Forum menu
The queues round the block near-constantly for KFC, Burger King, McDonald’s and the Starbucks Drive-Thru
Pick your battles, a drive-thru is the least of our issues.
I make that about 1333 days until vaccination complete. I hope we can get that rate up a bit…
The big national sites are in operation today and will be open 12 hours a day, plus further surgeries/pharmacies.
Give them a week or two to build up to capacity and the numbers will go up significantly.
Then give it a couple of weeks after that for the vaccines to become effective, and in a months time we'll see if its works or not.
Women follow the rules more closely than men. White people follow them more than people from ethnic minorities. Richer people tend to be less compliant. So do key workers and 18-to-29-year-olds.
I would love to know how that bold bit is calculated. Is it based on fines (which we know are handed out disproportionately or is it a cohort within the 70k who are being very honest in their self assessment.
As for exercise, well I walked for five hours this weekend. An hour would just mean head for the turbo. I could live with that, but then I work in a bedroom all week, and have been in the garage to exercise train, so that five hours is actually less than one hour per day
This I agree with, I went for a ride on the weekend about 4 odd hours stayed localish but I spent the mass majority of my time in my kitchen working or sofa watching tv.
Also, as a general question anyone know how many vaccines need to be done before we start to see the impact in cases?
I would love to know how that bold bit is calculated.
It's not. It's a survey of people self identifying their behaviour... hence TiReD's joke about more than half of the population saying they are above average drivers.
It's not valuable data... it could mean that the white people questioned were less likely to know they're not following the rules, or less likely to admit that they are... or just that the survey didn't include enough non-white people, or a wide enough distribution of them, to meaningfully compare their answers to the those given by the white respondents.
Also, as a general question anyone know how many vaccines need to be done before we start to see the impact in cases?
If all of the priority groups receive their first jab by mid Feb, and it takes ~2 weeks for it to become effective, then I'd be expecting an improvement in March.
That would be ~15 million vaccinations
Probably at ~1.5-2m at the moment, but there should be an update later today.
Exercise alone and end of bubbles would be a disaster for my mental health 🙁 It’s bad enough as it but if I now can’t go for a walk with my ex and the dog I’m not sure if I’d cope!
And yet the garden centres and home bargains can be packed.
I’ve tried hard to follow the rules, I have to go to work since I’m not allowed to take a fire engine home, but if we are now going for saying a walk from home (1 mile from the nearest other house!) with someone who also sees nobody apart from at work is riskier than all the people packing into shops for a day out, or still going to work when they could easily WFH I despair 🙁
Sorry, rant over x
The government still haven't figured out what the rules are yet
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1348617565552185346?s=19
I would love to know how that bold bit is calculated. Is it based on fines (which we know are handed out disproportionately or is it a cohort within the 70k
Well, as the data is taken from a survey that you then refer to, I think you've just managed to answer your own question.
As Kelvin says, there's all sorts of reasons why it's likely to be inaccurate anyway.
That would be ~15 million vaccinations
Probably at ~1.5-2m at the moment, but there should be an update later today.
Johnson just said 2.4 million jabs of 2 million people
I know one medic who got hers last week but is down with covid this week
The government still haven’t figured out what the rules are yet
Maybe it could.be explained to them by one of the people that say the rules are simple and everyone should just stick to them
Reported infections are at 55k/day - 385k/week. there is an under-reporting here of many-fold of true infections. We'll start winning when the vaccination rate passes the underlying infection rate. That will some time off.
We’ll start winning when the vaccination rate passes the underlying infection rate
Unsure if I understand that one.
Can we have an example?
~1 in 50 are currently infected, so 2%
If we've vaccinated 2m people thats ~3% of the population
How quick (relative term, obvs) will we see deaths reduce?
I grasp the concepts, but how do things like delay in immunity from recieving jab, and lagging of deaths behind infections and hospital admissions play out; compared with the scheduled vaccinations of those in the high risk of dying age groups?
2% infected is about 0.2% infections per day for a 10-day positivity (130k infections/day), reported is about a third of this. Lockdown 3 will bring down new infection rates (hopefully) and vaccination will raise immunity. Break-even is about 1 million vaccinations per day.
How quick (relative term, obvs) will we see deaths reduce?
Deaths in three weeks are cases today/50. Cases declined by about 5000, over the past few days. So give it three weeks.
end of bubbles
seriously? i’ll be breaking that law then. me and my partner have our own places either side of town. health issues meant i was support/carer and we have only seen each other and apart from 3 train journeys for walking day trips in the summer it’s been hospital appointments and the pharmacy. no eat out to help out, no pubs, no take-aways no socials, no christmas meet-ups. can count on one hand trips to shops for essential things like a boiler spare part etc. we haven’t moved into one place as there isn’t room for us both to work from home.
i guess if that becomes government policy it’s aimed at the piss takers. i’m not one of them.
They won't get rid of bubbles. They may to have to re-explain what they are, and how to use them.
Exercise alone and end of bubbles would be a disaster for my mental health 🙁 It’s bad enough as it but if I now can’t go for a walk with my ex and the dog I’m not sure if I’d cope!
And yet the garden centres and home bargains can be packed.
Exercise alone I can do, no change there actually, but no support bubbles would destroy me mentally. I've formed one with my parents as I can take care of them at the same time, they're the only people I see really. Except for now as dad is in isolation before a planned operation. There will be lots of people in similar situations too.
Can't see bubbles being cut, maybe tightened and policed but as there are so few ploice officers anyway it'll never work.
They won’t get rid of bubbles. They may to have to re-explain what they are, and how to use them.
There are too many different types of bubbles now that has got confusing. We don't have any bubbles but when schools closed last week in order to keep the children out of school the school were keen to point out you could use childcare bubbles which to me was the school saying use Grandparents if you can for childcare. Difficult to balance as everything related to this pandemic. I didn't even realise this was an option so had google what that bubble was.
Johnson was cycling with security detail but was concerned by the number of people in the Olympic Park
"How quick (relative term, obvs) will we see deaths reduce?"
Deaths in three weeks are cases today/50. Cases declined by about 5000, over the past few days. So give it three weeks.
Sorry TiRed - I meant deaths reducing due to the vaccination of the demographic that is mainly dying, over and above the current predicted trend of deaths based on lockdown3 levels of transmission.
I guess that means the "deaths = cases 3 weeks ago/50" relationship would change, but how much and how quickly?
I guess that means the “deaths = cases 3 weeks ago/50” relationship would change, but how much and how quickly?
When this ceases to be valid and deaths decouple, I would be delighted. I think three months if they ramp up vaccination as stated. Probably me being a bit pessimistic. I use forward projection to test this and will add vaccine takeup as a covariate in due course.
but as there are so few police officers anyway it’ll never work.
This. I have family in the GMP and they tell me that the further away from the actual city you get the less resources there are. My BiL is a sarge in a reasonably big town and the officers he has at his disposal is terrifying. I live in Merseyside right on the border with Greater Manchester and Cheshire so about as far from the city as it's possible to get. Sightings of actual police officers are very, *very* rare. Extrapolate this across the country and wide spread enforcement is impossible.
Johnson was cycling with security detail but was concerned by the number of people in the Olympic Park
I got that, the papers are wheeling out his best serious face photograph.
There is a lot of straight to pitchforks for people visiting parks / local countryside. It's not as simple as people flouting the rules you can act within the spirit of the legislation and still cause issues. Unintended consequences are in play. On top of the 'regular' visitors there's now the people who: would usually travel further but now stay local; people who can't do their usual leisure activity - pounding the shopping streets for example; strong emphasis on the value of exercising in green spaces and people quite reasonable seek local green spaces. With the very limited green space in and close to towns and cities it's not un expected. There may also be something in people using Google and the like to search for local walks / green spaces. Then you are getting what ever comes up at the top of the list. The solution could be to spread the pressure but then you run the risk of seeding the virus more widely / stressing local communities as the hoards arrive. As ever no perfect solution.
Edit - maybe push masks in public spaces and look at how to 'extend' the times when people visit green spaces
I know stating this wont be a popular suggestion, but if you look at the data it seems quite obvious:
As a percentage of all of the daily cases ~2.2/2.3% relate to those aged 85+
If you then look at the deaths which relate to that age group, they account for ~42% of the total deaths
If people really want to reduce deaths, then we need to support these people to shield again, until they can be vaccinated.
If you could reduce that risk down to 2%, that would reduce the death rate by 50 a day, which would have a greater impact than any other restriction.
I'm confused as to why ministers visiting vaccination centres and hospitals with TV crews in tow is essential?
Some people are getting into a right froth about 7 miles not being local thus rule breaking. I guess they've not ridden a bike since they were kids.
We’ll start winning when the vaccination rate passes the underlying infection rate. That will some time off.
Without wanting to sound facetious, that's also ~385k/week gaining immunity the dangerous and old-fashioned way. Plus people who've already had it and have some immunity.
The "20% have been infected" thing from a couple of pages back is just an accountancy exercise, dividing the deaths by an assumed fatality rate (and breaking it down by location, age etc I think). Not really news, my preferred fatality rate would make the number more like 16% but that's not a big difference in context.
A bit concerned about Whitty going round telling us that we're at the worst part (specifically as reported on R4 at lunchtime). Unless we have R<1 now by a significant margin, it's going to get a lot worse. I wonder what he's been told by SAGE?
BTW vaccination isn't going to ride to the rescue unless we have a really really successful lockdown as well. I know I already said that, but here's another analysis showing that it will have pretty much no effect until well into Feb even on the Govt's optimistic figures:
https://www.covid-arg.com/post/how-soon-to-see-the-vaccine-s-benefits
If they want more businesses to shut and people to stay at home, they need to set up more support for them, not just wring their hands on TV interviews. Muppets.
Some people are getting into a right froth about 7 miles not being local thus rule breaking. I guess they’ve not ridden a bike since they were kids.
I despair at the base level of fitness in this country. On tarmac, in flat londonshire with street tyres thats about half an hour to 40 mins moderate exertion.
I'm technically overweight and am certainly no competitive athlete and I could run that within Michael Gove's hour.
It's a bit like a venn diagram I guess, as there will be a significant overlap before we see the effects of the vaccines (if they are administered VERY fast and in huge numbers) in the official stats. Vs the growing infection rate.
Other variables like the newer more prolific strains and 'lockdown fatigue' will hamper this.
I think it will be a month or two before we can see what effect the vaccination plan is having, and that's assuming that people who are vaccinated are not asymptomatic/prolific carriers/spreaders.
They won’t get rid of bubbles. They may to have to re-explain what they are, and how to use them.
Well put. What was originally a good and fairly simple idea got extended and then confused by a lot of people. Like so much else.
Some people are getting into a right froth about 7 miles not being local thus rule breaking. I guess they’ve not ridden a bike since they were kids.
There might be a case for not being in the spirit. It could also be be legitimately argued Boris wasn't a local to those park and by going there he has increased pressure unnecessarily. St James Park, Regent's Park and Kensington Gardens are all closer. For Boris they are accessible from the door without the need for him to enter other areas. He could have thought they aren't really suitable places for cycling. There's Regents Park - there seem to be a lot of London based road cyclists who use that as a regular riding venue. It will be interesting to see if Boris grasps that he is (yet again) the problem that he's going to try and solve.
The queues round the block near-constantly for KFC, Burger King, McDonald’s and the Starbucks Drive-Thru
Pick your battles, a drive-thru is the least of our issues.
It's a valid battle.
One of the children's friends was at home for the last lockdown but has to attend school this time because the mum works in McDonald's.
Last time she was furloughed, now she's a key worker to cope with all those "essential journeys" to the drive through.
The solution to that, if it needs one, is to define key workers/industries more tightly. You can't expect businesses to voluntarily bankrupt themselves or berate people for using facilities that are open.
Provided we don’t go too silly. Lockdowns work
I’m confused. If lockdowns work then why, when lockdown restrictions were significantly released from May onwards, did cases continue to head ever downwards?
Why were there no visible upswing in cases in the late spring/early summer from the many protests and large gatherings like BLM, anti-lockdown etc? Oh and the beaches, holiday accommodation, restaurants, pubs etc. they were all packed too! Not much social distancing going on in the any I visited. Again though, despite this, cases kept falling across the summer.
If lockdowns work then why have cases kept rising in the winter even as lockdown measures and tiers have become ever more strict?
Looking around comparing countries that locked down really hard, with those that hardly had any lockdown I can't see any clear correlation between the severity of a countries lockdown compared to the overall outcome. Same with the US states who also had different degreed of lockdown, mask wearing, non mask wearing etc.
Please explain how they work for a thicko like me, as I'm struggling to get my head around it all. It would be useful to have some solid proof as it looks like we will have even stricter measures being announced tonight. If we are all going to comply then it would be very useful to at least see the concrete proof why we should indeed comply.
I’m confused. If lockdowns work then why, when lockdown restrictions were significantly released from May onwards, did cases continue to head ever downwards?
Schools were closed, the stats are out in the public domain and it confirms that supermarkets are the biggest spreader followed by secondary schools. Read it today.
We had hardly any cases through the summer then schools went back in September and shit hit the fan and hasn't stopped since.
A bit concerned about Whitty going round telling us that we’re at the worst part (specifically as reported on R4 at lunchtime). Unless we have R<1 now by a significant margin, it’s going to get a lot worse. I wonder what he’s been told by SAGE?
Based on current trends in cases (relatively stable at the moment, after a week of lockdown, R about unity) and ONS data, admissions will rise by about another 500/day in the next 10 days, and deaths another 200/day in the next 2-3 weeks. No idea what he's been told, but I don't think R will be heading very far south (0.8 would be a very good outcome for current controls).
Bit borderline, but they do serve takeout, and takeouts are permitted to open, and you are permitted to visit one. That's the guidelines. Also, they now deliver in some places.
Not sure how furlough works out for McEmployees, but I can understand wanting to keep working if possible.
As per thecaptain's post, if the gov want folk to stay at home, it has to be made easy to do so.
Anyway, it's nearly tea time and it's McDonalds night tonight.
Mista Dobalina, Mr. Bob Dobalina
Mista Dobalina, Mista Bob Dobalina
Mista Bob Dobalina, won't you quit?
You really make me sick with ya fraudulent behavior
Welcome to the Forum - have a look at Austrailia, NZ, S Korea to see how they work.
More people died in the last fews days of last week than have died in the entirety of the Pandemic in the countries I mentioned above - all have had lockdowns.
Mr Dobalina, welcome to the forum...
The solution to that, if it needs one, is to define key workers/industries more tightly.
Shutting up costs businesses a fortune, even when salary costs are covered by furlough. If its legal to operate, and has enough customers to make it viable then I have no objection to them continuing to trade.
Whether they should be allowed to utilise schools for free childcare (I dont doubt some schools have become little more than this, due to pressure on teachers) is a different question.
mistadobalina
Joined January 11, 2021
What sort of bike do you have?
Gah! Late I see! 😄
He seems familiar.
What sort of bike do you have?
And what previous login aliases did you have?
Mr Bob Dobalina?
Please explain how they work for a thicko like me, as I’m struggling to get my head around it all.
First, some honesty. Originally it was thought children did not present a significant transmission burden. That is now demonstrably false. Schools are harbingers of spread between pupils and back to their parents. In the first lockdown, schools closed from March to September, significantly reducing spread.
Second, outdoor transmission, particularly in warm dry air (less aerosols) is minimal. So no spread on those beaches.
Lastly, despite many predictions regarding immunity, everywhere restraints have been relaxed, spread has resumed. In December a new more spreadable strain showed that previous restraints probably only contained spread rather than shrink the epidemic. This is why the government is so concerned about adherence.
Very roughly cases decline a week after lockdown, admissions a week later and deaths a week after that. Now look at the patterns in the data at regional level here and see if you can now detect the effects of lockdown and relaxation with the "eye of faith". You'll find you can spot lockdown 2 in the North relatively easily. The South was confounded by not shrinking due to this new strain.
Orginally it was thought children did not present a significant transmission burden.
Who thought this? Lots of claims made (in bad faith to justify political decisions) of “no evidence” (if you don’t look you don’t find) but who really ever believed that this was the case?
The lockdowns do seem to help. Cases in Wales rocketed in December but then we locked down and now they are flat to falling, with the predicted Armageddon from letting people out for Xmas day not materialising.
I have two questions for the experts here:
1. Why have the scientists still not worked out whether or not the vaccines reduce the spread of the virus? How hard can it be?
2. When will we know whether the apparent side-effect of transverse myelitis in the trials is real or not?
Was really based on absence of hospitalizations. During influenza epidemics, hospitals fill with young children. That has obviously not been the case. No testing meant "no transmission". But the null hypothesis was that this is a respiratory virus that is passed between children. And so it is.
1. Why have the scientists still not worked out whether or not the vaccines reduce the spread of the virus? How hard can it be?
It's very hard in the context of a clinical trial. A population-level epidemic survey will show this AFTER a vaccine is approved. Getting it approved for use is just the first step
2. When will we know whether the apparent side-effect of transverse myelitis in the trials is real or not?
We won't. You cannot logically prove a negative. Rare events are rare, and one case was in placebo. Cast your mind back to autism onset at the age of vaccination. Causality is hard to prove in rare events.
Originally it was thought children did not present a significant transmission burden.
Come on...
A blind man on a galloping horse could see that schools were the perfect virus spreading device; the choice not to close them was political, not science-based.
So show of hands folks; when the UK government does finally roll out more restrictions will they be a) the ones that are most important and impactful regardless of how well that's played in their media testing and regardless of whether it contradicts what they were saying yesterday, or will they be b) soft targets and crowdpleasers regardless of whether or not they actually make the difference required?
My expectation is that at least some changes will be driven by people who're breaking the rules, but will actually only punush people who aren't- bubbles, exercise etc. And the people who previously broke the rules won't care about breaking the new rules either.
Keva
Free MemberWhatever happened to track & trace, is there a reason the supermarkets don’t use it?
We never hear about it but it is still happening. It never really worked in England even in teh quiet spell. In Scotland, it did work well in teh quiet spell but now can't deal with the volumes so it's not as useful a tool as it was.
Still, in both places it should still be generating really useful information about where infections are happening and that should be driving policy. You don't need to track every case to do that, you just need a big enough and representative enough body of stats to pull out patterns.
Was really based on absence of hospitalizations.
That makes no sense. Young people don’t get seriously ill very often from this, that was known early on… so inferring transmission rates from hospitalisation rates would be either foolish, or a con.
A blind man on a galloping horse could see that schools were the perfect virus spreading device; the choice not to close them was political, not science-based.
You may want to read the research from WHO and European Disease Prevention. A summary of *some* of the reports they have is that the original Cv19 strain was not caught or even transmitted by many children under adolescent age - the theories were a few but many focussed on pre-pubescent bodies not having developed various glands/hormones/whatever that helped Cv19 both infect or even 'hang around' in most of them.
At puberty that all changed. Secondaries were/are far more susceptible.
Cv19 news strains, all bets are off.
A blind man on a galloping horse could see that schools were the perfect virus spreading device
Indeed they are, but no deaths, no hospitalisations of school-age children, no symptoms, no testing, no evidence. Closure of schools required evidence. And was of course political too. For influenza, the decision is much easier as they fall like flies (higher per capita hospitalisation rate than the elderly).
Bear in mind we had next to no testing capacity back then too. And all of that capacity was going to needed areas, i.e. Not kids or population level studies
Closure of schools required evidence
Like closure of pubs?
I think schools reopening was a sign of a desperate government aiming to get people back to work. The lack of evidence is a red herring; this was a political decision.
So, what are we thinking?
Defined limits for exercise, be it in time, distance or both.
Redefinition of what counts as "essential" for retail purposes.
Tighter definition of bubbles, though I can't see how they'll scrap them altogether.
No definte breakdown of the help anyone, be they business or individual will get.
Hospitality absolutely destroyed.
Can't see much else they can do really.
I’m with Crikey. It was a political decision, and one I agreed with. But the bogus claim that transmission in schools wasn’t a thing (or implying that) resulted in it being done very poorly. Kids were send back to schools without enough being done to reduce transmission in them. That wasn’t science, and it wasn’t politically wise either. Lives, including the education of children, have been damaged by this.
Pick your battles, a drive-thru is the least of our issues.
Well you would think so but. . . (anecdote coming)
An acquaintance of the family works in a Costas, serving the drive through market. They had a verbal instruction last week to turn off the Track and Trace app on their phones from an area/general manager to avoid being told to self isolate. This is a franchise operation and the owner wants to stay open and risk his peoples health. The acquaintance is looking for a new employer as a priority.
How many of the other coffee chains are quietly doing the same I wonder? Thankfully my sample size is small and extrapolation would be poor analysis.
The rules may not be getting any stronger but the language certainly is.
Matt Hancock repeated the warning that this was the "worst point" of the pandemic so far.
He made clear the onus is on individuals, whose actions could "make a difference".
Increasingly urgent appeals to follow the rules reflect deep concern in government that the message isn't getting through.
So as you were & do what you want then.
Without wanting to sound facetious, that’s also ~385k/week gaining immunity the dangerous and old-fashioned way. Plus people who’ve already had it and have some immunity.
There's no solid proof that having previously had it gives you immunity for any long period of time, plenty of cases of people having it twice. There is also no proof that having had it or the vaccine means you can't pick it up and spread it around still.
So show of hands folks; when the UK government does finally roll out more restrictions will they be a) the ones that are most important and impactful regardless of how well that’s played in their media testing and regardless of whether it contradicts what they were saying yesterday, or will they be b) soft targets and crowdpleasers regardless of whether or not they actually make the difference required?
99.99% B. This is Boris' govt and he only does the crowd pleasing option unless he has no choice.
Hancock just said its fine to go for a walk in the park with 1 other person, or travel 7 miles
Closure of schools required evidence.
We shut them without evidence last March.
The problem is that we reopened them without evidence that it was safe to do so.
So watching the press conference thinking why are non of the journalists asking ministers again why they stood by Cummings when he broke the rules.
Also a practical point what is the advice on how the over 80s vulnerable thousands are meant to travel to the vaccination hubs? Most won’t drive. Anything over half a mile is impractical to walk for most. Immunity takes 10-14 days to kick in.
So is the advice to take the risk of being driven by relative with masks on after shielding all this time? That and the mixing at centres are bound to bring some infections you’d think?
The problem is that we reopened them without evidence that it was safe to do so.
Yes that's a better interpretation. Lockdown 1 was following the influenza scorecard. September was not. By autumn half-term their contribution was already clear.
Most won’t drive.
My understanding (from the old folk in my family) is the the new hubs are entirely optional… GPs will still be handling vaccinations locally for those who can’t/won’t travel.
Hancock just said its fine to go for a walk in the park with 1 other person, or travel 7 miles 😉
but then he said that its important to go for a walk with a friend for mental health, but then said you should do it only for exercising but nor for socialising
When will we know whether the apparent side-effect of transverse myelitis in the trials is real or not?
We won’t. You cannot logically prove a negative. Rare events are rare, and one case was in placebo. Cast your mind back to autism onset at the age of vaccination. Causality is hard to prove in rare events.
Thanks.
Is it rare, though? Three cases in 23,000 patients of something that normally affects 1 in 200,000. Two with the vaccine (one possibly predisposed due to MS) and the third in the control group (which wasn't actually a placebo but another vaccine).
Obviously there can be coincidences and flukes, but if you had multiple sclerosis, would you not be pressing to have one of the other vaccines or avoid them altogether?
The problem is that we reopened them without evidence that it was safe to do so.
This. And actively prevented schools from taking measures to reduce transmission (stopping them from using additional buildings to facilitate real social distancing and bubbling, for example).
By autumn half-term their contribution was already clear.
Government were, as recently as last Monday, stopping schools from taking actions to reduce transmission.
Three cases in 23,000
I thought it was two cases. Isn’t this an old concern that more recent events have reduced?
I got a letter from my work today to tell the police (or whoever else might think to ask why I'm out and about en-route to work) that I'm a 'key worker not able to work from home'.
Whether I'm a key worker is very much up for debate, and I worked from home for 2 or 3 months last spring, so the 'not able' bit is demonstrably nonsense.
Essentially, my employer believes that they'll make more money if we are in the office than at home, so to hell with the pandemic.
Anyone else's employers blatantly taking the Michael?
There's a whistleblowing line for employers breaking the covid rules.
But they aren’t breaking the rules, are they? Just the spirit of them.
99.99% B. This is Boris’ govt and he only does the crowd pleasing option unless he has no choice.
Hancock just said its fine to go for a walk in the park with 1 other person, or travel 7 miles
There is always the risk the option to strengthen guidance or tightened distance travelled up been ditched short term as the PM doesn't want to be told he's been a bad Boris.
I thought it was two cases. Isn’t this an old concern that more recent events have reduced?
No, definitely three. What recent events have reduced this concern?
If this were a side-effect affecting a high percentage of people with MS, it would be useful to know how long it might be until more cases show up to confirm it, or alternatively how long until we can rule it out.
It's not an old concern but a very real concern when society is pressuring you into being jabbed with something that could make you even more ill than you already are but is still not proven to stop you spreading the virus.
There is always the risk the option to strengthen guidance or tightened distance travelled up been ditched short term as the PM doesn’t want to be told he’s been a bad Boris
He could just have made the limit 7.5 miles to avoid that...
So as you were & do what you want then.
or "actually follow the existing rules/guidance, you pillocks" rather than add some additional constraints to be followed only by people who already behave.
It's been a fascinating thread this, particularly as throughout I've been getting news from four different countries. Almost everywhere there has been some misleading information from the authorities, in France it was over mask wearing going from not needed when there weren't any in stock to obligatory a little later, in Germany they were unrealistically optimistic about test and trace. Some stuff has been science based but a lot not. I've got into a few spats on here just for posting what is obligatory in one country as advice in another. I've been asked to "back off" for posting nothing more than measures already obligatory elswhere.
Valance claimed that vietnamese (IIRC) schools hadn't shut, but failed to mention they hadn't been reopened.
Valance blabbed about needing herd immunity when there was no vaccine in sight and the only way to achieve it was most people getting the virus.
Symptomless cases and asymptomatic transmission were rubbished and kids didn't transmit... . The teachers knew otherwise.
There weren't different strains - but Institut Pasteur had already identified some.
The NHS were clapped, then people went round to their mates for a lockdown party/ride.
It's equally been fascinating watching this forum as a sample of the population. Many have quit the thread but they are still out there in the real world with their anti-mask, anti-distancing, anti-science, anti-social ways.
And here we are, about a year after the first STW thread on the subject (which died and early death). A year since I told my son I very much doubted there would be a nightclub open for him to DJ in come the Summer. And what a shambles, I really didn't see him spending Christmas on his own in a 9m2 Paris flat a year later. We're well on our way to a worst case outcome pretty much wherever we may be in Europe - the economy ****ed and an impressive death toll. And why? Depressing as it may, and whilst I'd like to pin it all on that Valance, it's just the overwhelming number of people who couldn't give a shit or don't feel personally concerned.
One way or another we're all Johnson - I really don't see a problem with him riding in his security bubble 7 miles from home especially as he's already had the virus within the last six months - making up our own interpretation of the guidelines (when they aren't laws), chose a media outlet of your choice, what whould you have done without this thread of wisdom to put you right?
Is there a number for asymptomatic case's in under 21s?
My bet, if 1/3 of the population get next to no symptoms, and can unknowingly be a super spreader, lf what wr are told is true. I wouldn't be surprised if it was 3/4 of umder 21s who contract, carry and distribute the virus with virtually no symptoms
If you only test those showing symptoms you have no idea, amd the pcr test isnt accuate enough.
Test 100,000 kids for have it / had it and i bet those numbers would put more creases in BJs furrowed brow.