Coronavirus

[cloughie]

Far and away the most significant hotspot in the South West is the Bristol-South Gloucestershire-Bath region where the infection levels were originally driven by students and they still dominate infection numbers in some areas.

In Bath you have the "Widcombe, Bathwick Hill & Claverton Down" MSOA area with 830 cs/100k (Bath University).

The South Gloucestershire figures are dominated by the "Frenchay & Great Stoke" on the outskirts of Bristol, with 939 cs/100k (University of the West of England).

In Bristol itself, Bristol University students accounted for half the cases a couple of weeks ago. They turbocharged the previous gradual rise in infections amongst the general population. Covid-19 is now widespread in the community and increasing at a worrying rate (despite the vacuous assurances of the Mayor).

If you go back a couple of weeks, in many regions across the country you could see where the universities were situated just by looking for the infection hotspots on the Dashboard map of cases by MSOA.

So why are universities being excluded from the lockdown?

I think it is political to exclude universities and schools and wonder to what extent the school pupils role is in the spread - I’ve no facts or figures to back it up but are they spreaders? On the other side of the great divide Plymouth, Exeter and Torbay seem to be the highest. I’m just maybe selfishly sad that the bit of socially distanced socialising that the Rule of 6 permitted is being taken away.

[teamsaint]

Here’s some more stuff from SAGE, from all of two weeks ago.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/925856/S0770_NPIs_table__pivot_.pdf

Re closure of non essential retail.

“Low impact (low-moderate confidence)
SPI-M commission from 30 March 2020 included opening non-essential retail. Very minimal impact on R values.
Some limited evidence of transmission from China. Short duration and ability to distance in most settings + face coverings are likely to mitigate well.”

It does caveat with low to moderate confidence level. But the economic and consequent health effects will be huge, ( on manufacturing as well as retail) and most shops are certainly pretty safe environments with current mitigations.

But it doesn't matter to the government if the supermarkets and Amazon take over the world, because, well we know why, don’t we?

Edit: here is the source of that table.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/npis-table-17-september-2020

And it was 6 weeks ago, not two.

[teamsaint]

I think it is political to exclude universities and schools and wonder to what extent the school pupils role is in the spread - I’ve no facts or figures to back it up but are they spreaders? On the other side of the great divide Plymouth, Exeter and Torbay seem to be the highest. I’m just maybe selfishly sad that the bit of socially distanced socialising that the Rule of 6 permitted is being taken away.

It is ALL political. It has always been about “ protect the government ” not “ Protect the NHS”.

[Frances_iom]

It would appear that much of the European second wave was driven by Spanish holidays (as proved by the genomic evidence of the covid strain) - I suspect the same holds true in UK as the age range that requires a cheap Spanish package holiday are the same that provide the clientele for pubs + the night-time economy which I suspect are the key places being targeted by the lockdown - though I have my doubts re the safety of airconditioned shopping malls

[Cockney Sparrow]

As to a vote in Parliament, it was on Broadcasting House, 9.00am today - possibly quoting from Sunday paper, that Johnson was faced with the full awfulness of the likely outcomes (ice rinks as overflow mortuaries etc) and he was put in a position where he had to decide this weekend (lest he dither on Monday /Tuesday - apparently all too likely).
On the TV news Steve Baker, prominent loon for the ERG came out of No 10 having been shown the likely future and advised fellow MPs to carefully consider the wellbeing of their constituents in the light of the information to come. That leaves Duncan Smith (and the Daily Hate) on even outer orbit on their planet zog.

Surely the government won't need the opposition votes to carry the decision. Its failure in test and trace and other decisions is a large contributor to the position in which we find ourselves.
If the infection becomes rampant, apart from an overwhelmed NHS, the economy would cease to function or at the least be severely disfunctional.
And all the time the inviolable 1 January approaches......

[Dave2002]

I think it is political to exclude universities and schools and wonder to what extent the school pupils role is in the spread - I’ve no facts or figures to back it up but are they spreaders? On the other side of the great divide Plymouth, Exeter and Torbay seem to be the highest. I’m just maybe selfishly sad that the bit of socially distanced socialising that the Rule of 6 permitted is being taken away.

The stated evidence in Scotland is that school students in the 16-18 range are problematic, while most of the others don't present any major problems. Hence older students in secondary schools will be required to wear masks to move around.

[Anastasius]

.....But the economic and consequent health effects will be huge,.....

Evidence ?

You also kind of skipped over this bit

Improves consistency of policies, particularly if other interaction is to be restricted in addition (e.g. seeing family members in their homes).

You can't just cherry-pick those parts of the internet that suits your soapbox. Tackling Covid has to be a consistent and logical approach...I agree that the Govt hasn't got a clue but the scientists seem to have grasped it.

And presumably that Covid-breeding ground at that 700+ attendee rave near Bristol continues.

Surely our bile should be directed at those who deem themselves above compliance ?

[teamsaint]

Evidence ?

You also kind of skipped over this bit

Improves consistency of policies, particularly if other interaction is to be restricted in addition (e.g. seeing family members in their homes).

You can't just cherry-pick those parts of the internet that suits your soapbox. Tackling Covid has to be a consistent and logical approach...I agree that the Govt hasn't got a clue but the scientists seem to have grasped it.

And presumably that Covid-breeding ground at that 700+ attendee rave near Bristol continues.

Surely our bile should be directed at those who deem themselves above compliance ?

No I’m not cherry picking, just pointing out some interesting material. Inevitably people choose things that illustrate a point.

Which is kind of different. And there are eminent scientists who disagree with the SAGE conclusions and projections , notably from Kings , and Carl Heneghan.



Evidence ?

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-lockdown-may-have-indirectly-caused-16-000-excess-deaths-study-12044923

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-lockdown-cause-excess-deaths-180636962.html

Perhaps you think that lockdown is good for the economy ? Or do you need evidence on that too ?

Anyway, no more discussion with you, till you cut out the personal stuff, which is about the sixth time I have had to ask. It really is bloody tiresome to have to ask SO often.

[oddoneout]

So the 'instant result' tests are apparently not suitable for many(most?) of the situations in which it might be used and in any case are not intended for amateur interpretation. Why am I not surprised?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/02/doubts-over-rapid-turnaround-covid-tests-pledged-by-johnson

[DracoM]

Moonshot?
World's Best Track and Trace?

................yup. why are we not surprised?

Talk about a govt out of its depth....

WHY do we not have govt of National Unity to deal with a NATIONAL crisis? Much over-use of war rhetoric, so create a coalition govt NOW?

[french frank]

Inevitably people choose things that illustrate a point.

It's exactly what people do. But it is how prejudice works: I've made up my mind on this subject, and here is the evidence that supports my view. But if there is opposing evidence, that ought to rebalance one's opinion, oughtn't it?

But this is a good story from this morning's Guardian which should cheer you up:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/nov/02/this-is-revolutionary-new-online-bookshop-unites-indies-to-rival-amazon

[teamsaint]

It's exactly what people do. But it is how prejudice works: I've made up my mind on this subject, and here is the evidence that supports my view. But if there is opposing evidence, that ought to rebalance one's opinion, oughtn't it?

But this is a good story from this morning's Guardian which should cheer you up:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...o-rival-amazon

I take your point, But I am trying to make MY point here. I don't think I can do that in a completely " balanced" way,certainly not in this kind of forum context. And, as an example of attempting to put opinions in a balanced way, I even highlighted the caveat about " low to moderate confidence" when quoting the Sage report, which is a kind of balance, is it not ?

That doesn't mean I don't listen to other peoples views , or adapt my views if convinced.


We are already hard at work on our pages on Bookshop.org, which is I think a very positive initiative that will do well.*

I'm very cheerful by the way, all things considered, in the main. But I am really disappointed about personal attacks on this forum.

I'm not paranoid, I'm not on a soapbox, I don't always moan, etc etc. ( Not aimed at you obviously , FF). But some people just can't help themselves.

*Edit: very good piece ( for once !) from James Daunt in the Bookseller today, which I imagine will be widely quoted in the national press. To summarise, " Click and Collect" will be very big for them, December opening is critical, but he feels that Indies will suffer more, including his own stores. He would like all retail open rather than pushing people into supermarkets . And he is sceptical about Bookshop.org.

[Dave2002]

It is ALL political. It has always been about “ protect the government ” not “ Protect the NHS”.

Some of us (not necessarily me ..) wonder whether the issues re schools and universities are just to keep offspring out of the way, so that there is "free" babyminding, and the parents can go out and be "economically active", though not so much use if parents are now unable to go to work as well. The even more cynical suggest that it's nothing to do with education, or the well being of the young people - but purely to shift responsibility and keep some of the economy going.

That document/article based on (actually from?) Sage was very interesting - thank you.

[oddoneout]

Some of us (not necessarily me ..) wonder whether the issues re schools and universities are just to keep offspring out of the way, so that there is "free" babyminding, and the parents can go out and be "economically active", though not so much use if parents are now unable to go to work as well. The even more cynical suggest that it's nothing to do with education, or the well being of the young people - but purely to shift responsibility and keep some of the economy going.

That document/article based on (actually from?) Sage was very interesting - thank you.

It's worth remembering that even where people can WFH someone has to mind the children, and the bulk of that has fallen to women it would seem. A colleague of mine, with a well behaved pair(7 and 10), still had difficulties sometimes with Zoom meetings being dogged by 'noises off' or emergency interventions required. Her husband is a key worker who can't WFH, so it falls to her to juggle the lot. Her young trainee, as a single parent of a 3 year old had even more problems keeping the domestic and work separated. Cute as the child was it didn't help the smooth progress of meetings. So keeping schools open is indeed necessary for childminding purposes, as always, but with the added pressure that the choice would be between work or not for a great many women - and this isn't the time to be giving up a job if it is humanly possible to keep it, as the finances won't stack up and the chance to re-enter the workforce will be non-existent for all but the lucky few. The predicted collapse of the childcare(nursery etc) sector, due to reduced numbers for Covid rules making them uneconomic to run, isn't going to help their predicament either.

[Pulcinella]

Some of us (not necessarily me ..) wonder whether the issues re schools and universities are just to keep offspring out of the way, so that there is "free" babyminding, and the parents can go out and be "economically active", though not so much use if parents are now unable to go to work as well. The even more cynical suggest that it's nothing to do with education, or the well being of the young people - but purely to shift responsibility and keep some of the economy going.

That document/article based on (actually from?) Sage was very interesting - thank you.

And even more cynical to suggest that it's to deflect criticism away from the appallingly poor online provision for many (in terms of both equipment and material) if pupils are not at school.

Primary school children in Melbourne (just easing some restrictions after a 112-day lockdown) had a fully structured day of lessons, just like being at school, I think.