Coronavirus

[Serial_Apologist]

Fair point. I go out for long walks, daily, but tend to keep out of Bluetooth range of other people while on those walks. I shop only once or twice a week.

I'm in precisely the same situation. But as I don't own a smartphone, isn't my presence, and others like me, just going to b*gger the validity of any statistical evidence being reached by means of one of these apps?

[teamsaint]

I'm in precisely the same situation. But as I don't own a smartphone, isn't my presence, and others like me, just going to b*gger the validity of any statistical evidence being reached by means of one of these apps?

It might, but not necessarily. for example , one thing the app will do is be of use in working out how many infections arise from contacts with one ( anonymous) person who informs that they are showing symptoms. So a body of data will build up showing for instance the variance in infectiousness of different individuals, which might be useful to know.
I think the app is designed to both stop directly spread via alerts, but also help build a wider picture of the spread , or retreat, of the disease. So the wider data base will allow for those not using the app.
I think.........!!

[MrGongGong]

Back into the sewer with you Mr H

(yeah yeah yeah it's "anti Tory" BUT this waste of air is causing the deaths of many... )

"Team spirit"... FFS

[Petrushka]

Given the fact that there are close to 5000 new cases still coming in today, I see zero chance of any 'lockdown' being lifted any time soon. Where are these new cases coming from? I'd reckon that this number should be falling quicker than it is and that's why it would be reckless to loosen any restrictions now, restrictions that have never really been that tight anyway.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

[zola]

#WhereIsBoris is 'trending' on twitter.

[johnb]

Given the fact that there are close to 5000 new cases still coming in today, I see zero chance of any 'lockdown' being lifted any time soon. Where are these new cases coming from? I'd reckon that this number should be falling quicker than it is and that's why it would be reckless to loosen any restrictions now, restrictions that have never really been that tight anyway.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

It's important to distinguish between the so called Pillar 1 and Pillar 2 tests, both of which are included in today's total of 4,406.

Pillar 1 tests are done in NHS and PH laboratories for people with a clinical need (e.g. hospital patients, etc), and health and care workers. These figures are roughly comparable, week to week, and I suggest these are the figures worth that are looking at to see what the trend is.

Pillar 2 tests are those done by other laboratories for the drive through centre swabs, posted swabs, etc, etc and encompass the recently widened number of people eligible for tests. As the number of these tests are ramped up the number of cases confirmed via this route will also markedly increase - but that doesn't mean that the number of people who are infected in the country has increased - just that more people have been tested.

Today's figures for Pillar 1 and Pillar 2 haven't yet been released but those for yesterday were:

Pillar 1: 1,918, down 68% from a peak of 5,903 on 5th April
Pillar 2: 2,067
Total: 3,985

Don't get me wrong, the figure of 1,918 for Pillar 1 tests is still worryingly high but it is gradually declining.

[LMcD]

#WhereIsBoris is 'trending' on twitter.

I suspect he may have tried to do too much too soon and has been ticked off by his doctor(s). Although I don't enjoy his briefings, he's infinitely preferable to any of his colleagues because he believes he's right and manages to look and sound confident (even when he's wrong).
BBC News reports that the government has missed its 100,000 tests target for the 3rd day running. Yesterday, the explanation/excuse was 'the weekend factor', but this latest figure presumably refers to Monday.

[MrGongGong]

I suspect he may have tried to do too much too soon and has been ticked off by his doctor(s). Although I don't enjoy his briefings, he's infinitely preferable to any of his colleagues because he believes he's right and manages to look and sound confident (even when he's wrong).
.

So, let me get this straight.
You prefer to have someone who is a pathological liar trotting out bull because he "believes" he is right and "looks" and "sounds" confident?

I think we could do so much better than this, don't you think?

Are you really taken in by this piece of theatre?

(someone just sent me this)

[oddoneout]

I suspect he may have tried to do too much too soon and has been ticked off by his doctor(s). Although I don't enjoy his briefings, he's infinitely preferable to any of his colleagues because he believes he's right and manages to look and sound confident (even when he's wrong).
BBC News reports that the government has missed its 100,000 tests target for the 3rd day running. Yesterday, the explanation/excuse was 'the weekend factor', but this latest figure presumably refers to Monday.

That rather amounts to 'he's a more convincing liar' which in fact isn't the case is it? I don't know which is worse - someone who is a convincing liar so that we don't realise we are being deceived, or one who is so rubbish at it that every time he opens his mouth the response is 'what lies is he going to tell this time?' and any factual content that may be contained is lost . The minority who voted for this may not see a problem; the majority who didn't, do, and are not happy.

[MrGongGong]

That rather amounts to 'he's a more convincing liar' which in fact isn't the case is it? I don't know which is worse - someone who is a convincing liar so that we don't realise we are being deceived, or one who is so rubbish at it that every time he opens his mouth the response is 'what lies is he going to tell this time?' and any factual content that may be contained is lost . The minority who voted for this may not see a problem; the majority who didn't, do, and are not happy.

(more "anti-Tory" rhetoric, I see, some won't be happy )

[oddoneout]

(more "anti-Tory" rhetoric, I see, some won't be happy )

The irony is that in the past couple of days two Tory voting neighbours, from different ends of the age spectrum, have expressed annoyance at the lack of honesty from their leader and his colleagues.

[Count Boso]

The irony is that in the past couple of days two Tory voting neighbours, from different ends of the age spectrum, have expressed annoyance at the lack of honesty from their leader and his colleagues.

And in the USA it's reported that 59% of Republican supporters are against Trump's attempt to 'get the economy moving again'. A majority of Americans put public health above the economy. Of course, the question of honesty doesn't come into the matter with Trump supporters: they know he lies and until now most of them haven't cared. That again has its parallel with the UK: people see Johnson for what he is and still applaud him - or they have until now.

[LMcD]

That rather amounts to 'he's a more convincing liar' which in fact isn't the case is it? I don't know which is worse - someone who is a convincing liar so that we don't realise we are being deceived, or one who is so rubbish at it that every time he opens his mouth the response is 'what lies is he going to tell this time?' and any factual content that may be contained is lost . The minority who voted for this may not see a problem; the majority who didn't, do, and are not happy.

I was simply wondering: what is the point of having the correct answer if you then consistently fail to (a) convince others that you're right and (b) give any indication that you believe yourself that you're right? Then there's the small matter of over promising and under-delivering. Surely nothing damages public confidence, or increases general cynicism, more than repeated failure, as in the case of test numbers, to keep an endlessly repeated public promise that was probably made principally for political purposes.

[oddoneout]

I was simply wondering: what is the point of having the correct answer if you then consistently fail to (a) convince others that you're right and (b) give any indication that you believe yourself that you're right? Then there's the small matter of over promising and under-delivering. Surely nothing damages public confidence, or increases general cynicism, more than repeated failure, as in the case of test numbers, to keep an endlessly repeated public promise that was probably made principally for political purposes.

I agree, but the habit of deception was well established long before the current crisis, and has been compounded by the lack of experience of active(rather than reactive or lobby dictated) government by most of the current cohort of politicians( of whatever leaning). Pootling along letting the EU do the donkey work, and doing a bit of tantrumming occasionally to keep the voters thinking MPs are doing their job, isn't the best preparation for dealing with the realities of having to manage the country, let alone deal with something like a pandemic.

[DracoM]

I agree, but the habit of deception was well established long before the current crisis, and has been compounded by the lack of experience of active(rather than reactive or lobby dictated) government by most of the current cohort of politicians( of whatever leaning). Pootling along letting the EU do the donkey work, and doing a bit of tantrumming occasionally to keep the voters thinking MPs are doing their job, isn't the best preparation for dealing with the realities of having to manage the country, let alone deal with something like a pandemic.

Indeed.
My contempt for politicians knows no bounds. Johnson, Trump, Bolsonaro, Orbain...........etc etc.............