in the Scottish press briefing.

At one level serving alcohol is permitted with a substantial meal. Now, any reasonable person would concede the intention isn't to spend 12 hours in a pub with a packet of crisps or a sausage roll.

However here in the UK we will see many people flouting this until they put it in legislation. :rolleyes:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Then we need to consider how do we ensure that the percentage of the population that aren't adhering to restrictions are 'brought to heel' so to speak. The police service is in no way shape or form able to deal with that.

There's questions around the let it rip argument

a. How do you decide who needs be be shielded ? How far do you take it? Do the carers of those that are for example in nursing homes also need to shield?
b.How do you enforce that those who are required to shield do so?
c. How do we ensure that by allowing the virus to let rip that we don't overload the NHS
d. Would is be reasonable to say that by allowing the virus to burn through we risk civiil unrest due to lack of manpower in emergency services such as those in the police who have to either self isolate, or those that unfortunately die

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

It is indeed, there seems to be a distinct lack of answers though (not from you may i add)

The government is going to have to do one of two things

Let it rip and accept the country may well collapse

or

multiple circuit breakers until a vaccine is available

There's no alternatives that i can see.

---------- Post added at 14:16 ---------- Previous post was at 14:14 ----------


We also have media that don't know the restrictions... The Sun (amongst others) for example are saying that support bubbles cannot meet inside a private dwelling or in a private garden in areas that are Tier 2 or Tier 3

Re: Coronavirus
 

Sad to say but this sort of thing is actually taught and encouraged by journalist training centres (yes, they do exist, and very few hacks won’t have been to one, especially if they started on local or regional press as I did).

British journalism has an enormous narcissistic streak, it is enamoured of its own legends and traditions, and the behaviour of the “press pack” at a news conference is very much one of them. The game in a briefing like this is to catch out the person giving the presentation. If this can be achieved, you have a ready-made political story of incompetence. The Downing Street coronavirus briefings quite early on restricted each hack to one question (normally a follow-up question would be allowed) because they got sick of reporters trying to play “gotcha” rather than engaging with the unfolding crisis itself. Idiots trying to pick holes in the precise difference between a substantial dinner and a pie with 12 pints is just par for the course.

Re: Coronavirus
 

A pie and 12 pints is more than enough dinner for me.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

12 pints in 12 hours, that's slow drinking.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Dinner hour matey.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And for those reasons together with no proven evidence of lasting immunity, governments of all political persuasions have said no.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Lightweight :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Until we have the answers to the conundrum, surely let it rip is not the route to take?

Re: Coronavirus
 

The purpose of lockdowns is to stop the spread of the virus. It's been proved that they work.

Interesting approach in Central Europe:
https://www.ft.com/content/96e67b98-...a-eaf8b0d3a4db
Also see: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...261-3/fulltext

Re: Coronavirus
 

Of course you will. I don’t know how old you are but back in the 80’s licencing hours in the U.K. on Sunday you had to close between 3-6 but if you err a pub that served food you could stay open for diners and you could only drink whilst eating.

The amount of cheese sandwiches And chips we used to sell, and yes, it can easily take 3 hrs to eat a sandwich and some chips.

---------- Post added at 17:46 ---------- Previous post was at 17:44 ----------

You have to think of a different strategy. We are policed by consent and don’t take kindly to the jackboot of oppression enforcing incoherent legislation.

Re: Coronavirus
 

"Can you please behave reasonably" ≠ ‘Jackboot of oppression"...

Re: Coronavirus
 

Behave reasonably Whilst adhering to unreasonable, incoherent, inconsistent legislation.

Law is order, and good law is good order.

This on the other hand...................

Re: Coronavirus
 

And that’s why we can’t trust the public to exercise good judgement.

If they want to revolt. Let them. Bring the whole corrupt system down while they are at it.