Coronavirus

[johnb]

It seems there are differing views in the scientific community (see https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/e...ings-in-shops/)

(I am sure that cultural antipathies to the wearing of face masks influence people's views.)

On the other hand -

A review carried out for The Royal Society and the British Academy came out in favour of face masks: https://royalsociety.org/-/media/pol...D93BBCBFC2BB24

The WHO has issued guidance that face masks should be worn where it is not possible to maintain social distancing.

The UK seems to be behind the curve in the use of face masks, e.g. Germany made their use compulsory on public transport and in shops back in April.

How effective they are at preventing transmission seems to be an open question but even if their effectiveness is on the low side that can still make a very significant difference in the progression of the virus. But their effectiveness overall depends on the vast majority of people wearing then when it is not possible to maintain social distancing.

[teamsaint]

Let's hope you're right. I know of one person (highly paid) who now does not want to go back to commuting/full time work, as he can do all - or perhaps 90% of his work from home. His boss is anally retentive and wants everyone in at their desks. What his boss may not realise is that people in his employee's position may look for new jobs, and they will either bargain for better (for them) working conditions at the same or higher salary, or will simply take up offers closer to home for a lower salary.

The serfs (even very highly paid ones) are starting to realise that there's more to life than trundling in to offices each morning, and back out again like lemmings with everyone else.

I also know other people who say that actually their productivity has gone up in most aspects of their work during the current period, and discussing one area where I thought that face to face contact would be important I was shot down in flames - that's team meetings. Seemingly these are now much more efficient, there's a saving in travel costs, but the work actually gets done in about half the time, thus releasing time for other activities. This is apparently generally agreed by members of the team.

There will be areas of work which do require more contact, and more supervision etc., but perhaps these are only about 10% of most people's work. Bosses will feel left out though - as many have the problem mentioned a couple of paras up.

i had thought that the current conditions might lead to more use of local business centres, but some have a feeling that is not going to happen - most people would rather work from home, with much less frequent visits to a centralised work place, rather than working remotely, but in a local hub. I don't know if that is really going to turn out to be a strong preference.

There are problems for some people though - but not necessarily for many in the regular workforce. Some people with poor hearing find that online meetings are very difficult, and apart from not being able to hear well, they are not able to lip read either, which some people use as a compensating strategy. These are issues which need to be addressed constructively, and sensitively.

I meant to add, as you have mentioned, that in general, employees are going to ask for more working from home, and less commuting. Working from home really doesn’t work well for everybody, but many businesses are going to use it to help keep employees happy, reduce expensive office space etc.
The madness of the vast numbers of office workers flooding into London is surely going to become a much reduced activity? As part of that, railways are going to have to change enormously, and hopefully for the better. There will need to be more flexible season ticket arrangements, and hopefully a more efficient spread of services between peak and off peak.

Interesting point about those with hearing difficulties. New technologies always bring both unexpected benefits and difficulties.

[Serial_Apologist]

Interesting point about those with hearing difficulties. New technologies always bring both unexpected benefits and difficulties.

Surely however something is going to have to be done first to improve the technologies for online communcation, if the occurrences of poor audibility, screen freeze-ups and crashes at source one sees all the time in TV programme call-ins are to go by?

[Dave2002]

The madness of the vast numbers of office workers flooding into London is surely going to become a much reduced activity?

One might hope so, but I fear that the madness will bounce back.

As part of that, railways are going to have to change enormously, and hopefully for the better. There will need to be more flexible season ticket arrangements, and hopefully a more efficient spread of services between peak and off peak.

Railways may be affected, as if the number of passengers drop off without state support they will become unprofitable. Services will drop, and fares will rise. Maybe that can be managed, but there will be consequences, both for the rail companies and for passengers. There will also be knock on effects on other parts of our society, such as roads and road traffic. There will be shocks to the system, and some will lead to benefits and good outcomes, but there may also be unwanted effects.

Meanwhile another article on testing. It’s not a bad article, though I’m suspicious of the claim that 17.5 percent of Londoners have had Covid-19. Why not “about 17-18 per cent”, which doesn’t give a possibly false sense of accuracy. Why not “about 1 in 6 people in London” or “slightly fewer than 1 in 6”? Why not 17.3%? 17.5% means, or should mean, something like “around 17.5% with an accuracy of better than +/- 0.05%” but the use of the number with the decimal point suggests poor journalism - giving a false sense of “accuracy” in the hope of giving the article greater credibility.

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/coronavirus-uk-antibody-tests?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-en-GB

[LMcD]

Last night, BBC presenter Shaun Ley said that quite a lot of people aren't wearing a mask or other face covering while travelling on the London Underground, where use of same is mandatory. Just to cheer us up further, somebody on the 'Today' programme has just said it's quite likely that, even if a vaccine becomes available, quite a lot of people won't have it (or whatever you do with a vaccine).

[oddoneout]

Surely however something is going to have to be done first to improve the technologies for online communcation, if the occurrences of poor audibility, screen freeze-ups and crashes at source one sees all the time in TV programme call-ins are to go by?

It will also need the broadband issue to be sorted such that all areas of the country are on a more equal footing, there are still a lot of places which have 'historical speeds' as one person put it, ie those of some former age! Not that long ago a local area TV programme showed some people trying to cope with modem era speeds - frustrating for home use but horrendous for running a business.

[Dave2002]

Arizona looks in bad shape - https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2...covid-outbreak

Note the "musical" reference in the place name in the photo on the front!

[johnb]

Meanwhile another article on testing. It’s not a bad article, though I’m suspicious of the claim that 17.5 percent of Londoners have had Covid-19. Why not “about 17-18 per cent”, which doesn’t give a possibly false sense of accuracy. Why not “about 1 in 6 people in London” or “slightly fewer than 1 in 6”? Why not 17.3%? 17.5% means, or should mean, something like “around 17.5% with an accuracy of better than +/- 0.05%” but the use of the number with the decimal point suggests poor journalism - giving a false sense of “accuracy” in the hope of giving the article greater credibility.

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/coro...b-global-en-GB

In all fairness the article does say "about 17.5%" and that text provides a link to the ONS report where the uncertainties are clearly shown in the chart "Figure 1".

The it is an interesting and informative article, however it states:

There are promising signs that being infected with Sars-Cov-2 does provoke an immune memory that may help the body fight the virus if exposed to it for a second time. Experiments in macaque monkeys found that the animals were resistant to catching Covid-19 for a second time five weeks after being initially infected. Many immunologists are cautiously hopeful that the body can mount at least some kind of immune response to the disease.

Much of what we think we know about immunity to Covid-19 is based on our knowledge of other human coronaviruses, writes the Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch in the New York Times: “After being infected with SARS-CoV-2, most individuals will have an immune response, some better than others. That response, it may be assumed, will offer some protection over the medium term.”

But there are indications that the level of antibody immunity depends on the severity of the disease and, more importantly, that it might well decline very quickly according. If this is confirmed in knocks the idea of "herd immunity" firmly on the head and raises questions about vaccines.

There are two studies which come to similar conclusions:

One by King's College, London - a study of 90 patients: https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...study-suggests

A smaller one of 37 asymptomatic and 37 symptomatic patients: https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/e...v-2-infection/

[Dave2002]

In all fairness the article does say "about 17.5%" and that text provides a link to the ONS report where the uncertainties are clearly shown in the chart "Figure 1".

OK - maybe you're right, but I still react when I see decimal points used like that.

Here is the link you mentioned - https://www.gov.uk/government/public...ce-of-covid-19 Actually the limits are nothing like as tight as I suggested, and the diagram shows about 13 to 23 percent range, so I stick by my original comments regarding false accuracy.

[Dave2002]

Surely however something is going to have to be done first to improve the technologies for online communcation, if the occurrences of poor audibility, screen freeze-ups and crashes at source one sees all the time in TV programme call-ins are to go by?

Here is an article about how a village in Lancashire installed its own broadband - https://arstechnica.com/information-...ernet-networks
Other villages might have to follow that example if decent service levels are to be achieved.

[LMcD]

I wonder what the government's response will be if a significant number of people switch to online shopping because they don't, for whatever reason, want to wear a face covering in a shop or supermarket.

[DracoM]

Exactly. My guess is that this is PRECISELY WHAT WILL HAPPEN. Thus emasculating the high street even more.

[oddoneout]

Exactly. My guess is that this is PRECISELY WHAT WILL HAPPEN. Thus emasculating the high street even more.

I think a more immediate problem is going to be the hassle for shopkeepers dealing with a mix of those who've 'forgotten' their masks, those who won't wear them, and the frankly confused and/or unaware.
I suspect that in terms of online shopping this latest edict may make those who've already been doing it to continue, I don't know if the numbers of new shoppers going that way would be significant, There may be some people who will venture back to real shopping now who didn't feel comfortable before.
Longer term unemployment will have an impact on retail of whatever form and in whatever location.

[Frances_iom]

Exactly. My guess is that this is PRECISELY WHAT WILL HAPPEN. Thus emasculating the high street even more.

that's why the Gov is delaying the 5G roll out as well as by removal of equipment both foul up existing network and add substantially to the bill - since the Tories following the blessed Margaret have pushed the finance 'industry' over any local industry the problems are now emerging in both reliance on China (+ other countries) and poor management of many if not all big technical projects eg huge cost overruns in railway electrification, Crossrail, inability to even produce simple protective material - the list goes on - there is at least a decade needed to sort out this but in that decade the UK will have to sort out the financial mess from Covid19 + the high additional costs from Brexit

[DracoM]

I knew a lovely day was about to dawn for UK..........................................not.
'Somewhere over the Rainbow......' eh?