COVID19

[Marky147]

Click to see full-size image.

That's from the link Kush posted, and looks like the excess deaths were over ~5 week period, if I read that correctly. Not good whichever way you slice it, obviously.

As others say, be preferable if they just told us how many tests / how many people, and stopped trying to make the test numbers up.

[Cf]

Have a look at BBC Parliament. What a laughing stock we must be.

[neeko]

What should the distance for social distancing be? Science has summarised knowledge about this in a paper today, politicians need to make a decision as to the value to publicise.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

Chance of passing coved at 0m is 12.8%, 1m is 2.6% & 2m is 1.3% , it halves as you go 1m further away but even at 6m it is not zero.

What is the appropriate level to of risk for distancing? Get everyone to stay 10m apart and be as safe as possible, or make it 1m and  the risk if significantly reduced from no distancing.

Make masks compulsory and the distance can be lower, make testing work, along with track trace and isolate functioning and the distance can shrink again for the same level of risk.

I guess that it will move to 1m soon with the justification that the above other measures and others have the effect of retuning R and therefore the risk level of 1m plus other measures equals the old level of 2m with no other measures.

People still can stand 2m away anytime they care to.

[RED-DOG]

What should the distance for social distancing be? Science has summarised knowledge about this in a paper today, politicians need to make a decision as to the value to publicise.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

Chance of passing coved at 0m is 12.8%, 1m is 2.6% & 2m is 1.3% , it halves as you go 1m further away but even at 6m it is not zero.

What is the appropriate level to of risk for distancing? Get everyone to stay 10m apart and be as safe as possible, or make it 1m and  the risk if significantly reduced from no distancing.

Make masks compulsory and the distance can be lower, make testing work, along with track trace and isolate functioning and the distance can shrink again for the same level of risk.

I guess that it will move to 1m soon with the justification that the above other measures and others have the effect of retuning R and therefore the risk level of 1m plus other measures equals the old level of 2m with no other measures.

People still can stand 2m away anytime they care to.

Not if you're in a queue and the person behind is doing 1m.

[kukushkin88]

Have a look at BBC Parliament. What a laughing stock we must be.

https://twitter.com/marinahyde/status/1267842918792015872?s=21

[kukushkin88]

What should the distance for social distancing be? Science has summarised knowledge about this in a paper today, politicians need to make a decision as to the value to publicise.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

Chance of passing coved at 0m is 12.8%, 1m is 2.6% & 2m is 1.3% , it halves as you go 1m further away but even at 6m it is not zero.

What is the appropriate level to of risk for distancing? Get everyone to stay 10m apart and be as safe as possible, or make it 1m and  the risk if significantly reduced from no distancing.

Make masks compulsory and the distance can be lower, make testing work, along with track trace and isolate functioning and the distance can shrink again for the same level of risk.

I guess that it will move to 1m soon with the justification that the above other measures and others have the effect of retuning R and therefore the risk level of 1m plus other measures equals the old level of 2m with no other measures.

People still can stand 2m away anytime they care to.

I think the best lesson from this is probably that an arbitrary social distance, isn’t the answer. We need people who might be infectious, not to be out and about. I think we all agree a strict lockdown isn’t coming. So we need an absolute Rolls Royce of a contact tracing programme.....,,,

[Karabiner]

What should the distance for social distancing be? Science has summarised knowledge about this in a paper today, politicians need to make a decision as to the value to publicise.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

Chance of passing coved at 0m is 12.8%, 1m is 2.6% & 2m is 1.3% , it halves as you go 1m further away but even at 6m it is not zero.

What is the appropriate level to of risk for distancing? Get everyone to stay 10m apart and be as safe as possible, or make it 1m and  the risk if significantly reduced from no distancing.

Make masks compulsory and the distance can be lower, make testing work, along with track trace and isolate functioning and the distance can shrink again for the same level of risk.

I guess that it will move to 1m soon with the justification that the above other measures and others have the effect of retuning R and therefore the risk level of 1m plus other measures equals the old level of 2m with no other measures.

People still can stand 2m away anytime they care to.

Not if you're in a queue and the person behind is doing 1m.

In the same way that the highway code goes out the window as soon as people drive into a supermarket car-park the same thing happens to social-distancing as soon as they get out of the queue and enter the store.

PS I've now started queueing with the trolley behind me to discourage over-eager shoppers as we near the front of the line.

[RED-DOG]

What should the distance for social distancing be? Science has summarised knowledge about this in a paper today, politicians need to make a decision as to the value to publicise.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

Chance of passing coved at 0m is 12.8%, 1m is 2.6% & 2m is 1.3% , it halves as you go 1m further away but even at 6m it is not zero.

What is the appropriate level to of risk for distancing? Get everyone to stay 10m apart and be as safe as possible, or make it 1m and  the risk if significantly reduced from no distancing.

Make masks compulsory and the distance can be lower, make testing work, along with track trace and isolate functioning and the distance can shrink again for the same level of risk.

I guess that it will move to 1m soon with the justification that the above other measures and others have the effect of retuning R and therefore the risk level of 1m plus other measures equals the old level of 2m with no other measures.

People still can stand 2m away anytime they care to.

Not if you're in a queue and the person behind is doing 1m.

In the same way that the highway code goes out the window as soon as people drive into a supermarket car-park the same thing happens to social-distancing as soon as they get out of the queue and enter the store.

PS I've now started queueing with the trolley behind me to discourage over-eager shoppers as we near the front of the line.

No flies on you Ralph.

[kukushkin88]

https://www.actuaries.org.uk/system/files/field/document/Mortality%20monitor%20Week%2021%202020%20v01%202020-06-02_0.pdf

[Dewi_cool]

https://www.channel4.com/news/revealed-covid-test-and-trace-data-in-england-leaked-to-channel-4-news?fbclid=IwAR3DWGpAu3K3LAF3NFUiKJTEIo1ypjxCxVivZ27fjfdzcFXRWK8QnngdcDI

[arbboy]

Doobs made a guest appearance on the Q&A today asking a question!  Cracking lookalike.

[Cf]

Haha Alok Sharma self isolating with symptoms. Getting all those MPs back a genius idea. Bonus points for them all going back to different parts of the country and showing the problems with the idea of local lockdowns.

[TightEnd]

NHS test-and-trace app 'not fully operational until September'

https://theguardian.com/society/2020/jun/04/nhs-track-and-trace-system-not-expected-to-be-operating-fully-until-september-coronavirus

blimey, we really don't do some of this big scale organisation stuff that well/quickly/efficiently

This is a Serco project.

[TightEnd]

On the upside, 176 reported fatalities today, a big drop on last Thursday's 413. (413 338 428 539 674 727 1029 1103)

On the wtfside, another "oh look, that stable door is open where is my horse?" moment with the compulsory order to wear masks on public transport from 15th June, the prospect of which was something dismissed by the government/SAGE in April as an irrelevance

[Jon MW]

...
On the wtfside, another "oh look, that stable door is open where is my horse?" moment with the compulsory order to wear masks on public transport from 15th June, the prospect of which was something dismissed by the government/SAGE in April as an irrelevance

When public transport use was down by 80 to 90% how much difference do you think the 10-20% still using it wearing a mask would make?

The answer would still be a net positive effect, albeit a tiny one.

However, if they had introduced compulsory wearing a mask on public transport earlier, it could have lead to only a 50 or 60% reduction on public transport use because of people feeling safer going out.

Those 40-50% then using public transport might not bothered so much with social distancing, because everyone was wearing a mask so why would they need to.

The net effect could be a higher rate of transmission as a result of making mask use compulsory.

- is the "kind" of logic they had in mind.

As with other details in the epidemic response, just because something isn't appropriate at one point in time - it doesn't mean that it will never be appropriate at another point in time.

----

All that with the proviso though that the government response does seem to be getting more and more political and less and less 'science-y'