Forum menu
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.
That’s a great post Edukator. Thanks for the effort. I haven’t selectively quoted from it, because everyone should read all of it.
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
I'm sure there must be some data, a lot of the universities carried out mass testing, it's why Nottingham managed to go from average to top of the country in about a week in September
He could just have made the limit 7.5 miles to avoid that…
That's just fridge level avoidance.
Maybe he just needs to tell people you can't play Barnard Castle Rules in the Kentish Variation of the game.
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.
Isn't the primary aim of a vaccine to reduce the impact of the virus on those who are vaccinated?
kenneththecurtain
Free MemberI 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’.
If that were me, and if enough people had received it for it to be not provably me, I'd have used the whistleblower line and also dropped it to any news outlets that might be interested. It's the sort of preplanned abuse that needs to be cracked down on most, not people going slightly too far on their bike rides.
If I go out for a ride and dont get at least 7 miles from my house I’d be pretty dizzy!
Morrisons to ban shoppers who refuse to wear face masks
What do people think? Part of me thinks 'about sodding time' but it does put those who cannot wear one for genuine medical reasons in a bit of a tight spot.
so we can drive for 5 miles to ride our bikes after all
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-55625062
Morrisons to ban shoppers who refuse to wear face masks
What do people think? Part of me thinks ‘about sodding time’ but it does put those who cannot wear one for genuine medical reasons in a bit of a tight spot.
Definitely about bloody time - given the data released that shows supermarkets as one of the biggest spreader locations, and the fact that you can wear a face shield, or get a home delivery, or a click and collect, or send someone shopping for you, there really is no excuse. I'm sure there's some obscure medical condition that prevents you doing all of the above alternatives but in 9 months i'm yet to hear from anyone what it actually is.
There's a programme of testing underway in several French towns to find out exactly that, singletrackmind. Blanket testing of representative groups with both antigene and PCR tests for instant and more reliable results. They're also testing sewage water to find out which strains are dominant and where.
There were some intesting result from a Lycée in l'Oise early in the pandemic where 40% of people associated with the Lycée - students, teachers and families - had antibodies but very few of the students had been symptomatic. And given the number of antibody false negatives from blood tests even that study probably underestimated the number of people infected and asymptomatic.
Edit: I haven't been into a shop without a face mask in 9 months, it's just not a problem.
All shops should enforce face masks or not entry. Morrison’s will offer one to anyone who cannot prove they can’t wear it. Good on them. I’m really starting to feel rather uneasy about going in them at all. I certainly felt more Covid-secure in my local pub.
Only found this interesting stat on Supermarkets on a news site and not the original source, but it looks like supermarkets could be more iffy than going to the doctors.
https://www.cheshire-live.co.uk/news/chester-cheshire-news/where-catch-covid-places-likely-19601248
"The figures are based on data from week 53, between December 28, 2020 to January 3, 2021.
By analysing the contacts and retracing the steps of the people who'd reported they had tested positive between December 28 and January 3, PHE data has uncovered the most frequent locations people with the virus had been, prior to testing positive."
"Proportion of all common locations reported in Public Health England data:
Supermarket (visiting and working): 12.9%
General practice (visiting and working): 5.8%
Care home (working): 3.8%
Home (visiting and working): 3.8%
Restaurant or café (visiting): 3.8%"
Those figures say absolutely nothing about where people caught the virus. That the most common place people had been in the past 7 days was a supermarket is hardly a shocker is it?
What do people think? Part of me thinks ‘about sodding time’ but it does put those who cannot wear one for genuine medical reasons in a bit of a tight spot.
Did you read the link?
It does say:
will not be allowed inside, unless they are medically exempt.
Morrisons to ban shoppers who refuse to wear face masks
What do people think? Part of me thinks ‘about sodding time’ but it does put those who cannot wear one for genuine medical reasons in a bit of a tight spot.
Heard that on Drive on R5 - "great!", I thought, they read out a mixed bag of reaction as you might expect, then the last tweet/mail/text was "everyone'll just download the exemption forms and put whatever they want". Proper facepalm - why have that as the end of this segment on nstional tadio...?