Forum menu
I know it's meant to be illustrative but when the actions have been taken when R value is 0.9. The next change is show as being equivalent to 0.5. They are talking in terms of R value so it would be fair to assume it is a fair representation of the level required for a change relative to the others.
The graphic is not a graph with R on an axis… if you want to treat it like like a graph (my advice is that you don’t) then where the gradient becomes more shallow, it is because R is increasing, but remaining less than 1.
it would be fair to assume it is a fair representation of the level required for a change relative to the others.
I'd call that a generous reading and blame the graphic designer...
And the graphic is misleading. I would argue that it is designed to be misleading, because not only do they know people will treat it as a graph (they really shouldn’t), but they know it will result in misunderstandings. The misinformation is designed into it… but they can blame people for reading too much into it… even though they want them to.
Really the point I'm making is something is being shown that at first glance suggest a big drop in value is required compared to the current situation. Upper end of the current situation is about 0.9 and a nation wide change has been made.
The question is really the graph implies a big change in values is required for the next change. The next change date is set as beginning of June. Realistically is that going to be achieved. If the change is a hell or high water one on the 1st of June, then this graph is just window dressing.
No. If it was a graph (it isn’t) then it does not show R decreasing at all once Step 1 occurs (this week?). It shows R staying less than one, and the result of that being fewer “something”… perhaps new infections… perhaps current cases… perhaps new deaths… who knows. Just burn the graphic… ignore it… it’s just deliberate misinformation with plausible deniability.
it’s just deliberate misinformation...
It is. You should at least be able to rely on the infographics giving a broad indication.
The govt. will continue to use the pandemic as a useful exercise (for Cumming's crew) in managing the public's actions. I think that Ferguson served their purpose as the go-to guy for a big scary number to promote lock-down, subsequently rather undermined when the model code was belatedly released, and further when it transpired that he felt it clear that the rules didn't apply to him.
In the absence of any apparent prospect of eradicating/vaccinating they now need to prevent social and economic meltdown by nudging people in the other direction.
When Peter Bone has you agreeing fervently…
https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1260257779304017923?s=21
The promise of unlimited exercise seems to be limited to public spaces:
New sub clause (ba) "ba) to visit a public open space for the purposes of open-air recreation to promote their physical or mental health or emotional wellbeing— (i) alone, (ii) with one or more members of their household, or (iii) with one member of another household;”; "
Public open space defined as "5) For the purposes of paragraph (2)(ba), “public open space” includes
(a) land laid out as a public garden or used for the purpose of recreation by members of the public
(b) land which is “open country” as defined in section 59(2) of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949(a), as read with section 16 of the Countryside Act 1968(b);
(c) land which is “access land” for the purposes of Part 1 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000(c) (see section 1(1) of that Act(d)). "
So any legal types guess at what's allowed?
I'd have thought many golf courses weren't public so they're still banned.
How about watersports? Rivers and canals are public spaces under section 16 of the Countryside Act 1968. Is the sea a public space? Lakes and ponds?
Angling was specifically cited but I'd have thought a vast amount of angling takes place on private land or the sea?
Outdoor sports courts are specifically mentioned elsewhere so they're allowed.
Anyone else suffering a bit of anxiety this week?
The revision of the figures & the attitude that some “It’s all over...” means I won’t be changing my habits any till I see something more positive - whatever that might be! I remain unconvinced by the Gov’s stance..
At most I’ll see my girlfriend & go for a walk with her......& go for my first decent ride out into the countryside since this whole thing began.......
Fortunately I work from home 99% of the time & my meetings can be done online. I count myself blessed.....
That graph is kind of misleading
Its easy red=dead, blue=will die soon.
Peter Bone challenging Kier Starmer for the grown up of the week award.
Some excellent words, most conscice summary of what the Dom n' Boris show are trying to do to democracy that I've yet heard.
Totally not loving the hate being put out by lakes no, peaks np and forest comission. Really shows how those lucky few view city dwellers and tourists. Weve a far bigger problem if social distancing in the countryside dosent work given the Gov't drive to get us back to work and yet these bodies would rather spread hate and encourage mob rule where locals feel vindicated in their message. How can we spread out and us all our open spaces if the priveledge few try to lock the majority out of their locality. Shameful.
Totally not loving the hate
Odd way of describing the response from the National Park bodies.
Well said nwilko. I agree wholeheartedly from my home in the country.
The degree of nimbyism, hate, and lack of understanding for those less privileged has been massively dissapointing. And sadly it has been incited subversively by the governments message. Divide and conquer. ****ing brexit style politics again.
What have the National Parks bodies said to get this response? They’re not land owners trying to keep folk of their land you know.
Using the word “hate” just seems odd.
Most of us 'lucky' enough to live in or near the National Parks also accept reduced infrastructure. Have a quick look at how many hospitals there are in Cumbria for example. You probably won't catch corona virus but you might just cause an outbreak in an area ill equipped to deal with it. But you're right we are a privileged few.
Having said that I'm sure you will be lobbying hard to support rural communities in the future...
Not much chance of causing an outbreak with everything closed. The coachloads of tourists won't be visiting the honeypots so what harm is there in allowing day trippers from the nearby cities if they want to walk in the hills and have a picnic?
privileged few
Really! Many of them may well be trying to protect themselves as they can't afford to be ill. Do you think they are all gentlemen farmers, retired or enjoying a leisurely time at their second home?
As AD has said, there is not the infrastructure there to support an outbreak, especially in the Highlands/islands.
We are all in this together. Our NHS is a shared resource. If one hospital is over capacity, resources will be redistributed to support that shortfall. Similarily, our natural resources must be shared for our collection mental well being. I hope that visitors from urban populations will stay away from rural villages and go to the forests, hills, and to the most remote beaches. And I would suggest that the risk of transmission outdoors is much lower than the impact of not being in full lockdown.
Why would any rural person begrudge those less privileged this freedom?
Be kind.
That Peter Bone clip ^^^ is quite something.
He has always been a committed and loyal tory who is also a stickler for parliamentary process.
PMQs tomorrow so another opportunity for Starmer to use the stiletto again and johnson to be further exposed.
I would be surprised if neither Starmer nor the Speaker referred to johnson's breach of parliamentary rules.
Add to that Piers Morgan shouting down any tory who appears on GMB and his repeated references to Hancock being a coward.
If the circumstances weren't so serious this would be LOL stuff.
Completely agree with the move of trying to restrict travel between areas. Have we all forgotten just before lockdown how rammed the natural parks were? Seeing a bit of green is very easy in the UK , no need to go to places with infrastructure that wouldn’t be able to handle a crisis.
That all sounds very lovely but have you any idea what redistributing resources would involve in remote areas?
This was more than a week before our lockdown - an age ago! Just think about that. They had time to digest, understand and make a satirical video that far before our government did anything...
Woody - hugely difficult but within England, its in my opinion, likely to be effective. The Highlands, much less so but that's part of the reason why Scotland are still in full lockdown.
The government could have done so much better for England. Instructed limits on travel distance, required people to stay away from rural communities, made sure the stakeholders were on board. They didn't, but fundamentally its right that being outdoors is low risk and people need some relief.
Woody - there isn’t the infrastructure ANYWHERE to support this outbreak. I live in Rural East Sussex and hardly see a soul. Even down here the Forestry Commission have been taping off little car parks, forcing everyone into less and less space. We need to share it out a little.
As for medical resources, loads of my RAF mates have been on standby to move patients to capacity where necessary.
what harm is there in allowing day trippers from the nearby cities if they want to walk in the hills and have a picnic?
1. Most visitors will probably just be flocking to Windermere, Keswick, Grasmere, Ambleside, etc.
2. Before venturing out on the fells at the moment have a read at this. You might think it far fetched, that's for you to decide:
When Peter Bone has you agreeing fervently…
Unfortunately Peter Bone does not seem to have noticed that Parliament doesn’t work that way any more. Johnson and Cummings do what they want, the tabloids applaud and the MPs can go stuff themselves.
I was reassured some time ago on another thread that we didn't need a formal, written constitution.
I'm not so sure now.
That said.... Trump.
Immediately following the election I predicted, on the GE thread, that cummings would be gone by mid-year and johnson by end of 2020.
Should have placed a bet on that.
I have little doubt that johnson is beginning to see cummings as a liability and will ditch him before long.
If/when that happens will the poisonous weasel turn on the blond buffoon?
As for johnson, he's all about the good times; he didn't expect to be so deep in shit with no way out. He will either be removed or decide to stand down (ill health or some other bollocks) within 6 - 9 months so maybe not by end of 2020 but won't extend much beyond that.
I think we'll see Sunak getting taken out - some kind of press "scandal" - as the year comes to a close. Too bright, too young, too competent (to the public and press), starting to get ambitious. A challenge to the boys at the top.
singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/wheres-the-coronavirus-were-all-going-to-die-conspiracy-thread/page/293/#post-11188534
This is quite important
Probably not so much 'what's allowed' as designed to limit access to certain land or to give the landowner a choice as to whether they allow access. Examples I can think of include Forestry Commission with trails could choose to keep their car parks closed, or climbing on crags on private land but which otherwise have access agreements
Just got an email to all National Trust letter to members - again note most staff being on furlough. Although not key workers they are now on the front line in terms of public facing roles. Yet the Covid risk assessment guidance only came out yesterday. Which demonstrates a level of detachment by the government as to how organisations work and how long things take to do. Even at pace I would suggest this is not within 48hrs.
Just thinking about environmental charities who have car parks - many will have closed these and furloughed the staff. Today may fall within a 3 week furlough cycle rather than at the end of one. Pulling staff back in to do work forfeits all payment within this cycle - saving the government money but costing these organisations. Money which may not be replaced as people either don't donate / renew membership due to their own financial situation or donate to welfare causes.
Just thinking about environmental charities who have car parks – many will have closed these and furloughed the staff. Today may fall within a 3 week furlough cycle rather than at the end of one. Pulling staff back in to do work forfeits all payment within this cycle – saving the government money but costing these organisations. Money which may not be replaced as people either don’t donate / renew membership due to their own financial situation or donate to welfare causes.
Just because the public are out and about more than they have been for the last 6/7 weeks does not mean that they can expect or are entitled to find all car parks they previously would have used immediately available for their disposal. They will get opened when they can be and if the staff are currently in a furlough cycle (which I doubt as most car parks have been shut a lot longer than 3 weeks - the furlough scheme does not say you can only come back once every three weeks, merely that you have to be furloughed for a minimum of 3 weeks) they will stay shut a while longer. I see no big problem there.
Today may fall within a 3 week furlough cycle rather than at the end of one. Pulling staff back in to do work forfeits all payment within this cycle – saving the government money but costing these organisations.
This is not true, a furlough period may last more than 3 weeks- it's only if the employee is called back to work then put on furlough again that the clock is reset.
My question is answered:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/coronavirus-guidance-on-access-to-green-spaces
- all forms of water sports practiced on open waterways, including sailing, windsurfing, canoeing, rowing, kayaking, surfing, paddle-boarding and the use of privately-owned motorised craft (in line with the guidance issued by the relevant navigation authority) are allowed. You can continue to use towpaths for walking, running and cycling, being mindful of other users and people living in boats along the water
- go swimming in either lakes or the sea as part of daily exercise provided that social distancing guidelines are observed - you cannot use public indoor and outdoor pools
I think we’ll see Sunak getting taken out – some kind of press “scandal” – as the year comes to a close. Too bright, too young, too competent (to the public and press), starting to get ambitious. A challenge to the boys at the top.
I guess that all rather depends on whether he has enough dirt on the big boys.
100 deaths/day for the rest of the year would be an extra 18k for 2020.
Question is, do we believe C19 deaths will be down at 100 deaths today after returns to work and (some) schools going back and all that?
Question is, do we believe C19 deaths will be down at 100 deaths today after returns to work and (some) schools going back and all that?
I dont see how it can be kept under control until we instigate test, track & trace & NHS are expecting a 2nd spike by June
Just been chatting to a workmate whos back in germany (she needed some dentistry but couldnt get an appointment here)), shes had to stay in quarantine for 14 days, whilst there, but is looking forward to a spin class tomorrow when it ends! Their contract tracing app isnt running yet, but any +ve test gets manually tracked.
When she comes back next week she probably wont face any quarantine though which is mad
Question is, do we believe C19 deaths will be down at 100 deaths today after returns to work and (some) schools going back and all that?
Based on the news of overcrowded trains and buses with no social distancing and even less facemasks today - no. We'll be back in full lockdown - in London at least - next week.
Experiment No1 has commenced, the public have obliged and Nightingale stands ready.
Experiment No1 has commenced, the public have obliged
the cynic in me wonders if it was basically a way of getting a load of mixing for a few days to see what happened to case load, without ever officially announcing much change, allowing an easier official backpedal.
and Nightingale stands ready.
...and unstaffed.
Question is, do we believe C19 deaths will be down at 100 deaths today after returns to work and (some) schools going back and all that?
But there will be at least a 2 to 3 week lag between any changes today and changes in death rates. I don't think you'll see the effect for a little while.
But there will be at least a 2 to 3 week lag between any changes today and changes in death rates. I don’t think you’ll see the effect for a little while.
I quite agree.
And the recent changes in quantity of testing mask the really useful conclusions we might otherwise have drawn from the 'new case' numbers.
But there will be at least a 2 to 3 week lag between any changes today and changes in death rates. I don’t think you’ll see the effect for a little while.
Yeah but - referring to London's experience this morning - from what us armchair internet warriors know about Covid19 it doesn't need a genius to wait 2-3 weeks to predict the outcome....