Re: Coronavirus
 

It is not a legal requirement to stop at a pedestrian crossing

Re: Coronavirus
 

I think you’ll find if the pedestrian has started to cross, there is.

Of course we’re talking Zebra crossings. Obviously if it’s managed by lights of course you are.

---------- Post added at 19:13 ---------- Previous post was at 19:12 ----------

See above.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Are you compelled to, thought it was give way to pedestrians on the crossing? We've taken it upon ourselves to stop for those waiting

Re: Coronavirus
 

Apologies, yes you must stop if someone has set foot onto a zebra crossing but not if they’re approaching/waiting

Re: Coronavirus
 

Correct.

But it’s a brave, or stupid, motorist that doesn’t anticipate a pedestrian stood waiting on a crossing may cross as you’re approaching so best to let them, if safe to do so.

Re: Coronavirus
 

why would they be wearing a mask to cross the road

Re: Coronavirus
 

Probably they're chickens that are sick of hearing the joke? :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Why would most people be wearing one driving?

Re: Coronavirus
 

I do see lots of people wearing masks while driving alone and i wonder why.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not really affecting you though is it? They might be in and out of people's houses.
I see lots having chats on the phone/texting whilst driving and wonder why? Wearing a mask is unlikely to kill me, them on the phone might.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yeah they probably shouldn't be allowed on the road if they're caught doing that to often or be near sharp objects

Re: Coronavirus
 

My 17-year-old nephew has been offered a jab (He's 18 on Halloween) and falls in the new bracket.


He will get it. His 20-year-old sister has had her first jab.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

I took my daughter in to London yesterday for a hospital appointment and it was interesting travelling on the tube. Probably around 70% of people were wearing masks but we also saw people not wearing a mask on the platform and putting one on when getting on the train and others wearing a mask on the platform and taking it off when getting on the train (bear in mind that most of our journey was above ground) There was a scramble for masks when two TFL employees got on our train at Finchley Road!

My daughter and I wore masks BTW - conditions of travel and all that...

Thank heavens for air condition on the subsurface line trains though. Wouldn't have liked wearing a mask on the Circle Line for example.

Elsewhere, things were close to 100% at the hospital, both staff and patients

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just been for my second maskless shop and it's about 50/50 for wearing /not wearing.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Based on some of my recent trips into supermarkets, I’m going to guess that most of those not wearing masks now, weren’t wearing them last month.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's been very good here for mask wearing [when it was a requirement] give it a few days and mask wearing will probably be a thing of the past for the majority.

I should also say that hardly anyone has followed the rules on gatherings and meeting up indoors around here.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I wouldn't say that was anything to be particularly proud of.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I don't know that they were proud of it, i just observed that they did their own thing.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Many people I know have interpreted the rules to suit themselves and I think you’ll find it’s the same up and down the country.

The control freaks must be fuming.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

The point, my perfidious little radge packet ;) is that if those rates continue in that manner (unchecked) the nhs may well be at breaking point and we will be in lockdown again by early-mid September

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

I dont know numbers, but i don't believe you can reasonably expect the frontline NHS to keep operating at the level they have for the past eighteen months. it's not sustainable.


re your second question. nothing at all, just joshing :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just been to my local butchers masks still required every one seemed happy to comply.

Re: Coronavirus
 

What people seem to conveniently forget about all this whining about being "pinged", is that a set of circumstances has occurred.
IE C(who may not have caught it) will have been pinged because of sufficient contact with B, who has the virus but may not reach the stage of being able to transmit it to C and others, who in turn has had sufficient contact with A, who not only has the virus, but has transmitted it to B.
Even if B & C don't suffer any effects and can't transmit it, A is still an ACTIVE threat, and may have transmitted it to many others, who in turn also may be an ACTIVE threat.
As long as people are being pinged, there is somebody else out there in the chain, with the virus and able and "willing" to transmit it to others.
B & C may possibly be "safe" to not have to self-isolate, but the indications are that there a large number of A's out there who are not "safe".
It's not the harmless situation it's being made out to be by the media.:mad:

Re: Coronavirus
 

given the above,

Are we not getting to a point where we (the government) needs to make a decision as to what is less damaging to the economy, reintroduction of some restrictions (I wont say lockdown) or allowing 'pingdemic' to continue?

Re: Coronavirus
 

The blog in the ZOE app stats a change in the data collection to account for increase in percentage vaccinates, use of LFT positives etc. My reading of this would be an increase in the numbers reporting infection.


I think that if other figures have also had adjustments comparative figures may be a tad difficult. Good sources will try to adjust or provide mechanisms to compare datasets. I'm guessing media outlets will simply show figures to get the best headlines.


I've not been shopping since 19th but I'll have a mask with me and while I loathe the thing I will likely use it if requested by store policy. (And don't forget to keep saying thank you to all those working in "these" jobs, I always try to say thank you to the cleaners and others like them doing the less glamorous tasks as well as the more obvious "front line" people.)

Re: Coronavirus
 

The bottom line is, the evidence of the effectiveness of masks is flimsy and always has been.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Mainly because the type of mask available to the public does not stop all particles from leaving or entering the individual. Only a full medical grade mask can do that.

Anyway the rule, when it existed, only said cover the face. Anything would do from a mask or scarf to a bandana. Some people only wore a transparent visor that had zero effectiveness.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Almost any covering will have some effect even if really small including the visors.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You mean like one of these?

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2021/07/3.jpg

The sort of thing that's quite probably used extensively in most UK factories

Re: Coronavirus
 

Indeed, a surgical PPE grade mask, worn in very enclosed spaces does offer a decent level of protection something like 79-90% if I recall. Which is why in hospital nurses wear a face mask “and” a visor.

Cheapo masks, Cloth masks, scarves, bandanna, and such like aren’t worth the effort in reality.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Projections put them at the same levels as 1st lockdown if current rate of growth continues unchecked. (Sky News this morning)

Still pingdemic will get us first ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

"current rate of growth"

A interesting turn of phrase, especially when used alongside "projections"

What's the current infection figure . . 50,000 ish daily?

Let's go with 2% of those being hospitalised . . that's 1000 daily into hospital, of which probably 2% (20 people) may need an ICU bed.

Now if we move that figure along by 30 days, we have 600 people in an ICU bed, 60 days gives us 1200 people, and 90 days gives us 1800 Covid patients requiring an ICU bed . . . which is less than 1 patient per UK hospital.

Yes yes, I know that's not how it works . . . but it's how statistics work ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

those clear masks off ZERO protection

Re: Coronavirus
 

In combination with other measures, the science shows masks reduce infection.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/372/6549/1439 https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/41...-masks-prevent https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118

Re: Coronavirus
 

Viruses can enter the body via the eyes - that's where a visor comes in useful.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The eyes are really bad for virus control . . . they see one unsubstantiated post on Twitter and suddenly it's all over Facebook etc :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

As per my subsequent post, proper surgical grade, masks do. Others don’t. And how many people are wearing proper surgical grade masks? Not many.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...-covid-spread/

Re: Coronavirus
 

I will await Colin Axons paper being published in a journal such as Science or PNAS here this the ones Hugh posted...

He rightly says that virus particles are much smaller than the gaps in masks but no one is claiming that masks will stop naked virus particles, not even hardcore surgical masks. Cloth masks are designed to catch liquid droplets.

In the end what is the price of being wrong? If masks do nothing to protect yourself or others, then the price of wearing a mask over not wearing one is a slightly sweaty face. If masks do protect the wearer or others, then the price of not wearing one is the further spread of COVID.

Re: Coronavirus
 

virus particles might be smaller but what they're mainly in isn't, tiny droplets of saliva etc

Re: Coronavirus
 

Absolutely, spit, snot etc is where it’s at. Droplets vs. aerosol vs airborne transmission s important here.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Sadly not according to some it isn't, I don't know what agenda the anti maskers are working to either tbh, the discredited disinformation that's still bring spouted :spin:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Antima, and the Anti-Vaxxers, Antiva... ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

just been to the shop, only 1 mask wearer ,even the staff are mask free.
they are discussing whether to have a mask on hour in shops on the Jeremy vine show, they are suggesting 7am-8am.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just in John Lewis - about 95+% wearing masks (including staff).

Re: Coronavirus
 

Popped into my local Sainsbury's, they had a sign saying, although masks are no longer required, please wear them to protect others.


But most people were putting them on as they approached.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Are we just going to get hourly mask updates on this thread now?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Sounds like a plan as it's as about as exciting as anything else on CF ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Looks like another slow news day for Covid-19, a quick browse of the media sites shows a rehash of stuff we already know, with a 'very slight' drop in cases.

Pingdemic is still with us, but that will drop off shortly when more people have deleted the app.

Long Covid seems to be getting more mentions, maybe that's going to be the new story to go with?

Scientists etc are looking at a new variant found in the UK (16 cases) but that's been pushed far behind the Olympics, storm warnings, and quarantine exemptions. No information yet on how infectious or dangerous it is compared to others.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Looks like the pingdemic is causing more problems than the virus.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Did you miss this story about more people downloading it? It's almost as if some people fancy 10 days off work in the middle of summer ;)

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/23/uk-c...ads-spike.html

Re: Coronavirus
 

I wonder how many downloaded the app so they could easily "register" when visiting pubs/restaurants etc, and then turned it off? ;)

Have to agree some may use it as a chance of 10 days paid leave, especially those working in crap conditions on minimum wage, I however have no need of such subterfuge ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

With the number of infections now decreasing (since the peak of 15 July), hopefully things are now starting to ease. Fingers crossed. The virus seems to be running out of people with no immunity to infect. Herd immunity is almost at hand. And if that’s the case, the worries some have tried to give us all about an autumn wave will be put to rest.

I don’t believe that vaccine passports for domestic purposes will be required in the end. Foreign travel is a different matter due to the dangers variants pose to us.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Here’s hoping that’s true.

However, the peak was on the 17th July, and in July alone, we’ve had two previous 2 day reductions in infections*, so probably sensible to wait for a longer trend before making predictions…

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deta..._date_reported

*Cases by dates reported - 10th/11th July were lower than 9th July, and 18th/19th July were lower than 17th then it went upwards again, then dipped for the following three days

Re: Coronavirus
 

So now you know what to do with that second mask. :D

Telegraph link left in for those who have access.

Re: Coronavirus
 

According to this, the peak was 15 July, Hugh.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...oint-expected/

[EXTRACT]

Yet there are early signs that Britain has already peaked – and has done so at a far lower point than anyone expected. On July 15, the country recorded 60,676 cases, and infections have been largely falling ever since.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It’ll be interesting to see if that’s reflected in the ONS surveys which will remove the variation in the number of tests being carried out.

It’s funny how the “but we are testing more” brigade as a result of increases never say “but we are testing less” in response to decreases.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Are we testing less?

If the rumoured plans go ahead, many people could well be testing daily . . or at least twice a week in some cases. Then we'll see some figures :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

The 7 day average on the gov.uk dashboard is going downwards.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The difference is the Telegraph is reporting the Cases by specimen date peak on the dates the specimens were tested, and everyone else (I believe) is reporting the Cases by date reported peak date.

Anyway, another link to today's Telegraph.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-h...-cases-deaths/

Re: Coronavirus
 

1) Schools are now on summer break and I assume that the children will no longer be regularly tested thus reducing positive test results from that large cohort.

2) How many people will continue testing if Free Lateral Flow tests are stopped from September reducing number of those voluntarily testing and being found to be asymptomatic. Which would mean only those who have symptomatic Covid 19 would have cause to voluntarily confirm their infection by applying to use a PCR test.

Even those who use the lateral flow tests may not be reporting their reults as ...Maybe I am missing something obvious but it seems to me that we can't place any real significance to the positive case numbers we are seeing.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Agreed, especially when the Govt. site has this on the 'testing' page:

Still, it makes good copy ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

It does. I have major reservations about the way transmission rates are being compiled, to be honest.

It’s the same with number of deaths. We have been very ‘generous’ with the number of deaths due to Covid. If Covid is detected on admission to hospital, if they die the record records it as a Covid death, even if they died of something else. Deaths due to Covid in care homes and in the community are recorded too, but other countries are not recording the same. Some only record hospital deaths.

Because we all calculate numbers in different ways, it is absolutely pointless to compare country by country, and yet even professional people who should know better do this.

We really are our own worst enemy sometimes.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yawn. We did this tedious nonsense last year.

Who is trying to exaggerate the pandemic? To what end?

The Conservative Party? Honestly?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Oh, I'm not sure.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...AMwlmV?ocid=st

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not really . . . but we are quite adept at pi$$ing people off :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

mine could kill a skunk at 400 yards

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

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

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...1&d=1627165407

Re: Coronavirus
 

The government has just used the new travel RAG list


Amber

Amber +


Amber ++

Amber Ultra

I can’t believe it’s not Amber

Double secret Amber.

That should clear up any confusion.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's a bit amberbiguous :dig:

Re: Coronavirus
 

One day, you'll actually answer the point being made instead of making derogatory, often unrelated comments on every post you want to argue with.

If you had an answer to the issues I raised, no doubt you would have explained them.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Daniel Hannon in today’s Telegraph has summed up the position I take on lockdowns, vaccinations and face masks. It’s common sense to me.


‘…of the three lockdowns we’ve had, the one that made the most sense was the second, designed to slow the infection rate while vaccines were rolled out. It cannot be repeated too often that the various prohibitions do not, in themselves, save lives; they simply push the peak into the future. A lockdown must have a purpose, an end point. So, too, must every other form of restriction, from facemasks to pings.’

The trouble is, I think, that some have been scared witless over this pandemic, not without good reason, but are finding it hard to climb down from that high level of fear and agitation.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You agreeing with a Lockdown Sceptic in the Telegraph?

<shocked face>

:eeek:

Re: Coronavirus
 

It makes perfect sense. Lockdowns only delay, they do not prevent.

If the waves of infection once lockdowns end don’t prove that, what does?

Australia thought they were being very clever by having lockdowns with relatively few infections, but they are now finding out that unless they get their acts together with their vaccination programmes, those infections will just keep coming back and with their current policy they are subjecting their citizens to a lifetime of lockdowns. The country is becoming like a massive prison.

The riots in Sydney indicate that people are getting sick and tired of this nonsense.

Re: Coronavirus
 

India disproved your theory. The virus mutated into a more contagious variant and people became re-infected.

Re: Coronavirus
 

There is a very big difference, Australia vs India and that is obvious, transmissibility became rampant in India and I’d say it’s colossal population had something to do with it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I do agree that Australia should have got its vaccination plan together as it can't cut itself off forever.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No it doesn't, the Delta variant could just as easily have mutated into a less contagious variant.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/coronavirus-strains#1

Re: Coronavirus
 

But it didn’t….

We’re not concerned about the less harmful mutations.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Sorry, but that post gave me a vision of 5000 'flying doctors' all merrily buzzing about in their Piper Cubs :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

But you have consistently, and persistently, been against lockdowns in the UK because of this "logic".

But in reality, because we locked down, we delayed the infections enough to get working vaccines, which have avoided/prevented greater numbers of deaths, infections, and hospitalisations in the UK.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And what were the odds on that? Get a life FFS.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Don't, this gives credence to OB's theory that the quantity of people infected would remain the same, only the time period over which they became infected would change. Which, is of course, utter gibberish.

Re: Coronavirus
 

This article on the BBC website caught my eye - Covid vaccines: Why a giant plastic bag shortage is slowing the rollout. This is a huge deal right now in the pharmaceutical industry

Re: Coronavirus
 

Old Boy's theory only works if vaccines don't help prevent transmission.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Funnily enough . . . they don't in this case

Re: Coronavirus
 

The word “Theory” is doing some heavy lifting here.

Re: Coronavirus
 

They reduce but don't completely stop it

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/o...-by-up-to-half

Re: Coronavirus
 

You sure about that?

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm pretty sure yes, otherwise anybody that's been 'double jabbed' would be free to go about their life without the risk of catching it again and spreading it to others . . . can they?

Re: Coronavirus
 

To my understanding, it's a percentage of people who have been fully vaccinated that are still able to catch and transmit, not all.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You sure about that?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Based on reading & listening, pretty sure. Happy to be corrected should someone have the evidence to the contrary however.