|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2020 19:32:10 GMT
sf you are right it is not all about the individual but their risk of infecting others. I consider myself low risk and am going out more as I live alone, have no family nearby and keep myself to myself (now working from home and can be weeks before I talk or meet up with anyone) and therefore when not out and about am more or less self-isolating when at home. If I was meeting elderly relatives / friends regularly or going to a workplace where infecting others was a possibility I would be more cautious. At the moment I would attend a production with pre-COVID seating arrangements on the understanding that I have a duty of care in the days afterwards to minimise the risk of infecting others if I was unlucky to become infected. I agree it's people's level of risks Ievels. Would going to a theatre be any different to going to a pub or taking a flight? I don't know what I'd actually do if shows did reopen. Would others be prepared to go - lets say we'd have to wear masks?
|
|
4,033 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Aug 6, 2020 19:49:06 GMT
I agree it's people's level of risks Ievels. Would going to a theatre be any different to going to a pub or taking a flight? I don't know what I'd actually do if shows did reopen. Would others be prepared to go - lets say we'd have to wear masks? I wouldn't be prepared to go to theatre indoors at present. However nothing short of being marched in at gunpoint would get me into a pub or on a flight either!
|
|
311 posts
|
Post by olliebean on Aug 6, 2020 23:02:37 GMT
You could say the same thing about getting behind the wheel of a car - the risk of dying in a car accident is higher. How do you work that out? Fewer than 2000 people died in car accidents in the UK last year.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2020 23:17:43 GMT
No. I listen to a whole raft, including people who I know who are part of the science community and send me stuff from eminent people they work with - the views run the gamut. I don't live in an echo chamber. You absolutely miss my point, which isn't surprising. You claim to be on top of the science from experts, but when push comes to shove you quote an article that you can't source, from a newspaper you claim not to read. If it helps, the ONS report dated mid July 2020 states “Of the 50,335 deaths that occurred in March to June 2020 involving COVID-19 in England and Wales, 45,859 (91.1%) had at least one pre-existing condition, while 4,476 (8.9%) had none.” www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19englandandwales/deathsoccurringinjune2020Also, Prof Karol Sikora has been a good, common-sense voice on COVID - I’d recommend people check out his Twitter account or Google his articles from the last few months; they definitely soothe the nerves by keeping the things we hear in the media in proportion!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2020 23:26:27 GMT
You could say the same thing about getting behind the wheel of a car - the risk of dying in a car accident is higher. How do you work that out? Fewer than 2000 people died in car accidents in the UK last year. Dependent on age, of course - eg according to the professors who wrote this, the risk of dying of coronavirus is approximately equal to the risk of death in a car accident, for those of student age: voxeu.org/article/covid-19-pandemic-causing-crisis-uk-universities-0
|
|
2,763 posts
|
Post by n1david on Aug 6, 2020 23:37:53 GMT
It is just worth pointing out that Karol SIkora has been a long-term critic of the NHS, to the extent that he has supported US politicians campaigning against social healthcare. He runs a private healthcare business, which is I'm sure coincidental. He described the NHS as the "last bastion of communism", but he's probably right. I think he's right that there are many non-covid conditions that are being undiagnosed; I wouldn't assume he comes from a place which is entirely supportive of the English health service, for personal reasons.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2020 3:33:19 GMT
How do you work that out? Fewer than 2000 people died in car accidents in the UK last year. Dependent on age, of course - eg according to the professors who wrote this, the risk of dying of coronavirus is approximately equal to the risk of death in a car accident, for those of student age: voxeu.org/article/covid-19-pandemic-causing-crisis-uk-universities-0 In other words, comparing the people with the highest risk of dying in car accidents with the group least at risk from dying of Covid-19. It seems blatantly dishonest to simply say "Driving is more dangerous" while disingenuously leaving out the qualifier that the overwhelming majority of the population has been left out of the equation and the tiny subset that has been retained is exactly that subset that most skews the result.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2020 7:13:17 GMT
It is just worth pointing out that Karol SIkora has been a long-term critic of the NHS, to the extent that he has supported US politicians campaigning against social healthcare. He runs a private healthcare business, which is I'm sure coincidental. He described the NHS as the "last bastion of communism", but he's probably right. I think he's right that there are many non-covid conditions that are being undiagnosed; I wouldn't assume he comes from a place which is entirely supportive of the English health service, for personal reasons. Well, he may be right - judging by some of the comments coming out of some mouths in the NHS! But even if we disagree with his political views, do we disagree with him on the science? Isn’t it right to point out that numbers of cases are rising as a natural result of more testing? The numbers also seem to show the latest wave is of milder illness than earlier in the year, with hospital admissions and deaths continuing to fall...? So why are we slamming on the lockdown brakes again? He’s been calling for people to respect the rules to keep coronavirus at bay. He’s been calling for the government to take tangible action that will help us cope with the virus. Do we disagree with that? He’s pointed out the worrying dip (And he’s not the only one) in people being diagnosed with cancer (if it’s found later it’s harder to treat, therefore leading to potentially avoidable deaths later down the line). Are we OK with sacrificing those people (Some of whom will be children) if the latest outbreak is milder? He’s pointed out the mental health issues some people are suffering, which will also start taking their toll the longer this climate of fear continues. I’m not saying you have to believe him. Just that if you’re asking where trustworthy different opinions - and less panicky opinions - on COVID can be found, I’d suggest Sikora is somewhere to start.
|
|
1,863 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Aug 7, 2020 8:01:02 GMT
We are experiencing a different environment from March.
- The at-risk population are shielding. - Less people are at work. - Socially distanced cafes / restaurants / pubs. - A predominantly cautious population. - Social life can be lived outside.
At the moment we have a certain demographic continuing to take risks or having to take risks which keeps the infection rate constant or drifting upwards who are predominately the young / low-risk or those having to work in the gig economy as they cannot work from home which is reflected in the mortality and hospitalisation figures.
What even a small increase shows is that even with the draconian controls above COVID remains prevalent and this is the danger.
It does not matter if rates of infection is rising due to testing as it is the debunked Trump argument, infected people exist whether we test or not, the only difference is they have been identified and hopefully controlled.
The truth is that when Autumn arrives in a few week’s time we have a larger base infected population than Feb/Mar meaning when we return to the office, socialise inside or have just had enough it won’t take much to lose control of infection rates.
I do not often agree with this Government but at the moment delaying indoor Theatre for a few more week’s is a no-brainer, between now and the end of Sep determines the Winter we will experience.
We need to be extremely cautious and do all we can in the next few week’s to drive down the infected population in a similar way to Scotland and Wales.
Do go out, do enjoy yourselves only be cautious, limit interactions with strangers, follow infection control best practice but whatever you do not let down your guard as the line between the second wave and ‘new-normal’ is a fine one which at the moment we are most probably on the wrong side of.
Getting recreation and leisure up and running is in our hands as long as we reduce infection rates, at the moment believe it is about 1 in 1,500 who are infected and therefore there is statistically an infected person in every West End Theatre operating at full capacity.
|
|
2,504 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Aug 7, 2020 8:36:12 GMT
I find this guy quite useful to follow. He's got a good medium between realism and hope
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2020 9:27:35 GMT
But even if we disagree with his political views, do we disagree with him on the science? Isn’t it right to point out that numbers of cases are rising as a natural result of more testing? It's true that there's been an increase in testing but it doesn't explain away the rise in cases. We have 25% more testing now than a month ago (7 day average to 3rd August and 3rd July; 139k to 174k) but a 41% increase in cases (same range; 590 to 833). Reassuringly, the number of deaths isn't rising at all. That may be because the NHS is no longer stretched to the limit and is now able to offer better care to everybody, Covid-19 patients and everyone else alike.
|
|
2,504 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Aug 7, 2020 10:06:57 GMT
The Office for National Statistics has released its weekly report on the coronavirus and the social impacts on Great Britain.
The main findings are:
Almost all adults (96%) who had left their homes said they had worn a face covering to slow the spread of the coronavirus – an increase from 84% last week and 71% the week before.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2020 10:38:53 GMT
I don't think anyone is advocating going into complete lock-down again. But it is finding the point where we can have a economy and controlling the Covid infection rate, the dangers of opening too quick has been laid bare in some states in the US, such as Florida, Texas, California and Georgia. Where states that have proceeded with caution and listened to the science such as New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and New Jersey have fared a whole lot better. If we all wore masks, washed our hands, sanitised and social distanced for 3 weeks, we could get rid of this damn thing. Ultimately it is short term pain for long term gain. It is clear that a strong economy and Covid will not live together. Excellent points as always Phantom but didn't or weren't we supposed to socially distance from end March until well into May or do you mean a stricter lockdown as some of the big Eurpean Countries did?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2020 10:51:53 GMT
Anyone vulnerable that I do come into contact with will be on a train, in a supermarket or walking down a street, where they have chosen to be. Hasn't the government just ended shielding & associated support to people who were shielding though? So now vulnerable people might be forced to, for instance, go to the supermarket if they're no longer receiving food parcels & can't get a delivery when they need one or afford the minimum spend required for a delivery. I would hope that delivery spaces for those who require them are there and the supermarkets would deliver regardless of size of the order. People in this demographic would have shopped and had to pay for their food before so hopefully affording it isn't an issue. But a lot of older people don't have the internet for instance and even if they did bulk buy certain items it's the stuff like milk, fruit, veg that need to be largely bought each week.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2020 10:59:10 GMT
Most have been able to escape the virus since March, allied with both government and self imposed measures this has artificially dampened its spread. By far the main driver has been keeping people from getting together indoors. By far.
Up here in West Yorks, as press have reported, our new cases are a result of the domino effect, which takes some weeks to start to become apparent. People who have limited symptoms, who are asymptomatic and who are not decreasing their mobility have kept this steady low level transmission increasing. Children, young people, indoor pub/restaurant goers and holidaymakers ensuring spread around the country and coming in from international destinations. This then spread through public facing workers, taxi drivers are being particularly hard hit here, for example. Most are Asian, many are in multigenerational households.They do a lot of airport runs and, for myself, I’ve seen the high numbers of taxis ferrying young pub goers who abide by no distancing or masks. Within the few days where these public facing workers have no symptoms it rips through their families.
The virus is biding its time, waiting for the opportunity. We didn’t get the rate of transmission down anywhere near enough to stop this. When people get together, in indoor spaces, without masks, talking to each other, it spreads and, through aerosolisation, it remains in that space in a viable form for much longer than thought.
Put people back in indoor spaces in numbers and you are in trouble. Do it without respect for masks and you are doubly so. Guess what the UK government’s plan is as we move into September?
|
|
19,803 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 7, 2020 11:28:22 GMT
Most have been able to escape the virus since March, allied with both government and self imposed measures this has artificially dampened its spread. By far the main driver has been keeping people from getting together indoors. By far. Up here in West Yorks, as press have reported, our new cases are a result of the domino effect, which takes some weeks to start to become apparent. People who have limited symptoms, who are asymptomatic and who are not decreasing their mobility have kept this steady low level transmission increasing. Children, young people, indoor pub/restaurant goers and holidaymakers ensuring spread around the country and coming in from international destinations. This then spread through public facing workers, taxi drivers are being particularly hard hit here, for example. Most are Asian, many are in multigenerational households.They do a lot of airport runs and, for myself, I’ve seen the high numbers of taxis ferrying young pub goers who abide by no distancing or masks. Within the few days where these public facing workers have no symptoms it rips through their families. The virus is biding its time, waiting for the opportunity. We didn’t get the rate of transmission down anywhere near enough to stop this. When people get together, in indoor spaces, without masks, talking to each other, it spreads and, through aerosolisation, it remains in that space in a viable form for much longer than thought.Put people back in indoor spaces in numbers and you are in trouble. Do it without respect for masks and you are doubly so. Guess what the UK government’s plan is as we move into September? Can we have a source for that please?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2020 12:24:37 GMT
I’m not sure whether to be saddened, unsurprised or shocked that people don’t yet understand the way that the virus travels through air and hangs there. This is why scientists need to be more visible and not governments. A more fluffy piece on this. www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02058-1Much more technical but this is a pretty unanimous view among scientists in this area. www.medscape.com/viewarticle/934837?src=uc_mscpedt&faf=1#vp_1Referred to as ‘the smoking gun’, Study that shows virus remains viable and able to replicate in aerosol form. In simple form, what not to do. If I could get anything through to people for the coming months, it is this. Don’t gather in groups indoors, invest in air filtration systems. If you can’t, then you must wear masks.
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Aug 7, 2020 12:27:01 GMT
Cineworld have revised their policy. Masks should be worn through the film but removed and replaced each time you sip your drink or eat a snack.
|
|
19,803 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 7, 2020 12:32:22 GMT
I’m not sure whether to be saddened, unsurprised or shocked that people don’t yet understand the way that the virus travels through air and hangs there. Well I’m very sorry if you're saddened, surprised or shocked but the fact of the matter is that not everyone is as “into” this as some people seem to be. some people are just following the instructions and trying not to allow this disease to be the sole focus of their existence. Either way your earlier post, without any supporting facts to back up your statements, potentially fell into the scaremongering and misinformation category which we’ve asked people not to do. Thanks for the detail now provided.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2020 12:42:18 GMT
I’m not sure whether to be saddened, unsurprised or shocked that people don’t yet understand the way that the virus travels through air and hangs there. Well I’m very sorry if you're saddened, surprised or shocked but the fact of the matter is that not everyone is as “into” this as some people seem to be. some people are just following the instructions and trying not to allow this disease to be the sole focus of their existence. Either way your earlier post, without any supporting facts to back up your statements, potentially fell into the scaremongering and misinformation category which we’ve asked people not to do. Thanks for the detail now provided. All of my posts on this are based on scientific evidence, I could attach links to each and everything but understood that those giving false information need to be weeded out. It’s not your fault, or any individuals fault, the blame lies in messaging and, further back, the way the UK government is hanging for too long onto notions that are being found to be incorrect. We have, maybe, three weeks, until indoor gatherings will explode in number. There is still time to act, we have the capacity to make these changes.
|
|
19,803 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 7, 2020 12:59:46 GMT
Well I’m very sorry if you're saddened, surprised or shocked but the fact of the matter is that not everyone is as “into” this as some people seem to be. some people are just following the instructions and trying not to allow this disease to be the sole focus of their existence. Either way your earlier post, without any supporting facts to back up your statements, potentially fell into the scaremongering and misinformation category which we’ve asked people not to do. Thanks for the detail now provided. All of my posts on this are based on scientific evidence, I could attach links to each and everything but understood that those giving false information need to be weeded out. The rules about scaremongering and misinformation are the same for everyone. There isn’t a two tier system where some members are taken at face value as being reliable where others are not. You’re just like the rest of us, someone on a forum with an opinion. In the case of the post I referred to you were talking about the disease “ripping through families”, personifying the virus by implying that it has an intent “biding it’s time” “waiting for an opportunity “, all arguably inflammatory and have the potential to induce anxiety in people who read. We have reports from people who have complained about this sort of thing, and as a result some members have been warned and ultimately banned. People must back up their ‘facts’ with sources and where posts are felt to be deliberately trying to frighten people they’ll be removed.
|
|
311 posts
|
Post by olliebean on Aug 7, 2020 13:03:57 GMT
Cineworld have revised their policy. Masks should be worn through the film but removed and replaced each time you sip your drink or eat a snack. Not just Cineworld. It's the law from tomorrow that face coverings must be worn in cinemas, theatres, and lots of other places where they weren't previously mandatory. Because changing the regulations piecemeal every couple of weeks isn't likely to lead to any confusion about what is and isn't allowed at any given time.
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Aug 7, 2020 13:07:29 GMT
Cineworld have revised their policy. Masks should be worn through the film but removed and replaced each time you sip your drink or eat a snack. Not just Cineworld. It's the law from tomorrow that face coverings must be worn in cinemas, theatres, and lots of other places where they weren't previously mandatory. Because changing the regulations piecemeal every couple of weeks isn't likely to lead to any confusion about what is and isn't allowed at any given time. Oh I completely understand, and I'm glad they are. It's just cinemas are in the particularly tricky situation of needing to sell food and drink or else they go out of business and that simply doesn't work with masks!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2020 14:51:22 GMT
All of my posts on this are based on scientific evidence, I could attach links to each and everything but understood that those giving false information need to be weeded out. The rules about scaremongering and misinformation are the same for everyone. There isn’t a two tier system where some members are taken at face value as being reliable where others are not. You’re just like the rest of us, someone on a forum with an opinion. In the case of the post I referred to you were talking about the disease “ripping through families”, personifying the virus by implying that it has an intent “biding it’s time” “waiting for an opportunity “, all arguably inflammatory and have the potential to induce anxiety in people who read. We have reports from people who have complained about this sort of thing, and as a result some members have been warned and ultimately banned. People must back up their ‘facts’ with sources and where posts are felt to be deliberately trying to frighten people they’ll be removed. Ripping through families, with exponential spread in multigenerational households, is not a secret. I hesitated before deciding not to post a diagram from a study showing the extent of this because. quite frankly, it is scary. Personification is one of the main tools that medics are using to get the message across because dry, academic language is just not cutting it when they have so many spreading emotive messages that go against the actual science. All those public information films of now and yesteryear understood this. Anyone remember the classic, 'Lonely Water'? EDIT: Guardian now have a very good article on aerosols up on their site. More of this needed please from broadcast media and politicians. www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/aug/07/why-are-indoor-settings-higher-risk-for-covid-and-are-restaurants-safe?"Dr William Hanage, a professor of the evolution and epidemiology of infectious disease at Harvard University, says more information on effective ways to prevent transmission is helpful, but he stresses that outbreaks tend to occur because of similar factors. “It doesn’t take much digging to find examples of outbreaks in all kinds of places, and there’s a tendency to cherry-pick from them according to political priorities. But it is a mistake to fixate on a single outbreak, and better to recognise that they become more likely whenever people gather together indoors in poorly ventilated spaces.” The key issue, he adds, is the degree to which authorities try to prevent or encourage such gatherings. “I don’t understand how the British government maintains the cognitive dissonance required to suggest that relaxing restrictions in Europe leads to ‘second waves’ while encouraging British people to go to work or school or pubs will not have a similar impact.”"
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Aug 7, 2020 15:37:09 GMT
This is unforgivabley cold hearted from the Government. They are ending the furlough scheme but people physically cannot go back to work in an industry that isn't up and running!
|
|