Coronavirus precautions: Has the world gone mad?

[Peter Mugridge]

The relative spike today is a bit concerning and is precisely one week after "Super Saturday", but we'll have to see if it is sustained or a one off.

I'm sure there was something on the ( BBC ) news the other evening saying they were making an effort to catch up with recording any from previous weeks that hadn't already been recorded - unfortunately I can't be 100% sure that's what the report said because the subtitles were playing up and not appearing for more than half the words spoken...

If they are trying to clear any backlog, then yes we will get a few days of higher numbers won't we?

 

[317 forever]

And wait for the furlough to unwind... (though the Chancellor has now delayed some of the pain by using taxpayer money to bribe companies into taking furloughed staff off-furlough!)

The September quarter-day rent payment is going to send many retail companies over the edge, if they survive until then.

On the face of it, the furlough scheme has been very generous, even though we as taxpayers will eventually have to pay it back. However, it will start to unwind very quickly - only 7 weeks after non-urgent shops were allowed to reopen and only 4 weeks after pubs reopened. It is surely likely to take longer than 4-7 weeks for such staff returning to work to be spending regularly enough to benefit large swathes of the economy on furlough?

No wonder so many redundancies are already being announced.

 

[Richard Scott]

On the face of it, the furlough scheme has been very generous, even though we as taxpayers will eventually have to pay it back. However, it will start to unwind very quickly - only 7 weeks after non-urgent shops were allowed to reopen and only 4 weeks after pubs reopened. It is surely likely to take longer than 4-7 weeks for such staff returning to work to be spending regularly enough to benefit large swathes of the economy on furlough?

No wonder so many redundancies are already being announced.

Whilst hindsight is a wonderful thing but useless looking back it would have made sense to get people back out on everyday activities once shown NHS could cope. Furlough would then have to be applied for by those who needed to shield. Rest of us could have got economy back up and running sooner. Figures show majority of deaths are in retired age group who could have continued shielding allowing things to recover much more quickly.

 

[Bantamzen]

The relative spike today is a bit concerning and is precisely one week after "Super Saturday", but we'll have to see if it is sustained or a one off.

Come on @Bletchleyite, you know darn well that there are fluctuations in the data all the time. Pointing at a single day's increase isn't anything like proof of any spike, we will need at least a week's worth of data for that to be shown.

It's hardly a spike. Cases dropped a lot earlier in the week, unnaturally so. I feel there's a bit of settling of the numbers going on. France and Spain are still recording figures close to 900 and they have ways been 2 or 3 weeks ahead of us.

And this why we don't look at individual days to assess the situation. A rolling period trend is much more useful because as you say the data is constantly adjusted as test results are caught up, and indeed duplicate results removed.

 

[6862]

The relative spike today is a bit concerning and is precisely one week after "Super Saturday", but we'll have to see if it is sustained or a one off.

Although I have not looked at the raw data myself, I have read elsewhere that Saturday's figures contain a lot of backdated cases.

 

[Domh245]

Not really too much of a backlog I'd have said - 100 of the cases announced were from samples taken on or before Monday, the remaining 706 were samples taken between Tuesday and Friday. Digging into the data is always interesting though, for example 56 of the cases sampled on Thursday came from Herefordshire - that looks to me like a testing 'blitz' rather than any sort of sudden spike as a result of 'Super Saturday'.

 

[adc82140]

Not really too much of a backlog I'd have said - 100 of the cases announced were from samples taken on or before Monday, the remaining 706 were samples taken between Tuesday and Friday. Digging into the data is always interesting though, for example 56 of the cases sampled on Thursday came from Herefordshire - that looks to me like a testing 'blitz' rather than any sort of sudden spike as a result of 'Super Saturday'.

Quite. Unfortunately nuances like that are far too complex for the shouty social media community.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Although I have not looked at the raw data myself, I have read elsewhere that Saturday's figures contain a lot of backdated cases.

Thank you; so despite the mangled and missing BBC subtitles, I wasn't posting garbage in #1051 above then?

 

[6862]

Thank you; so despite the mangled and missing BBC subtitles, I wasn't posting garbage in #1051 above then?

I don't think you were posting rubbish.

Here are a couple of links:

https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/cases

https://twitter.com/rob9son/status/1282008484658196485?s=19

There have been similar looking 'rises' before - it looks like there have been bursts of catching up previously.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Not really too much of a backlog I'd have said - 100 of the cases announced were from samples taken on or before Monday, the remaining 706 were samples taken between Tuesday and Friday. Digging into the data is always interesting though, for example 56 of the cases sampled on Thursday came from Herefordshire - that looks to me like a testing 'blitz' rather than any sort of sudden spike as a result of 'Super Saturday'.

And all from a single farm. 700 cases to date in Herefordshire, and then another 70 all in one go. What no-one is discussing is the severity of these cases. It is good that testing is identifying them, but how many of this latest outbreak, or the Anglesey Meat Plant, or the other large single premises outbreaks, resulted in hospital admission?

 

[Busaholic]

I've been down my main street to compare notices regarding how many people are allowed in each shop at one time. I gave up quickly, as there is no more logic being applied here as in any other aspect of the 'crisis.' Holland and Barrett, a long, thin store = 4, the game store next door, approx 60% of the size of H&B = 6, Poundland, perhaps three to four times the size of H&B = 70! Think of a number and write it down - the 'risk assessment' is that scientific.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And all from a single farm. 700 cases to date in Herefordshire, and then another 70 all in one go. What no-one is discussing is the severity of these cases. It is good that testing is identifying them, but how many of this latest outbreak, or the Anglesey Meat Plant, or the other large single premises outbreaks, resulted in hospital admission?

Most out of these 73 were asymptomatic:

Coronavirus: Mathon farm workers isolating after 73 cases

Up to 200 vegetable pickers and packers will remain on the farm in Herefordshire while isolating.

www.bbc.co.uk

It's quite possible that there are other farms with cases that have no symptomatic cases at all and thus nobody knows they have.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I've recently returned to Facebook and was astounded to see this chain post that's doing the rounds. I'm guessing it dates back to April back when the virus was a serious threat but people are still copy and pasting it verbatim. Words fail me that there's still people believing this hysterical hyperbole!

Let's say you woke up with a terrible cough, a fever, and severe body aches. Immediately, you rush to the doctor and unfortunately, you’re diagnosed with COVID-19. For the last two weeks, you’ve been unaware that you were infected and you’ve ignored "the rules." You've gotten together with some close friends for pizza, had a few too many people over for a party (who's going to know), even hugged and kissed your relatives. You figured, “I don’t feel sick. I have the right to keep living my normal life. No one can tell me what to do."
With your diagnosis, you spend the next few days at home on the couch, feeling pretty crappy; but then you’re well again because you’re young, healthy and strong. Lucky you. But your best friend caught it from you during a visit to your house, and because she didn't know she was contagious, she visited her 82-year-old grandfather, who uses oxygen tanks daily to help him breathe because he has COPD and heart failure. Now, he’s dead.
Your co-worker, who has asthma, caught it too, during your little pizza get-together. Now, he’s in the ICU, and he's spread it to a few others in his family, too--but they won't know that for another couple of weeks yet.
The cashier at the restaurant where you picked up the pizza carried the infection home to his wife, who has MS, which makes her immunosuppressed. She’s not as lucky as you, so she’s admitted to the hospital because she’s having trouble breathing. She may need to be placed in a medically-induced coma and intubated; she may not get to say goodbye to her loved ones. She may die surrounded by machines, with no family at her bedside.
All because you couldn't stand the inconvenience of a following a few rules; of staying home; of changing your familiar routines for just a little while. Because you have the right, above all others rights, to continue living your normal life and no one, I mean no one, has the right to tell you what to do.
#SocialDistancing = It’s not about YOU!
#StayHome = It's not about YOU!
#GetTested = It's not about YOU!
As Dan Andrews said, “we all know at least one person who hasn’t followed the rules”.
Please Copy and share, you can save lives.

 

[Scrotnig]

I've recently returned to Facebook and was astounded to see this chain post that's doing the rounds. I'm guessing it dates back to April back when the virus was a serious threat but people are still copy and pasting it verbatim. Words fail me that there's still people believing this hysterical hyperbole!

I now have a policy of blocking anybody who posts any of that sort of nonsense.
Same for any of the "army on the streets, shoot anyone seen outside" brigade.
I rarely use social media but when I do I don't want it contaminated with hysterical morons.

 

[kylemore]

Most out of these 73 were asymptomatic:

Coronavirus: Mathon farm workers isolating after 73 cases

Up to 200 vegetable pickers and packers will remain on the farm in Herefordshire while isolating.

www.bbc.co.uk

It's quite possible that there are other farms with cases that have no symptomatic cases at all and thus nobody knows they have.

If you vastly increase testing you will find more "cases".

They are increasingly using "cases" to scare us and keep this going, you don't hear much about hospitalisations.

And remember these "cases" are not "Covid-19 positive", in reality genetic material has been found that indicates the person has anti-bodies that may have come from exposure to Covid-19. The vast majority are asymptomatic however you are not discouraged from believing that "700 cases" means 700 people struggling for their lives in hospital. That is scare-mongering. Deliberate scare-mongering.

What the agenda of those who appear to be deliberately making our lives difficult is, one can only surmise, however this is now without doubt a social conditioning and economic reset event. Forget the politicians, they are simply employees doing what they are paid to do.

 

[sheff1]

I've been down my main street to compare notices regarding how many people are allowed in each shop at one time. I gave up quickly, as there is no more logic being applied here as in any other aspect of the 'crisis.' Holland and Barrett, a long, thin store = 4, the game store next door, approx 60% of the size of H&B = 6, Poundland, perhaps three to four times the size of H&B = 70! Think of a number and write it down - the 'risk assessment' is that scientific.

We have three places next to each other, all the same size. Two are shops and the limits are 1 person & 3 people. The third is a bookies - 15 people. Guess in which place people are going to spend longer in close proximity to each other, and guess which was the only one with the door closed - same answer to both.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

If you vastly increase testing you will find more "cases".

They are increasingly using "cases" to scare us and keep this going, you don't hear much about hospitalisations.

And remember these "cases" are not "Covid-19 positive", in reality genetic material has been found that indicates the person has anti-bodies that may have come from exposure to Covid-19. The vast majority are asymptomatic however you are not discouraged from believing that "700 cases" means 700 people struggling for their lives in hospital. That is scare-mongering. Deliberate scare-mongering.

I agree 100% with this view.
Some people are also fixated on any rise in cases, however small, as evidence that ‘this virus is getting out of control again’. They seem determined to ignore the obvious: that if a certain percentage of the population are infected, and you ramp up the testing, of course the absolute number of people you find positive is going to rise!
The first concern should not be the number of cases, the concern should be number of deaths, and whether those are still trending downwards.
In Scotland today, the number of new cases was just 19. The number of deaths was 0

https://www.gov.scot/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-daily-data-for-scotland/

If tomorrow’s stats show 30 new cases, and 1 death, a headline-writer could scream ‘new cases in Scotland rise by over 50%’ or ‘Covid deaths in Scotland rise exponentially in 24 hours’ but it doesn’t alter the low numbers

 

[Huntergreed]

I agree 100% with this view.
Some people are also fixated on any rise in cases, however small, as evidence that ‘this virus is getting out of control again’. They seem determined to ignore the obvious: that if a certain percentage of the population are infected, and you ramp up the testing, of course the absolute number of people you find positive is going to rise!
The first concern should not be the number of cases, the concern should be number of deaths, and whether those are still trending downwards.
In Scotland today, the number of new cases was just 19. The number of deaths was 0
If tomorrow’s stats show 30 new cases, and 1 death, a headline-writer could scream ‘new cases in Scotland rise by over 50%’ or ‘Covid deaths in Scotland rise exponentially in 24 hours’ but it doesn’t alter the low numbers

But this is exactly what’s happening, and it seems to be what Sturgeon is still wanting to happen. She certainly isn’t wanting to encourage economic activity just yet, she keeps warning us to “stay at home where possible” and reminding us “life shouldn’t feel normal yet”, I’m doubtful this will end anytime soon either.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've recently returned to Facebook and was astounded to see this chain post that's doing the rounds. I'm guessing it dates back to April back when the virus was a serious threat but people are still copy and pasting it verbatim. Words fail me that there's still people believing this hysterical hyperbole!

It's not hysterical hyperbole, it's quite rational. We all need to do our part in preventing spread. It's not hard to do so by paying attention to simple social distancing measures, you don't have to put your life on hold and that message doesn't ask you to. You can even go to Barnard Castle for an eye test at Specsavers if you want, just follow the distancing measures they have in place and consider a mask.

It's probably being shared by hysterical coronaphobes, but there's not a lot wrong with it otherwise, other than maybe that it includes a hashtag #stayhome which isn't necessary as long as you consider what you're doing properly.

The main point it makes is "it's not about you", which is absolutely correct. Like when driving a car, you need to take responsible measures for the safety of others.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

It will never be eliminated. The only disease ever eliminated is Smallpox. We (and Guernsey) will have to learn to live with it.

You may be interested in reading this article

http://www.vernoncoleman.com/vaccines.htm

which claims that Smallpox was not eliminated by vaccination...

Doctors and drug companies may not like it but the truth is that surveillance, quarantine and better living conditions got rid of smallpox – not the smallpox vaccine.

When the World Health Organization campaign to rid the world of smallpox was at its height the number of cases of smallpox went up each time there was a large scale (and expensive) mass vaccination of populations in susceptible countries. As a result of this the WHO changed its strategy. Mass vaccination programmes were abandoned and replaced with surveillance, isolation and quarantine.

For example, in the 1960s Sierra Leone had the highest rate of smallpox in the world. The country got rid of smallpox in just over a year – largely by the simple process of identifying and isolating patients with the disease.

The myth that smallpox was eradicated through a mass vaccination programme is just that – a myth.

It is worth pointing out that Edward Jenner, widely feted as the inventor of the smallpox vaccine, tried out the first smallpox vaccination on his own 10 month old son. His son remained mentally retarded until his death at the age of 21. Jenner refused to have his second child vaccinated.

 

[Domh245]

Of course, notorious anti-vaxxer Coleman is going to claim that it wasn't vaccination that eradicated smallpox. He seems to be ignoring the countries who did eliminate it using vaccination though

 

[Bletchleyite]

Of course, notorious anti-vaxxer Coleman is going to claim that it wasn't vaccination that eradicated smallpox. He seems to be ignoring the countries who did eliminate it using vaccination though

And the latter paragraph is just irresponsible. There is no similarity between having a modern, properly tested vaccine and testing one that hasn't been properly trialled on your son.

 

[gsnedders]

It's not hysterical hyperbole, it's quite rational. We all need to do our part in preventing spread. It's not hard to do so by paying attention to simple social distancing measures, you don't have to put your life on hold and that message doesn't ask you to. You can even go to Barnard Castle for an eye test at Specsavers if you want, just follow the distancing measures they have in place and consider a mask.

It's probably being shared by hysterical coronaphobes, but there's not a lot wrong with it otherwise, other than maybe that it includes a hashtag #stayhome which isn't necessary as long as you consider what you're doing properly.

The main point it makes is "it's not about you", which is absolutely correct. Like when driving a car, you need to take responsible measures for the safety of others.

Especially when any infection almost invariably follows exponential growth/decay curves, it can very quickly get out of control again. The longer you keep it on a decay curve, the easier time you should have tracking outbreaks. I think the concern many people like me have is we still have very little in the way of any infrastructure to track outbreaks, which when we're seeing significant long-term effects of infection (lung capacity, etc.) means the risk of any resurgence is significant. The need for safety is to avoid both infecting yourself and the exponential growth that would be expected from you—and inherently that means avoiding infection yourself and any risk of you spreading it is about protecting vastly more people than yourself.

 

[Journeyman]

I now have a policy of blocking anybody who posts any of that sort of nonsense.
Same for any of the "army on the streets, shoot anyone seen outside" brigade.
I rarely use social media but when I do I don't want it contaminated with hysterical morons.

Looks like it came from America, with the style of language. Agreed, anyone posting stuff like that gets a block from me.

 

[talldave]

The need for safety is to avoid both infecting yourself and the exponential growth that would be expected from you—and inherently that means avoiding infection yourself and any risk of you spreading it is about protecting vastly more people than yourself.

Agreed and all the queuing we've spent weeks tolerating has led to negative growth. My point is that I want to continue visiting the supermarket without being muzzled because apparently up until now that was good enough.

 

[gsnedders]

Agreed and all the queuing we've spent weeks tolerating has led to negative growth. My point is that I want to continue visiting the supermarket without being muzzled because apparently up until now that was good enough.

I think there's a number of possible interpretations of for the change, among them:

• Further understanding of the spread of the novel virus,
• Decreasing conformance to social distancing guidelines,
• A desire to accelerate the decay phase, or
• Providing time to normalize masks in many environments prior to making them mandatory more widely.

That's by no means an exhaustive list. It is worthwhile pointing out however that the UK has some of the lowest rates of mask wearing in Europe which may well be related to the comparatively high rates of death we still have for how long we are after the first deaths. If people in most of Europe can wear masks, if those around at-risk people can wear masks year round, you too can wear a mask.

 

[Scrotnig]

If people in most of Europe can wear masks, if those around at-risk people can wear masks year round, you too can wear a mask.

I can't.

 

[adc82140]

I think there's a number of possible interpretations of for the change, among them:

• Further understanding of the spread of the novel virus,
• Decreasing conformance to social distancing guidelines,
• A desire to accelerate the decay phase, or
• Providing time to normalize masks in many environments prior to making them mandatory more widely.

That's by no means an exhaustive list. It is worthwhile pointing out however that the UK has some of the lowest rates of mask wearing in Europe which may well be related to the comparatively high rates of death we still have for how long we are after the first deaths. If people in most of Europe can wear masks, if those around at-risk people can wear masks year round, you too can wear a mask.

The main reason we had a higher death rate than the rest of Europe has nothing to do with bits of cloth, but a lot to do with the fact we have the highest obesity rate in Europe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can't.

You have one of the medical exemptions, I assume? In which case you are exempted and don't need to wear one.

If you just don't like them, though, that's different, yes you can, you just have to accept some discomfort or change your shopping/travel habits.

 

[takno]

I think there's a number of possible interpretations of for the change, among them:

• Further understanding of the spread of the novel virus,
• Decreasing conformance to social distancing guidelines,
• A desire to accelerate the decay phase, or
• Providing time to normalize masks in many environments prior to making them mandatory more widely.

That's by no means an exhaustive list. It is worthwhile pointing out however that the UK has some of the lowest rates of mask wearing in Europe which may well be related to the comparatively high rates of death we still have for how long we are after the first deaths. If people in most of Europe can wear masks, if those around at-risk people can wear masks year round, you too can wear a mask.

Thanks for the motivational message, but no I really can't, not for more than a couple of minutes without health consequences. That's real consequences, unlike the benefits that don't even exist theoretically unless you pretend that an improperly-worn bit of cloth is a surgical mask.

In any case, we don't have one of the lowest rates of mask use in Europe. A large chunk of the continent including some quite lightly affected places is barely using them at all, and the Czech Republic, which was one of ther cheerleaders for the whole thing, has largely stopped usage with a similar current infection rate to where we are *starting*. Even places which are theoretically quite stringent about them also don't mandate that you sit stewing in them once you've taken your seat on public transport.

As usual we are arriving late, driven by a weird sense of guilt rather than reason, and grabbing the most inconvenient solution with both hands in some misguided kind of attempt to morally cleanse ourselves