***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 18 *****
==============================================================
Ongoing debate.
606876
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 18 May 20 at 03:04
|
Listening this morning to a noted statistician on TV this morning who had a very objective view of the way figures are presented.
In particular he noted that (figures from ONS to 24th April so a little out of date):
- 2 deaths under the age of 14
- 24 under the age of 25
- 25295 over the age of 60
- 15648 over the age of 80
So it's quite clear why some/many younger people feel they are being penalised for the aged - the risks to them are very low (normality would probably be more risky!).
It is also noteworthy that the incidence of death by age follows very closely the average for all other reasons. So like strokes, heart attacks, cancer, pneumonia etc CV-19 could be described as a new threat, not an unusual one.
Not intended to be complacent, but an observation to put things into context!
|
|
Did he breakdown the group 25 to 60?
|
|
The website we use says 31k deaths so on the face of it about £6k between 25 and 65.
|
Yes - just 4 sets of data to make the point.
Total deaths to 24th April were 27330.
Those related to 25 - 59 were 2011
|
>> Did he breakdown the group 25 to 60?
>>
Cough.
31,587 minus 25,295 minus 26 equals 6,266.
|
Following on from Terry's post a few other notable statistics.
A study in Italy (Epidemiology for Public Health) indicated that of the fatalities;
1% had no known underlying conditions
25% had 1 underlying condition
26% had 2 underlying conditions
48% had 3 or more underlying conditions
A study from China (Center for Disease Control & Prevention) rated the most significant underlying conditions as;
10.5 % Cardio Vascular disease
7.3% Diabetes
6.3% Chronic Respiratory disease
6.0% Abnormally high blood pressure
5.5% Cancer
Figures from UK (ONS) & Italy (Epid. for Public Health) into age of the deceased; (25,000 cases, I don't know why it only adds up to 95%)
<9...........0.2%
10- 20......1.0%
20 – 59....3.8%
60 – 69....9.7%
>70.........79.8%
According to the CDC Tuberculosis, Hepatitis B, Pneumonia and HIV are each killing more per day than COVID-19
Johns Hopkins states that average Daily Death growth rates are (7-day rolling average)
UK = -7.4%
US = +1.5%
Germany = -4.8%
Brazil = +8.0%
Note that this last is as at 10th May so probably includes figures upto and including 9th May which makes be wonder about the report from the BBC that Germany's rate is increasing. It certainly did blip up 4 days ago but has been decreasing again since.
|
Very interesting article in The Telegraph today on the risks associated with various activities. It seems the most dangerous thing you can do is to get old! So!
The safest age of all is 9 to 10 years old.
An extract
Age
Age is one of the biggest risk factors for general health and wellbeing, with the chance of dying rising substantially as people grow older.
Although there is an early spike in the deaths of babies due to congenital birth defects and problems in delivery, the chance of dying as a child is eye-squintingly small, with those aged nine and 10 the least likely of any age group to die.
As Cambridge University risk expert Sir David John Spiegelhalter put it in a recent blog: "Nobody in the history of humanity has been as safe as a contemporary primary school child."
Youngsters also seem largely immune to coronavirus, with most cases involving people over 60 or with underlying health conditions.
In April, Imperial College modelled the death rates for the virus, factoring in for the first time less serious cases which will never trouble the health service. While the overall death rate of those in hospital is hovering at around 1.3 per cent, or about one in 77, it falls dramatically to 0.66 per cent, or one in 152, when mild and asymptomatic cases are included.
The same lowering of risk holds true for all age ranges, and means that the chance of dying for children contracting coronavirus is miniscule, approximately 0.0069 per cent for 10 to 29 year olds – one in 14,492.
For the under-10s, there is even less risk – around 0.0016 per cent, or one in 62,500. Those in their 20s have a one in 1,666 chance of death, while for 30-somethings it is one in 1,190. For people in their 40s it is approximately one in 625, in their 50s one in 169 and in their 60s nearly one in 50. Over-70s have a roughly one in 23 risk of death.
The risk of dying from anything follows the same linear pattern as coronavirus as people age, with a slight rise in the late teens and early 20s largely caused by the follies of youth. But apart from that blip, the average risk of death doubles roughly every eight years.
Each age group has a different chance of dying each year, and Prof Spiegelhalter has calculated that coronavirus squeezes, on average, a year's worth of risk for someone who is hospitalised.
So for an 80-year-old Briton, the chance of death from anything annually is around 11 per cent, and coronavirus adds 9.3 per cent to that for hospitalised patients.
For those aged 10 to 19 the risk is far lower, accounting for just five months of annual risk, yet for those 60 to 69 it is two-and-a-half years of extra risk.
If we include those who never needed hospital, the risk falls even further. So while the annual risk of death for a 10 to 19-year-old is just 0.02 per cent, the risk of death from coronavirus is 0.0069 per cent – the equivalent of four months of annual risk.
|
|
I have a full head of hair and have often envied my more follically challenged peers..anyway my one "dystopia" fail was getting my hair cut. Ordered a hair trimmer on 2 April turns up a month later...Mrs RP cut my with it (using a 12mm cut)....what a relief..! Anyone else gone down the home-cut route..
|
|
I've seen my mrs use of clipper type things on the Hedge! I'll be going to the Hair-dressers looking like Cousin "It" thankyou!
|
I thin it's been mentioned in earlier volumes.
Having been a bit overdue a haircut when the barbers/hairdressers shut up shop I was pretty woolly by second week of lockdown. After extensive browsing I ordered a Wahl clipper with a range of combs for different lengths.
Number 4 back/sides and number 6 on top seemed about right. Thought I might need Mrs B to assist but in the end it came out OK.
Another fortnight or so and it'll need doing again.
|
I get my hair cut 3 times a year. Last Dec cost me €8 in a shopping centre ( San Eugenio) Tenneriffy. Early March another €8 in Spain. A bit early because it was unseasonably warm. For my birthday in July it will be the £4.99 barbers in Skipton.
I was looking at some old photos of my backpacking trip around Oz circa 1980 when I jacked in my job and my hair was very long, bleached blond after a month or so in Queensland and I was starting to look like a hobo.
Not a lots changed. Apart from the colour of my hair.
Last edited by: legacylad on Sun 10 May 20 at 12:14
|
Many years ago I bought a trimmer set. Used it once myself and ended up at the barbers for an 'emergency' short cut. The set has gathered dust ever since.
It came out of retirement and Miss FC undertook the task having never before cut hair. And a remarkable job she made. Bit of wax finished off the proceedings.
|
I’ve plenty of (Toko) left over wax in my ski maintainance kit. Drop globules on to the base of the ski off a hot travel iron. Then scrape excess off with a metal ruler.
I hope Miss FC didn’t use that method
|
|
I'm waiting for a Wahl to turn up sometime this week. A couple of decades back I used to cut my own hair with one, anything between a number 1 and a number 4 depending on my mood. In fact I must have been doing it nine years ago too as my driving licence photo has me in skinhead mode.
|
|
With my new babyliss cutters it now gets done once a week, looking better than any hairdresser ever managed. mrs Z has to get to the bumfluff on the neck with the beard trimmer attachment to my philips shaver.
|
- Stay at home when possible
- Work from home if you can
- Return to work if you need to
- Avoid public transport if possible
- Take exercise outside
- Enjoy parks and public spaces
- Always keep your distance
- it is hoped that schools will be able to gradually return after the beginning of next month.
Plenty for people to throw rocks and at rather predictably the rocks immediately come from Nicola Sturgeon, Labour and The Unions gleefully transmitted by the BBC and the rest of the tabloid media. Not that any of them have any alternatives to suggest but normality seems to be returning to their behaviour.
But it all seems reasonable to me. And almost inevitable really, given that the lockdown would not have lasted much longer anyway.
In particular Sturgeon seems to have got a panties in a twist about the change from "Stay at home" to "Stay alert". But yet again seems a reasonable step to me.
All designed to allow a creep back towards freedom of movement rather than a gallop.
And if anybody thinks that they should stay at home, they have the freedom to do so.
And despite the UK Airlines assuring us that they had been told that 14 day quarantine would be applied, it predictably hasn't been. Though the spectre of it is kept there, almost certainly so in-line with Zero's FUD principle.
Though one peculiarity is the statement that restrictions will not apply between France and the UK. I don't quite see the logic behind that, or even the ulterior motive, for that matter.
|
"Plenty for people to throw rocks .............."
All sounds perfectly reasonable to me too. During lockdown the usual suspects were complaining about 'being treated like children' so Boris gives them a tad more freedom to use common sense, and they complain that the rules aren't specific enough.
Boris seemed to have lost quite a bit of weight and, considering what he's been through, I thought he did pretty well. I think sensible people will be quite happy with Boris ..... and all the more so when placed against the background of the media, the Beeb and the Loons.
|
>>I thought he did pretty well. I think sensible people will be quite happy with Boris
>>..... and all the more so when placed against the background of the media, the Beeb and the
>>Loons.
I entirely agree. We could have had much worse than Boris et al.
|
Sometimes I read things on here and think I live in a parallel universe! But just goes to show everyone has their own opinions and viewpoints.
If Boris has done this live with questions afterwards then it would maybe have made more sense. But it was prerecorded, in front of a prompter. We know the man doesn’t like interviews, I genuinely don’t think his party trusts him to stick to, and understand, the script.
But, as I say, everyone has their own opinions and viewpoints.
|
"Sometimes I read things on here and think I live in a parallel universe! "
Do you live in the same parallel universe as the aforementioned Beeb, media and Loons ?
|
|
What the chuff was that graph about?
|
Please allow this rant....
I’m sick to the back teeth of the sanctimonious two faced local ass holes who post hateful comments on my local, very informative FB site, about the spawn of the devil who have the temerity to park in my small market town, go for a walk in open countryside or the deserted single track lanes, then drive home to the nearest built up urban area where they live.
I don’t have a problem with them at all. They are country lovers like myself. So long as they don’t sneeze through my letter box or spit on my door handles what’s the problem ?
The paranoid parochial locals are up in arms about the few that arrive.
These are the self same locals, who I know for a fact, drive to urban centres to do their food shop. One goes to Sainsburys whilst the other shops in Aldi. They travel from Settle to Clitheroe, Kendal, Skipton, even Keighley visiting more than one supermarket on a trip on a weekly basis. In my unscientific opinion there is far more chance of them returning with CV19 than there is of the walkers, cyclists and bikers from out of town infecting the community..
|
I have two mates with second properties in Cornwall who in normal times are my Sunday night drinking buddies.. I took beer with them this evening during a video call. They both feel that they would not be welcome in Cornwall right now, even though one in particular spends about 45% of his time there normally and has made lots of mates.
Earlier I read on another forum some really vitriolic stuff by some people in Cornwall against visitors and second home owners coming to visit. The sensible part of the argument was around the relative shortage of hospitals in he area. I suppose they have a point but a counter argument went that they are happy to take visitors money in the good times...
|
>> Sometimes I read things on here and think I live in a parallel universe! But
>> just goes to show everyone has their own opinions and viewpoints.
>>
>> If Boris has done this live with questions afterwards then it would maybe have made
>> more sense. But it was prerecorded, in front of a prompter. We know the man
>> doesn’t like interviews, I genuinely don’t think his party trusts him to stick to, and
>> understand, the script.
>>
>> But, as I say, everyone has their own opinions and viewpoints.
It was a statement, about the way the gov plans to ease and monitor restrictions
All seemed perfectly logical and simple to me. He also explained questions would be answered in Parliament tomorrow
In you parallel universe this morning, before Bojo announced anything your leader said she was in sole charge of how and when restrictions would be lifted in Scotland, then whinged because Boris did something different in England
|
Normality is returning:
- politicians are reverting to type criticising the party in power because they are in power, not necessarily because the policies are wrong.
- the devolved administrations want to assert their power and independance despite the fact that England dominates the debate with 85% of total UK population. No good reason why the whole country should move at the pace of the slowest anyway!
- the media pick holes and trivia to suit their particular audience. A few are worthy of respect, most put pursuit of circulation or viewer numbers above professionalism.
- the public complain about lockdown restrictions, and when the rules are flexed a little, complain that it is too generalised. Perhaps they (and we?) deserve the politicians and media we get.
Nice to see some independent thinkers on this forum even if I don't agree with all views expressed.
|
>> In you parallel universe this morning, before Bojo announced anything your leader said she was
>> in sole charge of how and when restrictions would be lifted in Scotland, then whinged
>> because Boris did something different in England
I have (surprise, surprise) the parallel universe feeling too.
First of all surely a policy announcement of that magnitude should be made to Parliament first with the broadcast to follow. I suspect he'll get a telling off from the Speaker for that. To tell us this on Sunday implying it applies from Monday, before the back up detail is published never mind legislated for is downright foolish. I note that Raab was on 'Today' saying what was actually meant was Wednesday but even so.....
The leaders of the Devolved Governments are absolutely entitled to be angry. If this stuff cannot be agreed between London, Edinburgh, Belfast and Cardiff then each has to do their own thing. But you'd reasonably expect there to have been some consultation, even if just Leader to Leader on Privy Council Terms. Nicola Sturgeon apparently heard about the same way as the rest of us; press speculation over the weekend.
It's also reported that most of the Cabinet were blindsided. They can discuss the guidance today but it's already been finalised and printed.
It's squarely in the territory where Unions should have their members backs. Ensuring working conditions are safe is absolutely what they were about from the word go in the last century but one. How do you maintain social distancing in a factory or warehouse, never mind amongst Primary age children?
The whole thing is typical of Johnson. Not a team player, can sound convincing on strategy provided he's not challenged but hopeless on detail.
|
|
I'm in some agreement over Johnson's style but I thought I'd read a number of articles over the weekend about "what to look for" which I presume were based around an embargoed press release and gave an indication of what was coming.
|
> First of all surely a policy announcement of that magnitude should be made to Parliament first with the broadcast to follow. I suspect he'll get a telling off from the Speaker for that. To tell us this on Sunday implying it applies from Monday, before the back up detail is published never mind legislated for is downright foolish. I note that Raab was on 'Today' saying what was actually meant was Wednesday but even so.....
I think PMs stopped (mainly) announcement big stuff to parliament years ago? Not perhaps right but it's not really a step change.
>> The leaders of the Devolved Governments are absolutely entitled to be angry. If this stuff
>> cannot be agreed between London, Edinburgh, Belfast and Cardiff then each has to do their
>> own thing. But you'd reasonably expect there to have been some consultation, even if just
>> Leader to Leader on Privy Council Terms. Nicola Sturgeon apparently heard about the same way
>> as the rest of us; press speculation over the weekend.
I think she's got the sad face on because she'd already hinted that she'd be the first to change policy in regard what was right for Scotland now she's not the first she's got the hump on.
How do you maintain social distancing in a factory or warehouse, never mind amongst Primary age children?
You can't, it's the government stating the obvious that we are going to have to live with a bit of risk.
|
>> The leaders of the Devolved Governments are absolutely entitled to be angry. If this stuff
>> cannot be agreed between London, Edinburgh, Belfast and Cardiff then each has to do their
>> own thing.
And they did BEFORE Boris announced anything, they made their positions clear, they have absolutely NO right to be angry, they have devolved government they did their thing first but it cuts both ways, They cant have devolved government and then tell others what to do.
As for the rest of yur post - Your political dogma has coloured your thinking again. You dont seriously think a pre prepared statement "blindsided" the cabinet? It wasnt live firing from the hip trump style, it would have been drafted and checked by many.
And the country does have to get back to work, in a staggered way, otherwise we will never be able to learn to live with the virus.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 11 May 20 at 10:59
|
>>
>> And they did BEFORE Boris announced anything, they made their positions clear, they have absolutely
>> NO right to be angry, they have devolved government they did their thing first but
>> it cuts both ways, They cant have devolved government and then tell others what to
>> do.
>>
It does, but with devolved Government consultation is still a requirement, not just something to receive lip service. Boris is carrying out Government by Daily Telegraph again, bypassing most, if not all, of the niceties.
>> As for the rest of yur post - Your political dogma has coloured your thinking
>> again. You dont seriously think a pre prepared statement "blindsided" the cabinet? It wasnt live
>> firing from the hip trump style, it would have been drafted and checked by many.
>>
It shows all the signs of being drafted by Cummings and Co. There have been rumblings for quite some time from both the Cabinet, and members of Sage (both scientific and behavioural) that they are not being kept in the loop. One might dismiss that simply as newspaper talk, except for the fact that senior members of the Tory party, including cabinet ministers, are well off-message this morning.
There is no plan....there hasn't been for much of the duration of the pandemic...they're winging it; badly, and Boris is seriously out of his depth.
|
>> As for the rest of yur post - Your political dogma has coloured your thinking
>> again. You dont seriously think a pre prepared statement "blindsided" the cabinet?
The 'dogma' jibe is just lazy, are you going to stick it on anyone else who thinks it was a pee poor performance?
As to the rest of the Cabinet I only know what I read which is of course unattributed. PM's who rule through a 'quad' and leave even senior members of the cabinet out of the loop are hardly new.
Cameron did and so did Blair. Wilson had a 'kitchen cabinet'.
|
PM's who rule through a 'quad' and leave even senior members of
>> the cabinet out of the loop are hardly new.
>>
>> Cameron did and so did Blair. Wilson had a 'kitchen cabinet'.
>>
What do you mean a quad?
|
Often when the PM (or Queen) addresses the nation it is a serious and somewhat sombre occasion and even the most experienced public speakers would use notes and autocues to ensure they make their point in the way they mean to, and don't allow themselves to deviate.
It's not intended to be a spectacle with the journos trying to outsmart the speaker and each other afterwards.
Even though I'm not really a great Boris fan I'm comfortable that he did rather that than shoot from the hip like Trump tends to.
|
The Johnson announcement was dismally inadequate. That he is better than Trump is not any kind of comfort.
A lot needs to happen between now and Wednesday when people are supposed to be returning to work - even then the plans are not self-consistent.
To be clear I agree that there should be some intelligent effort to restore economic activity as and where possible, as far as is consistent with whatever the strategy is for managing the spread of the virus. Is it controlled spread, or is it suppression?
Millions are furloughed, many have children at home with them. They will have to sort out child care. Childminders are currently only allowed to work if they have at least one child of a key worker in their charge. Is that to be changed? Schools are not opening yet, and presumably that applies to nurseries. My daughter has a 3 and a 5 year old. The school and the nursery are are closed, and the childminder is not working.
Allowing people to take unlimited exercise, to sunbathe and to picnic, and to drive a distance from home, particularly when the sun comes out, will result in large numbers appearing in parks and popular locations at the coast, in national parks etc.
The injunction to go to work but to maintain social distancing will result in many being coerced into working non-compliantly. This has happened already in some businesses where management has refused to close down and simply put the onus on the workforce to do it safely. I know of a commercial building firm in which all site managers have been told to carry on working but to do so compliantly. In practice this is impossible, with trades travelling together in the same vans, sharing facilities on site, and working at close quarters. Head office staff are alll working from home. Management is off the hook and employees take the risk. It seems that this is to become national policy. It will be very difficult in practice for many individuals who are not happy with this to dissent.
The announcement yesterday left far too much unresolved, and still one size fits all. It appears to be a plan to allow controlled spread, but little if anything was said about 12 million over 65's and 1.5 million highly vulnerable people who presumably have to stay out of the way. There was an acknowledgement of the care home problem but no plan - the COVID deaths in homes are clearly being understated see the second chart in this story. It uses actual (ONS) deaths. Excess deaths had reached 6,000 a week by w/e 27 April and at most half are being categorised as COVID related.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274
No FM2R has already noted that the 14 day quarantine plan for air travellers is impractical.
The 'plan' doesn't seem to be a plan at all. Typical Johnson "it will be alright on the night" rhetoric that he probably thinks is Churchillian. What a lamentable excuse for a PM.
Last edited by: Manatee on Mon 11 May 20 at 11:05
|
For those who thought the announcement was poor, what would you have said last night?
How would you unlock the country?
|
>> For those who thought the announcement was poor, what would you have said last night?
>> How would you unlock the country?
That argument doesn't fly. Johnson and his Ministers are the government, they have the information and the ability to set this stuff out and resource it. Asking 'Could You Do Better' is just a form of whataboutery.
Some of it may make more sense when expanded by the stuff to be published later but that's not even all due today. The criticism is as much of how he's gone about this as of the content.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 11 May 20 at 11:24
|
>> >> For those who thought the announcement was poor, what would you have said last
>> night?
>> >> How would you unlock the country?
>>
>> That argument doesn't fly. Johnson and his Ministers are the government, they have the information
>> and the ability to set this stuff out and resource it. Asking 'Could You Do
>> Better' is just a form of whataboutery.
Seems a perfectly reasonable question to me, how you've worked out its 'whataboutery' I've not the foggiest clue.
I'm not asking for a 50 page researched document, you must some alternative ideas though?
|
>> For those who thought the announcement was poor, what would you have said last night?
>> How would you unlock the country?
>That argument doesn't fly. Johnson and his Ministers are the government, they have the
>information and the ability to set this stuff out and resource it. Asking 'Could You Do Better' is
>just a form of whataboutery.
What an utter cop out.
>>Asking 'Could You Do Better' ..............
Nobody did.
And even if they had, it's f.all to do with whataboutery.
|
>> For those who thought the announcement was poor, what would you have said last night?
>> How would you unlock the country?
>>
This is simply a situation where nobody has any answer that will be universally accepted. Continue lockdown, ease lockdown, lift lockdown completely? Each scenario has it's pluses and minuses and the people or person in charge can only listen to the advice from their own trusted experts and act on it. There will be plenty of other "Experts" who think you are taking a damaging course of action no matter what you do and provide ammunition for your political opponents.
I think Johnson is doing a decent job in near impossible circumstances (I voted Labour at the last election) and I doubt if Starmer would do any different were it down to him, he is just nit picking for the sake of it. Sturgeon is a complete joke, running scared because the likely long term fall in oil prices is wrecking her hopes of creating a Scottish Utopia and she is just blindly hitting out where ever she can.
|
>> For those who thought the announcement was poor, what would you have said last night?
>> How would you unlock the country?
A five minute answer without benefit of an army advisers in every field? Ok.
I don't think we are in a position to relax lock-down quite yet. What does "R is between 0.5-0.9 mean? Is it the variation between different settings, or is it the range of the overall estimate? I bet it's a lot higher in care homes. So I would have been clearer about that.
There was no detail, or advice about where to go for it. What businesses are expected to be able to open, and which not? Is there a list somewhere? These are the businesses that are supposed to resume from today!
It's clearly impossible to avoid using public transport for many. Compulsory face covering would make it much safer. It has to be mandatory - you can't protect yourself with a mask, only other people. Yes there is a shortage, but they can be made in the community - my wife has made some for us.
I haven't got it all in my head and I'm not watching it again, but there was just no clarity. It was all reasonable at the general level but there was no detail on how to do it, and no pointer to it. How do you work safely if it was deemed not possible previously? The government is "working on it" but people are supposed to be back from now? How do you return to work if you have been furloughed or laid off and you are looking after your children?
What is being alert?
I'd like to hear more on testing and how t will be used to direct and manage the relaxation. It's clear there are very different levels of infection in different areas. The testing target seems to have affected the planning - great example of Goodhart's law in action.
|
|
Yes that's fine, like I said I'm not expecting people to write a nation wide comprehensive report but I think it's best if you're criticising then at least offer up some sort of alternative.
|
"I haven't got it all in my head and I'm not watching it again, but there was just no clarity. It was all reasonable at the general level but there was no detail on how to do it, and no pointer to it."
If you are over 70 and retired, then I suggest that you stop worrying, keep your head down and stay at home until the all-clear is sounded.
|
>>
>> If you are over 70 and retired, then I suggest that you stop worrying, keep
>> your head down and stay at home until the all-clear is sounded.
>>
...unless you've got offspring, friends, acquaintances that don't fall into that category, or you feel some sense of empathy with everyone else who is potentially going to be taking a risk....
|
>> If you are over 70 and retired, then I suggest that you stop worrying, keep
>> your head down and stay at home until the all-clear is sounded.
>>
There never has been a blanket instruction fo over seventies. The have always been allowed to venture out for exercise. I for one will be getting in my car on Wednesday and driving into the countryside for a walk around our rural footpaths. I doubt that I will see anybody.
|
>>
>> A five minute answer without benefit of an army advisers in every field? Ok.....
>>
Apart from saying "if you're going there you shouldn't be starting from here", I'd agree with much of that, but I would add at least one key factor.....
Don't do anything that will encourage a rise in infections until the front-line NHS staff have:
i) had the opportunity to have some R&R I'm not a great believer in PTSD, but I suspect there will be some coming down the line)
ii) a better provision of PPE and other required equipment (I know it's difficult to source, but that is the point of delaying)
If there is a rise in infection rate, with current practice it is likely to lead to another significant spike before it is noticed and things are put into reverse.
Last edited by: tyrednemotional on Mon 11 May 20 at 12:15
|
I didn't learn much from Boris last night, but I didn't expect to.
On the political front we are back to business as usual. Point scoring from the opposition. Mischief making from the devolved administrations. Media intent on finding inconsistencies and problems rather than reporting solutions. Unions finding that after decades they may now have some influence on the way forward.
It is apparent that many are incapable of independant thought and need clear rules to be able to function at all. Common sense, and judgement are personal qualities in short supply.
There are some harsh realities to deal with:
1. Tolerance for lock down is time limited
2. Fear of the virus was used to ensure compliance - now too many like the new normal
2. Financial support is creating a huge burden which will need to be repaid at some point
3. CV-19 is predominantly an old persons disease - just like strokes, heart attacks, etc
4. 30000 deaths is a relative success compared to the 0.5m it may have been.
We must accept that nanny state sticking plaster (so nobody need suffer) is going to be unworkable. It will create fault lines between:
- the young, relatively unaffected, who will have to work to pay for the debts built up
- the elderly who are most vulnerable, don't work, and mostly won't pay.
The solutions are not risk free. Some of the relaxations will need to be reversed. But to wait until the risks are close to zero before acting will impoverish all for a generation. Not a good legacy to leave ones children and grandchildren.
|
Slightly to one side of the discussion, but it occurs to me that now would be a good time to spend a bit of time with our two grandchildren, whom I miss very much. Both we, and my daughter, husband and children, have been in isolation for at least 6 weeks. The chance that any of us has COVID-19 must be close to nil.
Unfortunately we cannot meet just now unless we break the rules.
In a few weeks time however, schools will reopen and there must be a good chance that the 5 & 3 year old will become infected. Very low risk for them, and perhaps an acceptable risk for their parents who are 39 & 46, but it won't in my opinion be sensible for us to see them even if we are allowed to.
I wonder if anybody has considered this point. It would make far more sense for us to see them now (and I hope for them to see us) but if we don't, and if we stay alert and manage our risk responsibly, we might not see them for over a year.
I doubt whether politicians whose focus is getting to the end of the sentence they are currently improvising will have considered this sort of thing.
|
I sympathise with this and have much the same problem.
We have been isolated for 6 weeks and similarly any get togather would be very low risk.
Where we might differ is that I am happy to apply common sense, and less concerned with slavish compliance with rules.
As said grandchildren live 200 miles away it is more than "pop round the corner" . But (a) who will find out, (b) what could they possibly do, and (c) do I really care (no).
The main issue is one of personal risk - I can make my own judgement about my risk, but how would daughters or grandchildren feel if I later succumbed and they may feel responsible.
|
>> Where we might differ is that I am happy to apply common sense, and less
>> concerned with slavish compliance with rules.
Ours are 60 miles away. I'd like to make my own quite narrow rules but there is a clear problem with everybody gathering as they wish so I don't, not yet anyway.
Next week there may well be such a breakdown amidst the confusion that it will look very different. We didn't venture out this weekend but apparently parks and beaches were busy again.
There is a gathering of the wilfully uncooperative panned for Hyde Park on Saturday. Maybe a helicopter spraying disinfectant?
|
I can't speak for the reliability of the source and it's very far from a complete story, but the charts here are thought provoking.
www.endcoronavirus.org/countries?fbclid=IwAR0xhW-oUWS8-CJelqIZNLAK5LjlErESlwfDzYPWETIM3Da2kkLR3BOk9bA
|
>>I can't speak for the reliability of the source
I don't think it's great. That's the group which maintained the entire world should be 100% locked down for 5 days and then the whole problem would go away.
I think they're also the people in Nevada demonstrating about the current lockdowns.
The charts themselves are simplistic at best and don't compare well with each other.
|
|
p.s. all that bit in your link after and including the '?' is how they track where the link came from. I always think it better to remove it. The link works just fine without it.
|
"Our plan to rebuild"
www.gov.uk/government/publications/our-plan-to-rebuild-the-uk-governments-covid-19-recovery-strategy
Document published today.
PM due to make a statement to parliament about now.
Last edited by: Manatee on Mon 11 May 20 at 14:17
|
I've only been through it fairly quickly, but it seems entirely reasonable in the context of trying to keep all the plates spinning in an unknown environment.
Thus no doubt the sniping will begin in the absence of anything else sufficiently sensational to talk about.
Why do those not in power always do this? The Conservatives would be no different were they in opposition. Are people really swayed by such nit-picking, churlish and disingenuous behaviour?
I remain comfortable with the job that Johnson and his party are doing and the speech last night and the document today certainly give me sufficient guidance for my behaviour (in reality that of my family). They seem to be doing the best that can be done in a sensible, logical and open way.
Which is not so say that Labour wouldn't have done it equally as well, it is just to say that Johnson *is* doing it.
It takes such a small mentality to snipe purely on the basis and with the motivation of political allegiance.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 11 May 20 at 17:49
|
|
Why does the Opposition always oppose? I guess there’s a clue there somewhere.
|
With your ongoing eagerness to disagree with me you failed to read what I actually wrote and went with what you wish I'd written.
Amusing in its way.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 11 May 20 at 18:12
|
|
Always happy to amuse. Seriously though those that you see as nit picking, whilst perhaps irritating are doing a job. It’s surely just the way that politics and the press works. Sometimes it seems as though it would be better to have a more considered and consensual approach but at the end of the day trying to get the government to fully explain and justify every action they take is part of what makes us a democracy.
|
I absolutely agree that a strong party in opposition is a necessary thing. But rarely does any party come up with material or valuable points, it is almost always just sneering nit-picking perpetuated by a like minded media.
That, though, is just annoying.
What is worrying is that they must believe that it has a material effect on the electorate.
I have no particular party allegiance, in fact I whole-heartedly dislike party politics since no one party has ever managed to represent all/most of my thoughts, or none/few of them for that matter.
I don't know what percentage of the electorate does. Obviously some do, Bromp for example, and many others on all sides of course. For them it'll never make a blind bit of difference. They only want to hear/believe positive about their own party and negative about the other.
Presumably the targets are the ones that will change from one party to another. I am one of those. But never in a gazillion years will I be positively influenced by this level of tedious, petty and immature sniping. Neither, I doubt, are you. But I find it depressing that others so obviously are.
|
"I have no particular party allegiance, in fact I whole-heartedly dislike party politics since no one party has ever managed to represent all/most of my thoughts, or none/few of them for that matter."
Pretty much my philosophy too. Since growing up and leaving behind the politics of socialism, my policy has been to vote for 'the least worst' party.
|
|
Blimey, I thought I was an odd-ball. I've always voted for the party who's mandate that seemed to benefit me at the time.
|
|
My politics are the same as Eric Clapton, my heart is on the left but my wallet is on the right !
|
>> My politics are the same as Eric Clapton, my heart is on the left but
>> my wallet is on the right !
Also a line from 'The Candidate' by the late great Alex Glasgow:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJt3Rsde7PI
|
>>
>> Presumably the targets are the ones that will change from one party to another. I
>> am one of those. But never in a gazillion years will I be positively influenced
>> by this level of tedious, petty and immature sniping. Neither, I doubt, are you. But
>> I find it depressing that others so obviously are.
I find it hard to believe that many have changed their vote because they were called stupid, either directly or by implication, or by having been mocked.
Governments change when enough voters are fed up with the incumbents, and if there is an acceptable alternative. It's astonishing that the red wall swung so heavily to the Conservatives, when all Labour had to do was to appear half-sensible and they would have walked it. Starmer appears to understand this - he has not taken the opportunity to ridicule the government or the PM, nor does he end every exchange in parliament with the daft slogan "for the many not the few" which sets up the 'them and us' narrative and closes minds. Labour's best chance of power is to talk sense or shut up, be constructive and establish credibility, prioritise great policies instead of putting the kitchen sink into a manifesto, and be there in 2024. Brexit and jingoism rather cuts across this theory, but we can only hope that people will get fed up with that too.
|
It was a brilliant move to change the way that all graphs and figures are presented - confusion marketing at its best.
If you are having difficulty in understanding the latest obfuscation you are not alone, look at this appraisal, but make sure you read the comment on COVID Alert Level at the bottom.
www.thepoke.co.uk/2020/05/12/a-teacher-annotated-boris-johnsons-covid-19-graphic-and-its-brilliant
Last edited by: sherlock47 on Wed 13 May 20 at 08:43
|
Amusing but the diagram was not intended to be a graph showing what has or will definitely happen but rather a diagrammatic representation of the conditions required to be met to allow the various phases of easing the lockdown.
I understood it anyway.
|
|
As did I, its a risk and action thermometer.
|
|
Many/most people who saw it won't have even tried to analyse it, they will be looking at the general downward direction and insert their own conclusion.
|
I had eventually worked out that the x axis is risk from high to low, and the y axis is probably the rate of new infections or the number of cases.
However it is still cobblers
(a) because it's probably a harder puzzle to solve than the Daily Mail crossword so their target market will just take in the line dropping steadily to zero and turn the page with a nice warm feeling.
(b) it goes nowhere towards explaining the haphazard changes to the infection controls.
(c) it implies, without giving a time scale, that we can completely phase out the disease while relaxing controls. It's nonsense.
"Common sense", Mr Johnson? Better than experts or properly evaluated options, rational decisions and well planned implementation I suppose.
So I can meet one person who is not from my household, outside, and as long as we remain 2 metres apart? What planet are they on?
Apart from those totally bottled up, we have all been meeting multiple people on this basis for the last 2 months. I mowed the lawn for the codgers across the road yesterday and passed one of them the cable to plug in. Have I used up my permitted contact? I pass near to a dozen or more people when I don my mask (now that is common sense if we all do it) and go to M&S Food for milk and bread. I just had a short chat with the postman. We had a socially-distanced street party here on Friday as did many millions elsewhere.
I have been one of those despising the sociopaths who think they should make up their own rules but I feel like joining them - when the government spouts transparent nonsense, and licenses common sense, the ball will go over the wall anyway. Clearly 'R' will rise a bit, and if we are lucky will result in us accepting a more or less manageable level of deaths for the sake of the economy. At worst the deaths will spike again, which seems likely.
Now is probably our best opportunity to meet the grandchildren and our own grown up children without material risk until next year. We have all been self-isolating - I don't think my daughter and family have been off their own property since before lockdown. They and my son who lives alone have been working from home. It's probably safer to see them with or without distancing than to go shopping, and ideally in our own homes where surface transmission is unlikely. Even if I don't, a lot of people in my position will be applying such "common sense" and a pattern of ignoring the government advice will be established.
As it happens I don't believe that Johnson and co. have especially malign aims, although they must of course have their private objectives as we all do. And nobody will get everything right.
But there is too much plain incompetence here. There are people who can do this stuff, and they have not been brought in and listened to - or perhaps the ones they are using had the weekend off. The 'science' alone is not enough.
And no, I couldn't do better myself - other than by finding people who can. I don't know Cummings, or whether what we are seeing is his work but I think I recognize a type - they are very clever and think they know everything. People who really do know everything aren't usually like that.
Last edited by: Manatee on Wed 13 May 20 at 11:12
|
Some ***** are now back to work.
Scam automated telephone calls have resumed.:-(
|
For christ sake stop whinging and use your ruddy common sense and stop asking everyone to change your nappy for you - just take appropriate precautions YOU think are required for your situation and rebuild some normality
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 13 May 20 at 12:03
|
>> For christ sake stop whinging and use your ruddy common sense and stop asking everyone
>> to change your nappy for you - just take appropriate precautions YOU think are required
>> for your situation and rebuild some normality
To paraphrase Hancock I would ask you to consider your tone, you know it's my role to have an outburst now and then when you are all singing from the same hymnsheet.
Don't forget that whilst promoting "common sense" they have increased the penalties for deviating from from Big Brother's self-contradictory regulations. They can't have it both ways and they won't get it. It's a recipe for disaster cooked up by inadequate placemen who are all distracted by avoiding being the scapegoat.
I'm very happy to use my own judgement with two caveats - we all depend on each other, so we should apply common sense for us all and not for ourselves, and that making my own decisions could land me with a very large fine and a criminal record.
I don't believe the hoi polloi are going to act altruistically and correctly without clear guidance that actually makes sense, especially if the weather is good this weekend.
If someone refuses to follow the regulations - for instance a request to go home - officers can give them an on-the-spot fine of £60, reduced to £30 if paid within 14 days. If they keep breaking the law, more fines can be given - up to a maximum of £960.
From Wednesday, those fines are expected to change in England - and go up to £100 for a first offence, through to a maximum of £3,200.
Police could ultimately charge someone with the more serious criminal offence of breaching coronavirus regulations and a direction to follow them. This could lead to a conviction in a magistrates court and an unlimited fine.
|
>> I'm very happy to use my own judgement with two caveats - we all depend
>> on each other, so we should apply common sense for us all and not for
>> ourselves,
If you assume you have it, and don't want to give it to anyone else, and everyone else has it and you don't want to catch it, and act appropriately, you account for their lack of it.
>>and that making my own decisions could land me with a very large fine
>> and a criminal record.
And if you apply the rule above, no you wont .
I think its time to have a huge rally to complain about lack of clarity on social distancing, I'll assume you'll be there.
|
The dictionary defines common sense as:
"the basic level of practical knowledge and judgment that we all need to help us live in a reasonable and safe way"
What has become evident is that most of the media and ordinary people are quite incapable of common sense.
For some, picking holes in what has been said is a way of making a critical political point, often by ridiculing the messenger. CV-19 is far too serious for this to be an acceptable response, and the media in particular should be ashamed of their behaviour.
Others clearly lack the intellectual capacity to understand the problem and actions they should take. This may be true in some cases and they should be given support.
Mostly, if asked, those who are critical would assert they have the capacity for good judgement and application of common sense. The disconnect between their inflated view of themselves is is probably clear evidence of their inability to apply common sense.
Perhaps they are unaware of CV-19 and the risks - or deliberately ignorant and should be ignored or ridiculed in turn.
|
>> The dictionary defines common sense as:
>>
>> "the basic level of practical knowledge and judgment that we all need to help us
>> live in a reasonable and safe way"
>>
>> What has become evident is that most of the media and ordinary people are quite
>> incapable of common sense.
As a former colleague was wont to say the trouble with Common Sense is that in no sense at all common.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 13 May 20 at 13:27
|
>>
>> For some, picking holes in what has been said is a way of making a
>> critical political point, often by ridiculing the messenger. CV-19 is far too serious for this
>> to be an acceptable response, and the media in particular should be ashamed of their
>> behaviour.
Just for balance, here is a critical appreciation posted on FB by a friend.
Just like to say, we live in the best country in the World. We are fighting a horrible virus, however, our British Spirit will not be broken, we shall win this battle... I also would like to say that we have a fantastic Prime Minister leading a very strong, intelligent team to overcome this situation, I am confident that with our British Spirit and a great Government we shall, as always win this war. God Bless The Queen... This battle will be won.
|
|
But some of us have Krankie/Harridan/Nippy Sweetie at the helm.
|
>> But some of us have Krankie/Harridan/Nippy Sweetie at the helm.
Would you swap?
|
>> But some of us have Krankie/Harridan/Nippy Sweetie at the helm.
More than one former colleague with Scots roots described her as a Nippy Sweetie. She's also given her own account:
www.scotsman.com/news/politics/nicola-sturgeon-explains-nippy-sweetie-nickname-1442087
She looks competent, behaves normally in company of others and seems intelligent and thoughtful.
If only she'd been Labour......
Or perhaps the English wouldn't have taken to her.
|
>> Just like to say, we live in the best country in the World. We are
>> fighting a horrible virus, however, our British Spirit will not be broken, we shall win
>> this battle... I also would like to say that we have a fantastic Prime Minister
>> leading a very strong, intelligent team to overcome this situation, I am confident that with
>> our British Spirit and a great Government we shall, as always win this war. God
>> Bless The Queen... This battle will be won.
I keep getting similar stuff. Those posting it are the same as who post 'Leave.EU memes'.
|
I do question myself quite a lot, being aware that I am perhaps a little biased against habitual liars.
Then I see this from the Telegraph...
www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/05/12/governments-handling-covid-19-british-disaster/
|
"Then I see this from the Telegraph..."
Oh Manatee, I've told you before to stop reading this stuff - all the journos are frantically trying to catch your attention by finding even more outrageous rubbish. Don't worry; just be sensible!
Anyway, how's your old neighbour doing; you know, the one to whom you passed the electric cable? I hope you doused your hands with sanitiser!
|
You're right, the point was it was in the Telegraph. Both that and the Mail, not to mention Piers Morgan, seem to be getting stuck into the government. It's all very confusing:)
>> Anyway, how's your old neighbour doing; you know, the one to whom you passed the
>> electric cable? I hope you doused your hands with sanitiser!
They're OK - I also left my CTEK connected to their old Fiesta, she had tried to start it yesterday but all it could manage was a click. Just about to go over and confirm it is now OK.
I didn't sanitise - I used my common sense! Both households have been self isolating for 7 weeks so it seems highly unlikely that one will infect the other.
|
>> >> Just like to say, we live in the best country in the World. We
>> are
>> >> fighting a horrible virus, however, our British Spirit will not be broken, we shall
>> win
>> >> this battle... I also would like to say that we have a fantastic Prime
>> Minister
>> >> leading a very strong, intelligent team to overcome this situation, I am confident that
>> with
>> >> our British Spirit and a great Government we shall, as always win this war.
>> God
>> >> Bless The Queen... This battle will be won.
Well that clearly is vomit inducing.
|
>>Well that clearly is vomit inducing.
Not arf. I think he might have adapted one of Trump's tweets.
|
After some weeks of dicking around with putting some boroughs in quarantine and others not, and then switching them around, not unlike designating some parts of the swimming pool for peeing in, Santiago is now going into total quarantine from Friday.
Unlike the UK this will be enforced by armed police and the military.
Rather b****rs up my exercise though.
|
>> Another riot due?
About two weeks ago on a Friday they had a riot, not a big one, just few hundred people but the stupidity is amazing.
One area, Nunoa, came out of its Quarantine about a week ago and the crime rate shot through the roof instantly.
However, right now the problem is COVID rates. Santiago cannot do any more tests, their laboratories are buried. The hospitals report that Intensive Care capacity is now at 98%.
People are dying from other stuff for lack of hospital beds/facilities.
|
Sorry to be a total misery but the hospitals are full to capacity now by those infected 2-4 weeks ago. It is going to get much, much worse over the next month assuming transmission rates have been fairly unconstrained.
I have never been to Chile but I am guessing that infrastructure is less than consistently good, that housing is often multi-generational and higher density population than (say) western Europe.
It may end up an an object lesson for all of us about what could happens if the virus gets out of control. With so many in the community with infection already, and a continuing need for food delivery, police and troops on the street and some essential services in overwhelmed hospitals, it will be difficult to stop the spread even with a full lockdown.
|
>> It is going to get much, much worse over the next month
Oh you are so right, but there are challenges which make things difficult, mostly special to Chile;
Chileans have no concept of the relevance of time. Aside from anything else it's why they neither save or worry about debt.
So trying to get them to accept that behaviour today may make life better or worse two to three weeks from now is virtually impossible. "I went out today and I'm fine, therefore I am immune" is pretty much the attitude along with a belief that rules and inconveniences should be enforced on everybody else, but not them.
Secondly, a large proportion believe that any restriction is part of a Government conspiracy to control them and therefore that any announcements, news or reports are made by the Government to support the restrictions. As a people they do not believe that there is a crisis.
Thirdly telling them that it is "go out for important stuff only" is pointless. As far as they are concerned anything that anybody else wants to do is of no importance and should be stopped, whereas everything they want to do is vitally important and should be allowed. They genuinely believe this.
On top of all that a huge amount of them are poor, have no insurance and no choice about going out to work - and often bad work.
All this allied with a very dubious infrastructure. As a person who is not poor I am able to afford the best insurance which entitles me to use the best Clinics (hospitals). Other than a habit of over prescribing and over testing, these represent about the best medical care you can get anywhere.
However, most people cannot and for most decent healthcare is a struggle.
Minimum wage is about £350 per month. Rent for a crap one room awful room is about £200pcm plus bills. But Santiago is an expensive place. A coffee in the cafe I use is about £4 and a beer about the same. Phone bills are about £20 per month and reasonable clothes around the same price as the UK.
It's a b***** nightmare and, as you say, likely to get much worse. Still, as this household is equipped to withstand the aftermath of earthquakes, we have enough of everything for some considerable period of time. [as an aside, we haven't had a significant earthquake for about 4 months, that is a concerning thing. Overdue earthquakes worry me].
And for me, I had to go to hospital this morning. On the upside I do not have Coronavirus yet. However, I am now on drugs which will massively compromise my immune system for the next week or so.
Thus, as I can't go near anyone, at least I am unlikely to contract COVID-19.
But damn I'm going to get crabby. I may even get intolerant.
|
>> But damn I'm going to get crabby. I may even get intolerant.
>>
Would we notice any difference? ;-)
On a more serious note, keep you and yours safe and well down there in these especially difficult times!
Last edited by: zippy on Wed 13 May 20 at 22:24
|
>> >> But damn I'm going to get crabby. I may even get intolerant.
>> >>
>>
>> Would we notice any difference? ;-)
Imagine how bad it would have to be if you did!!!
>> On a more serious note, keep you and yours safe and well down there in
>> these especially difficult times!
Thank you.
How are you doing? Well I hope.
Karma being what it is I was faced with a pretty similar decision to yours this morning. The only difference being that the Doctors told me that a hospital was absolutely the last place I should be and isolated in my own house, from even my own family, was far safer.
They say that you gain an extra regular tablet with each decade over 40.That'd put my in my early 130s.
|
>> How are you doing? Well I hope.
>>
>> Karma being what it is I was faced with a pretty similar decision to yours
>> this morning. The only difference being that the Doctors told me that a hospital was
>> absolutely the last place I should be and isolated in my own house, from even
>> my own family, was far safer.
>>
>> They say that you gain an extra regular tablet with each decade over 40.That'd put
>> my in my early 130s.
>>
Much better thanks!
Usual side effects from too many steroids (prescribed) and antibiotics.
I know what you mean re the tabs, I'm currently on 11 a day!
I was new to inhalers three years ago and ended up very ill after accidentally overdosing with too many puffs as I didn't think it was working (not dispensing a dose rather than not being effective).
Last edited by: zippy on Thu 14 May 20 at 02:51
|
>> Usual side effects from too many steroids (prescribed) and antibiotics.
Steroids are a way of life for me, and have been for more than 50 years. I can tell you they're a whole world better than they used to be. The side effects used to be nasty and dangerous, now they are merely a manageable inconvenience.
>> I was new to inhalers three years ago
Asthma Intal Inhalers were licensed in 1968 and I was on the clinical trial in 1967. They changed my life from bedridden to fully active. I remain eternally grateful to Fisons for that - they remain the only company to whom I have ever given a cheap/discounted consulting contract rate.
I don't know what inhalers cost back then, the NHS being what it is, but one of the inhalers I use now is £110 and lasts two weeks!!!
>>and ended up very ill after accidentally
>> overdosing with too many puffs as I didn't think it was working
Racing heart and all that stuff? Yes, you have to watch that. If you ever think it is not working you should still wait an hour or so before taking it again.
Which inhaler is it? I think I've tried them all over the years.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 14 May 20 at 03:22
|
Talking of our medical conditions and just to please Duncan
I refer him to
"I had that done, apart from the fact that they lowered it down mine. The nurses kept telling me to keep still. "Keep still while you're doing that to my old chap!!
You will think you are peeing razor blades for a week......"
After I had it done, I was in bed catheterised for the night. The next morning it came out and I was asked to pee.
The pain was SOOOO bad I projectile vomited my breakfast all over the toilet.
Despite Oral Morphine, and muscle relaxant injection my bladder had gone into shock and refused to work.
I was discharged home to self manage with a catheter for two weeks.
So Yes I wish you had been there to watch, you would have been splattered with OJ, Toast Tea and Kellogs Frosties.
|
>> After I had it done, I was in bed catheterised for the night. The next
>> morning it came out and I was asked to pee.
>>
>> The pain was SOOOO bad I projectile vomited my breakfast all over the toilet.
I have to admit that I can't match that!
|
>>They say that you gain an extra regular tablet with each decade over 40
Where have I gorn wrong then, I'm 68 in a few months and don't take any tablets (meds) whatsoever :(
|
>> Where have I gorn wrong then, I'm 68 in a few months and don't take
>> any tablets (meds) whatsoever :(
Well, let's hope so...
|
When you're gorn you're gorn Cc, and there's no coming back.
I had a YouTube for you yesterday - orf out now but I'll see if I can find layder 4U2C ... if I'm still alive.
God.
Ere tis ~ www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-6QNshZyL4
Last edited by: God on Thu 14 May 20 at 13:45
|
Going by the reactions here [Chile] I have come to the conclusion that people want specific, dictatorial instructions so that they have got something at which to scream "Injustice!" and "Wrong!" and other similar comments.
Their main problem with "for guidance", recommendations of common sense and general guidelines is that fundamentally they may end up doing something sensible that they actually really didn't want to do, but with nobody to blame for the inconvenience or to deliver their outrage upon.
|
Echoes a conversation I had with my brother a few days ago where his comment about Joe Public was:
"....the public are ***** too, willingly letting the press tell them that they are "confused", unable to apply common sense. It's like when a report says "3 rashers of bacon increases your chance of X by Y" and all the ***** go "tell us how much bacon to eat!". *****."
|
Mmmmm..bacon. Dry cured, smoked, from my local butcher, served in a plain white bread sandwich. Proper butter one side only. That’s what I’ve had for my lunch every day so far this week, and will today. Then probably no more bacon until July.
Next week I’ll overdose on apricots, blueberries and fresh peach served on cornflakes for lunch.
The life of a single bloke ....
|
|
Stoppit leglad, your making me feel Hungary.
|
>> Mmmmm..bacon. Dry cured, smoked, from my local butcher, served in a plain white bread sandwich.
WHITE bread, indeed only WHITE bread for a Bacon Sarnie
>> Proper butter one side only
Yes only BUTTER, not an ersatz dairy spread.
And dont you dare tell me you put brown sauce on it.
|
Why does the "R" number vary so much around the country?
The UK regional baselines are as follows:
England: 0.75
East of England: 0.71
London: 0.40
Midlands: 0.68
North East and Yorkshire: 0.80
North West: 0.73
South East: 0.71
South West: 0.76
Is it that Northerners don't comply with the requirements and advice?
Well, what then?
|
|
Could be all manner of things, starting with the figures might not be correct. Might be that it wasn't that bad in those areas so people don't think it's that big an issue, compared to other areas where there was a bigger outbreak?
|
>> Is it that Northerners don't comply with the requirements and advice?
>>
>> Well, what then?
I think London peaked early. It's also likely that absence of commuters from City/Westminster etc has an influence.
In fact it's London that's the outlier.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 15 May 20 at 16:20
|
Could be all sorts and will be.
London is ahead and it's possible that more have been infected earlier.
Differences in ethnicity, age profile, general health (linked to wealth), obesity, types of employment.
Also the estimates could be wrong.
|
|
I'm amazed that London is the lowest. I've always thought that the London underground was a coronavirus factory.
|
All the London commuters who got caught up in, and infected in, the early wave there have now migrated to their commuterland abodes, their parent's address, or their second homes, and started a later wave by spreading it there.
;-)
Last edited by: tyrednemotional on Fri 15 May 20 at 17:24
|
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/7/contents
This is over 200 pages long.
I was just curious as to where in the act it gives the police the right to arrest someone out and about for non exercise reasons (like the twits going on long journeys to holiday homes etc or large gatherings etc.)
Or are the police treating advice as law which are two different things?
All I can see that is relevant is sections 21 but that refers to potentially infected persons.
|
>> I was just curious as to where in the act it gives the police the
>> right to arrest someone out and about for non exercise reasons (like the twits going
>> on long journeys to holiday homes etc or large gatherings etc.)
I think it's in regulations:
www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/regulation/6/made
Regulation 6 says folks may not leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse and provides a non exhaustive list of things that count as an excuse. The version I've linked is the original and it's subsequently been modified in various ways but not directly relevant to Zippy's question.
Other regulations deal with gatherings and action that can be taken by 'relevant persons'.
On the gatherings point I understand it's no defence if the gathering is 'socially distanced' which means those of us who gathered for VE day or the weekly clapping constitute an illegal gathering.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 15 May 20 at 13:28
|
Any legislation and laws passed through the house and onto the Statute book in the short period of time this was, is bound to be ambiguous at times as would enforcement of same.
There isn't however a suitable way of passing into legislation the law "be sensible, Dont be a dick here at this place at this time, even tho yesterday when it was less crowded it would have been ok"
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 15 May 20 at 13:32
|
Thanks Bromptonaut!
Should have put a fiver on you getting a quick and good reply in on a legal matter! :-)
|
Notice the wording of the legislation, "Without reasonable excuse" - This implies that you are automatically in the wrong, and that you know you shouldn't be out. The Police think they have been given the power to decide what is a reasonable excuse, they haven't, it is only their opinion which they think they can impose on you.
When I was asked recently, ( stopped whilst taking mt blood samples to hospital) I told the Coppers that I didn't have a reasonable excuse, (their eyes lit up!) I told them I had a legitimate reason, and also told them (when asked) that it was none of their business, they didn't like it one bit but couldn't do anything about it, as I aslo refused to give them my details, which by law you do not have to do unless you have committed a crime and are arrested.
|
|
I wonder who the first person to moan will be if they get mugged because the police didn't follow up on a lippy scroat?
|
|
A simple and polite answer to their question would surely have sufficed.
|
>>A simple and polite answer to their question would surely have sufficed.
Yes. Why not do that? Why be awkward about it?
|
>> >>A simple and polite answer to their question would surely have sufficed.
>>
>> Yes. Why not do that? Why be awkward about it?
>>
If the police officer was being officious I might respond by being awkward.
There are lots of ways to ask what you are doing and they would illicit different responses.
Despite experience to the contrary I like to think most police officers are good. I have had life changing experiences with bad ones.
Last edited by: zippy on Fri 15 May 20 at 18:42
|
|
I recommend a reading of Proverbs 15
|
>> I recommend a reading of Proverbs 15
>>
It’s not a perfect world and appeasement rarely works with the officious!
|
|
Neither does sinking to their level. Life's too short.
|
>> as I aslo refused to give them my details, which by law you
>> do not have to do unless you have committed a crime and are arrested.
>>
I like to believe that 99% of the police are good guys.
An increasing number demand your details though and think it is a crime if you don’t give them those details.
I think it’s an important point and Bromp. posted about recently re ID cards.
I have refused to give my details to a horrible police officer once when out for a walk late one night whilst away with work. At one point I was convinced he was going to brain me for refusing.
I can understand why some people video every encounter with them.
Last edited by: zippy on Fri 15 May 20 at 17:56
|
|
8 mile round trip to the nearest town this afternoon on the bike. Collect a prescription. It woke me up, even that short distance re-booted my locked down brain. Infected finger - phoned the surgery at 10:10, doctor called me back n twenty minutes, prescription issued, and a bike ride into the bargain.
|
>> Infected finger
Where have you been sticking it?
|
zippy
May I say that you do seem to make life unnecessarily difficult, fraught and complicated.
|
>> zippy
>>
>> May I say that you do seem to make life unnecessarily difficult, fraught and complicated.
>>
>>
Would you give your details to a total stranger? Police officers are strangers who will use what you say against you.
There was no reason for the policeman mentioned above to stop me. I was out for a walk, minding my own business. There was absolutely no reason for his asking for my details save to have power over me. I even got the "in case a crime is reported later" excuse.
I have had a run in with police who sided with a large company when I stopped them stealing from me and it ended up with a night time raid at my house - see my post below!
|
Years ago I was out for a run quite late....it was before midnight, I was wearing proper running kit, got stopped by the police and taken to the station for questionning !
Did d I have an alibi for where I’d been earlier that evening sir ? Sure thing. I’d been at home decorating for a few hours with a friend, and going for a run afterwards helped me sleep. They didn’t believe me, so went to visit my friend, whose phone number wasn’t in my memory bank.
Fortunately my pal was a solicitor specialising in criminal law and he vouched for me.
It was an interesting experience, one I look back on with amusement now.
|
>>Years ago...
Why did they arrest you? Out running isn't a crime. If that was the only reason there could have been a nice claim for assault and false imprisonment.
|
Zippy. I wasn’t arrested. They asked me to accompany them to the police station to help with enquiries or some such. Obviously I wasn’t a happy bunny. Hot & sweaty...I just wanted a shower and bed! They never explained....I didn’t have a bag of swag with me, kept me in a room for an hour or so, not a cell, then when my alibi was confirmed ran me home.
A tale to tell to my pals. L
Not as good as my brother being arrested for drunk driving in the early hours after a night out in Ilkley with friends. Pulled over on the unlit moor road en route home to Bingley. Unfortunately for the police the car was LHD being driven by a tee total friend. They hadn’t spotted that in the dark. Another fine tale to tell, although his friend was subsequently stopped a lot after that and he eventually complained. As he was tee total and always kept his car, a distinctive two tone Capri, in excellent condition, he had nothing to fear.
|
>> Zippy. I wasn’t arrested. They asked me to accompany them to the police station to
>> help with enquiries or some such..
If you were not free to go then you effectively arrested. Helping with enquiries voluntary interviews are fishing exercises to help the police, not you.
>>
>> Not as good as my brother being arrested for drunk driving ...
>>
There is a similar case of a bloke being accused of being a phone while driving. Strenuously denied it went to court and the officer sweated on oath that he saw the accused use the phone and it was in his left hand.
Of course the accused had lost his left arm and was driving an adapted car and was unable to hold a phone in his left hand as it didn't exist.
|
There is a similar case of a bloke being accused of being a phone while
>> driving. Strenuously denied it went to court and the officer sweated on oath that he
>> saw the accused use the phone and it was in his left hand.
>>
>> Of course the accused had lost his left arm and was driving an adapted car
>> and was unable to hold a phone in his left hand as it didn't exist.
>>
I find it hard to believe it got that far without anyone in the police not noticing that fairly key bit of information.
|
>> I find it hard to believe it got that far without anyone in the police
>> not noticing that fairly key bit of information.
'Ambush' evidence of the type portrayed in courtroom dramas of old is nowadays frowned on in favour of disclosure. However if the defendant here had simply asserted no offence then I guess it's possible.
|
|
Has a certain whiff of urban legend about it.
|
>> I thnink thise must be the case:
>>
>> www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/police-accused-driver-using-mobile-3244036
>>
I recall an older man but can't find a link at the moment.
Last edited by: zippy on Sat 16 May 20 at 15:20
|
>> I recall an older man but can't find a link at the moment.
>>
You think there is a third case involving police one armed men and mobile phones ?
|
>>
>> >> I recall an older man but can't find a link at the moment.
>> >>
>>
>> You think there is a third case involving police one armed men and mobile phones
>> ?
>>
Anything is possible in this country!
|
...you are Dr Richard Kimble, and I claim my £5.
;-)
|
Yeah, reminds me of when me and Danny were up to no good.
Got nabbed by the filth - Danny gave 'em lip ... Danny got carted orf and they let me go :)
|
>> Notice the wording of the legislation, "Without reasonable excuse" - This implies that you are
>> automatically in the wrong, and that you know you shouldn't be out. The Police think
>> they have been given the power to decide what is a reasonable excuse, they haven't,
>> it is only their opinion which they think they can impose on you.
It's fairly standard statutory language and has the advantage that the meaning is well tested.
The Police may suspect that you have no reasonable excuse but it would be up to a court to decide.
>> When I was asked recently, ( stopped whilst taking mt blood samples to hospital) I
>> told the Coppers that I didn't have a reasonable excuse, (their eyes lit up!) I
>> told them I had a legitimate reason, and also told them (when asked) that it
>> was none of their business, they didn't like it one bit but couldn't do anything
>> about it, as I aslo refused to give them my details, which by law you
>> do not have to do unless you have committed a crime and are arrested.
Regulation 9 provides for breaches of regulations 4-8 to be offences.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sat 16 May 20 at 08:56
|
In answer to the original question about the power of arrest if it is not written into the act.
It comes from section 24 of PACE which gives the power to arrest for any offence. There are no such things as 'Arrestable Offences' any more. The Serious and Organised Crime Act 2005 introduced the new powers under Sec 24. And further updated with Code G.
The reasons are—
(a)to enable the name of the person in question to be ascertained (in the case where the constable does not know, and cannot readily ascertain, the person's name, or has reasonable grounds for doubting whether a name given by the person as his name is his real name);
(b)correspondingly as regards the person's address;
(c)to prevent the person in question—
(i)causing physical injury to himself or any other person;
(ii)suffering physical injury;
(iii)causing loss of or damage to property;
(iv)committing an offence against public decency (subject to subsection (6)); or
(v)causing an unlawful obstruction of the highway;
(d)to protect a child or other vulnerable person from the person in question;
(e)to allow the prompt and effective investigation of the offence or of the conduct of the person in question;
(f)to prevent any prosecution for the offence from being hindered by the disappearance of the person in question.
So for any offence if someone is refusing details / giving false details / uncheckable or unsuitable address for summons service they can be arrested.
|
>> So for any offence if someone is refusing details / giving false details / uncheckable
>> or unsuitable address for summons service they can be arrested.
>>
That’s the point though, some of the BIB think you have to give names and addresses regardless of any offence being suspected or committed.
|
I always give them my name and address, screw that job. If I can make their life a bit easier, even if they're in a crap mood, then I will.
Here, of course, if you do not cooperate then you tend to get a gun in your ear.
|
>> I always give them my name and address, screw that job. If I can make
>> their life a bit easier, even if they're in a crap mood, then I will.
>>
If I hadn’t had the experience of a compromised police then I might have the same view but experience tells me to give them as little information as possible whilst remaining polite.
Unfortunately some see the refusal to give information as a direct threat to their authority.
Remember this is a no ID card society!
Last edited by: zippy on Sat 16 May 20 at 01:09
|
Why refuse?
It's hardly a magic command which will make a bad one go away.
|
>> Why refuse?
>>
>> It's hardly a magic command which will make a bad one go away.
>>
Generally I have had reasonable encounters with the police.
However, the police sided with a major (now defunct) US company and refused to investigate their crimes. In short US company pirated my software. I had no contract with them, it was out and out theft. I used a credit agency to pre-populate data that cost me a few hundred pounds a month which was covered by the licensed users and agreements on usage levels.
Then I got a bill for several thousand in one month. This American company was putting all their cases though my software without any permission so I cut them off. Didn’t even know who it was at the time. I never sold them the software or any licences. They must have copied it from a floppy disc at the time and got the passwords from an ex-employee of my customer.
I reported it to the local police but they had no clues.
The American company had the balls to complain that I was cutting access to their files and used a major police service to do their dirty work and even employed ex-senior members of that force as security advisors.
So I got arrested at some ungodly hour by police who broke my front door without ringing the bell or knocking and terrifying my family, home ransacked and then charged for a computer misuse crime for trying to protect my fledgling business from an unknown thief that deliberately pirated my software and stole software services that I had to pay for!
I did have a laugh when the American company collapsed.
So funnily enough, whilst I have time for the BIB who are polite and courteous and take a legitimate and legal no for an answer, if I meet the other type I will do my upmost not to cooperate!
Last edited by: zippy on Sat 16 May 20 at 02:16
|
>> if I meet the other type I will do my upmost not to cooperate!
I understand your feelings, but how does refusing to cooperate help?
|
>> >> if I meet the other type I will do my upmost not to cooperate!
>>
>>
>> I understand your feelings, but how does refusing to cooperate help?
>>
It shows that they can't ride roughshod over law abiding citizens, demanding information that they can only request.
In my view, you need to draw a line, e.g. you get a request from a police officer to enter your house for no reason. Would you let them? Remember once in anything they see can be used against you.
Last edited by: zippy on Sat 16 May 20 at 03:14
|
>>It shows that they can't ride roughshod over law abiding citizens, demanding information that they can only request.
I bet it doesn't. If they cared about that lesson then they wouldn't need it, if you see what I mean.
>>e.g. you get a request from a police officer to enter your house for no reason. Would you let them?
Probably. But in any case we were talking about name and address in the street.
|
>> www.moneycontrol.com/news/trends/sports-trends/in-pics-coronavirus-lockdown-athletes-around-the-world-train-at-home-5260631.html
One of Northampton Saints' (Rugby Union) players lives in our close and is out every morning with weights, some sort of 'Bullworker' type device and a cycling machine.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sat 16 May 20 at 17:19
|
This is worth 40 minutes of your time...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kab6c8CNZOI
|
>> This is worth 40 minutes of your time...
>>
>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kab6c8CNZOI
>>
I'm suspicious of any type of expert on social media, why is this chap worth listening to?
|
Me too. A friend recommended it.
I know no more than the way he speaks and the data that he uses which seems trustworthy to me. If you don't like his opinions the facts remain interesting.
But hey, watch it and make up your own mind. I'll be interested in what you think.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sat 16 May 20 at 21:47
|
"A Coronavirus "north-south divide" has emerged across England, according to the latest modelling by scientists at Public Health England (PHE).
The new figures also show that the death rate is far higher for older people than has previously been estimated, and they reveal that nearly one in five children aged between five and 14 has been infected with the disease – the highest of any age group.
The data, calculated by PHE and Cambridge University, suggests that huge numbers of people have already been infected with the virus, around 6.5 million in England overall, including 1.8 million in London."
That would change the UK fatality rate from 14% to 0.5%
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/14/public-health-englands-latest-coronavirus-modelling-north-south/
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sun 17 May 20 at 02:25
|
I'd like to hear the 'More or Less' version of this story.
33,000 on 6.5million is about 0.5% so that sounds somewhat logical: but how many of these infections have not yet resolved? Where did the 6.5 million come from? And the excess deaths are about double the attributed COVID 19 deaths.
1% might not be far off in the end.
Just over a week ago the government estimated 136,000 current infections. That sounded low to me and working on a 4 week resolution period on the back of an envelope I thought 300,000 might be nearer. Then I saw the small print in the government estimate - the 95% confidence interval is IIRC 75,000 - 225,000. Of course I do not have access to most of the data or the finer technical skills needed to handle it.
Nevertheless I think the fact is that without random population testing on large samples we do not have a reliable number of current/past infections, and nor do we know the 'properly attributable' number of deaths.
I'm uneasy about contemplating the idea that many of the deaths in the elderly are 'just' dying people being nudged over the edge - but there will be some of that, which is why when this is looked at in a couple of years the average excess deaths figure might actually come down when the 'brought forward' deaths are accounted for.
|
For thought...
1) Covid will cause delay in some diagnosis and/or treatment which may have impacts on other conditions going forward
2) Currently fatalities levels in the other main causes have dropped noticeably below the norm and may well stay that way for some years.
3) Life expectancy for the surviving people will be higher than it is now once COVID has cleared out a considerable amount of the most vulnerable.
|
>> For thought...
All of that yes.
I've read the article, having commented first! Has the DT dropped the paywall?
It does sound interesting. I was chatting about risk with my daughter yesterday. She's a wise owl, who works in the development of medical devices, but not worried about the risk to her young children if they go back to nursery/school/childminder. I think she's right.
What people don't consider when they instinctively try to avoid more or less known risk is the risk of the alternatives, or indeed of other activities they happily undertake. This caught my eye "For people aged 45 to 64, the death rate is now just 0.28 per cent" because it is pretty much the risk of dying when you have an angiogram, a risk that I knew when I consented to one recently.
Now I don't think a 0.25% risk of dying is negligible. My thought process was on two main considerations (a) what is the risk of not having it - could be higher because my doctor won't have a good diagnosis, (b) that's a population estimate, which probably includes a fair number of much older and sicker people than me, especially as it is not a procedure that is generally done on people who aren't ill. I'm also not obese (quite), don't smoke, and don't drink.
So, at 66, I'm not completely careless of catching it, and will continue to make reasonable efforts to avoid contacts, but I am not terrorised.
|
Surely the risk to any one individual is not the major reason we are being limited in our social interaction. Any one individual can argue that he is willing to run the risk of infection and the remote chance of death but by doing so he is increasing the chance of others more susceptible to the disease of dying, exacerbated by the likelihood of overwhelming of our hospital services.
The whole thing is really a moral dilemma. How far should a government go in restricting an individuals rights to protect the health of others?
|
>> Surely the risk to any one individual is not the major reason ...
>>
No and I wouldn't, and didn't, suggest otherwise. I wouldn't even say it's a dilemma in which what is good for the individual is bad for society and vice versa - in this case, infection control is good for all of us.
The loonies are already asserting their freedom of choice re vaccines for example, and the wearing of face coverings on public transport. If there were to be a safe effective vaccine, it should essentially be mandatory as should the face coverings in the applicable circumstances. I would allow opt-outs provided, the refusers all stay at home.
|
IF (note big if!) many more have had it than thought and IF having had it you definitely can't get it again then the vaccines become less important, as the herd immunity theory kicks in.
Luke Johnson, that well known business tycoon who presided over the demise of Patisserie Valerie but has other successes to his name, was on Question Time the other night. He was arguing against lockdown (but didn't convince me!) but also said we are becoming, and raising, a nation of scaredy cats (which I found myself nodding to).
I can't make my mind up about when is right to be opening up lockdown from a health pov, which is obviously different from and economy pov. I think I'm erring on the side of caution but not excessive amounts of it.
Tic - we need the young to get back to work anyway to pay for our health care!! :-)
|
>> Luke Johnson, that well known business tycoon who presided over the demise of Patisserie Valerie
>> but has other successes to his name, was on Question Time the other night. He
>> was arguing against lockdown (but didn't convince me!) but also said we are becoming, and
>> raising, a nation of scaredy cats (which I found myself nodding to).
Don't forget what happened in Lombardia and Piemonte. It would have been brave to ignore that.
On the basis of fatality it might not be quite as bad as feared (unless you live in a care home) but it is also supposed to be a nasty experience for the serious cases.
It might yet turn out that we have not done that badly given it's far from over, although it might just be that the government by its lack of preparedness and dithering early on has managed to fall right between the two stools of protecting the economy and saving life.
Last edited by: Manatee on Sun 17 May 20 at 16:35
|
>>>the two stools of protecting<<<
I cannot think of a better choice of words :)
|
Some of the terrified of Settle are already up in arms about the return of motor cyclists, albeit in reduced numbers. Photos have been published of them not social distancing around their bikes in the Market Place. So what. You don’t have to go lick their leathers. There are so many narrow minded, parochial holier than thou folks around here it annoys the carp out of me.
Plus lots of vitriol aimed at walkers who arrive from out of town. They park up, go for a nice walk...lots of space for everyone apart from a very few honey pot areas such as Malham and Stainforth Foss, return to their cars and go home. The clamour some people make you’d think they were all carriers of CV19, sneezing through your letter box and spitting on your door handles.
And let’s ignore the locals who don’t want to shop locally. Drive 20 miles to small towns so they can buy their stuff cheaper in the large supermarkets, shoulder to shoulder with the masses. But heaven forbid anyone arriving for leisure purposes from outside of small mindedville.
I know some people, the same age as me, who won’t even step outside their gardens. And they wear a mask in their garden...they live off a single track road to nowhere but won’t even walk on it. Paranoid with a capital P.
|
Must admit I’ve been a bit blasé occasionally. The other night there were 5 of us from 4 different households sat around my pals patio table drinking beer. Ages from 42 to 75. Male and female.
We bring our own alcohol and glasses, our own nibbles, wash our hands both before entering his property and when we return home.
It’s called social interaction with your friends. Obviously a small chance of catching Cyrus the Virus from a friend, or making contact off a contaminated surface, but by taking all precautions we mitigate those risks. No way am I staying banged up behind the curtains.
|
|
That seems a basically selfish attitude LL. if everybody were to follow the same course there is every chance we would all be back to square one.
|
I would agree.
Though from this weekend's local observations it would appear that a large proportion of the population are following the same course. Both the concept and practice of social distancing have magically disappeared within a week.
Frankly, I find it extremely disappointing.
I'm quite capable of managing my own risk (and in a good position to do so being retired and financially sound). Nonetheless, in largely conformant continuing life I still come into contact with people who definitely have much less choice and control, and probably greater risk (Supermarket and shop staff, medical staff, etc.). I think it's only fair to take such steps as are relatively easy to help keep them safe.
Frankly, I would hate to become symptomatic, and then find I might be implicated in someone else's death if I hadn't taken such steps as I can.
|
So be it with my selfish attitude. I consider it risk assessment. None of my friends have been brushing shoulders with people in busy supermarkets. Or used any form of public transport. Like me they do a big shop once a week in the evening, rather than visit smaller local shops which are more cramped.
We don’t sit on one another’s laps, or sneeze on one another.What’s the harm in a few friends sitting outdoors of an evening drinking beers, whilst keeping social distancing ( ish). No physical contact is made apart from touching his gate and bums on seats. And we don’t touch the gate handle.
I’ve probably opened and touched at least 15 gates and wooden stiles on my walk this afternoon. Washed my hands as soon as I got home though.
Last edited by: legacylad on Sun 17 May 20 at 21:46
|
>> No physical contact is made apart from touching his gate and bums on seats.
I don't think you are supposed to be touching bums - are you?
|
I'm still seeing my Sunday night drinking pals each Sunday for a few beers.
I also have a weekly meet up with motor racing mates, who previously I hardly saw more than once a year.
We are having Friday evening drinks with four sets of neighbours, with whom we're all close friends.
We're doing a pub quiz each Thursday, after clapping for the NHS and other front line workers.
Then there was a new meeting on Wednesday this week - which possibly will be every 10 days or thereabouts - of school friends. There were 9 on it this week, and I'd only met one of them since leaving school.
All of those are done on video. Conferences by Jitsi except one on Zoom. The quiz is run on Facebook by the local Lions club and they've raised nearly £3000 by doing them each week, which is going to the local drop in centre who are really grateful for the support at this time, as other sources have dried up.
So my social life is busier than it's been for a while, and all done without risk and within guidelines.
SWMBO and I walk most days, though you'd probably class it as no more than a hop skip and jump rather than a walk. It does for us though. Only this week have we started to take the car to go to some of our favourite walks on the other side of town.
Last edited by: smokie on Sun 17 May 20 at 14:46
|
>> Some of the terrified of Settle are already up in arms about the return of
>> motor cyclists, albeit in reduced numbers. Photos have been published of them not social distancing
>> around their bikes in the Market Place.
We had a hoo-hah here a couple of weeks ago. The village has a large and active rugby club with extensive social and changing, training etc facilities. During the summer they've been carrying out what I assume were planned works to their buildings. The started by removing a pitched roof which, of course meant they were not socially distanced. They'd also all arrived in the same van.
Bloke on road behind/overlooking was playing merry hell on the village FB page, threatening to involve police etc. Don't know what happened in end as FB page admins removed the discussion. The building work has however continued.
|
>> Bloke on road behind/overlooking was playing merry hell on the village FB page, threatening to
>> involve police etc. Don't know what happened in end as FB page admins removed the
>> discussion. The building work has however continued.
>>
On a few (very few) occasions I think joining one of those groups might be a good idea. Then I read about stuff that's on them and remember why I've never bothered.
|
>> The village has a large
>> and active rugby club with extensive social and changing, training etc facilities
>>
Long Buckby?
|
Coronavirus Volume 17 - Terry
