Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » David Cameron once said Dominic Cummings was a ‘career psychop

15681011

Comments

  • brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    Monkeys said:

    The question haunting me about the public's behaviour is: What's wrong with venison? It's lean and pound-for-pound must be one of the most nutritious things out there. If you're panic-buying meat for a lockdown, I mean forget fucking Bambi you sentimental idiots.

    In the smaller, more local world, where we stay within our communities, we will be thrilled that we have venison.

    Probably because people don't know what to do with it. When I've gone to the supermarket the pasta shelves are stripped bare, the dried noodle ones directly opposite are all full.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    Charles said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Charles said:

    Monkeys said:

    The question haunting me about the public's behaviour is: What's wrong with venison? It's lean and pound-for-pound must be one of the most nutritious things out there. If you're panic-buying meat for a lockdown, I mean forget fucking Bambi you sentimental idiots.

    In the smaller, more local world, where we stay within our communities, we will be thrilled that we have venison.

    until you get hung for poaching the King's deer...
    We don't currently have a king so we are safe
    Do you still swear fealty to the Duke of Cornwall?
    Why would I want to do that, I may be cornish but I don't regard him as my liege
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,229
    ABZ said:

    Jeepers. That's petrifying... we are testing heavily in hospitals here and the rate is nothing like that. The US is going to be a total catastrophe. Really sad.

    It is. The American manifestation of this will be on a different level to everywhere else in the developed world. They do everything bigger and more vividly there and public health disasters are no exception.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518

    Nigelb said:

    Can Johnson just resign in favour of Sunak now?

    Johnson's press conferences have been mortifying. At best several yards off the pace, and at worst utterly callous and Cummings-driven. He does not have a grip of the situation and never lets a chance of under-steering pass him by. The inquiry when all this is over will be horrific.

    Utter nonsense
    Look at the "advice" Johnson has given out at his press conferences, and look at how far it has been followed.

    Res ipsa loquitur.

    I don't say it as an anti-Tory point - I think Sunak has handled his role very well for example. But Johnson and the wider strategy has been dreadful.
    How far has it been followed? Put a number to it?

    I'd estimate on a normal Mothering Sunday with sunny weather at least half of the country would have gone out. 40 million plus socially gathering?

    How many people are socially gathering today? Bars, restaurants etc that would be SOLD OUT today normally are shut and empty. We're seeing reports of thousands in parks - not tens of millions.

    If 40 million would go out normally and 400,000 have today then 99% have got the message.
    A guy from Snowdonia National Park said the numbers today were greater than anything he’d seen in thirty years...
    And the point of that is?

    Given that virtually every pub, bar and restaurant in the entire country (which would have overwhelmingly been sold out today) have been shut and the only place people have been told it is appropriate to go to is a park - that should surely be filed under "No Shit Sherlock".

    It says nothing about numbers.
    It also says nothing about whether such activity is actually creating much of a heightened risk of transmission. Especially as large numbers would likely be family groups who would have been non socially distanced at home anyway.

    I think a lot of the chatter is about Govt guidance allegedly not being followed, not actually whether it actually matters particularly to the progress of the pandemic.
  • stodge said:


    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job

    You're the one throwing words like "hatred" around. People have a right to ask questions, scrutinise what is being down in their name and criticise it if they don't agree or understand.
    I am referring to the posters who loath Boris and they know who they are

    Boris is not perfect and should be held to account but some of the attacks are coming from those who hate brexit
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,622
    Andy_JS said:

    Just been out for a walk in a moorland area. It wasn't very busy at 4pm. Easy to keep a distance from other people.

    Have done something similar and it is easy.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,379
    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The only possible argument is they fear a backlash, possibly violence in some hotspots.
    Get the troops in and if there is violence shoot a few of them.
    The reason is that you need to get buy-in to the social distancing from 90% of the public. This is what Italy, Spain etc have been struggling to achieve. The only way to do this is to progressively tighten the screws.

    On pub Landlords - the local couple of pubs near me closed at their regular hour when it was announced. No stupid midnight last-night stuff. Just closed. So not every landlord is an arse.
  • alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Why would I do that. I respect all life, it is precious
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    stodge said:


    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job

    You're the one throwing words like "hatred" around. People have a right to ask questions, scrutinise what is being down in their name and criticise it if they don't agree or understand.
    I am referring to the posters who loath Boris and they know who they are

    Boris is not perfect and should be held to account but some of the attacks are coming from those who hate brexit
    Guilty of loathing Boris
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    edited March 2020
    A slightly bigger percentage increase outside of London in the last 24 hours, I think.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898

    Andy_JS said:

    Just been out for a walk in a moorland area. It wasn't very busy at 4pm. Easy to keep a distance from other people.

    Have done something similar and it is easy.
    I think I will venture out tomorrow if the weather's reasonable. Remember to growl at anyone who gets too close. I have to say our local corner shops have been invaluable - "local shops for local people" - well, not quite Royston Vaizey.

    The truth is everyone knows where the big supermarkets are but the locals know where the corner shops are and that's been a big lesson of me of this crisis.
  • Pagan2 said:

    stodge said:


    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job

    You're the one throwing words like "hatred" around. People have a right to ask questions, scrutinise what is being down in their name and criticise it if they don't agree or understand.
    I am referring to the posters who loath Boris and they know who they are

    Boris is not perfect and should be held to account but some of the attacks are coming from those who hate brexit
    Guilty of loathing Boris
    And you are entitled to your view but in this epic fight a sense of balance and proportion is needed
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163

    alex_ said:


    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”

    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Why would I do that. I respect all life, it is precious
    So you are just going to ignore their opinions because you do not like them? There is a segment of the population who view the virus as a leveller. Ignoring them will not make them go away. You have to ask why they feel that way and are they justified and, if so, what can be done to address their issues.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    Pagan2 said:

    stodge said:


    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job

    You're the one throwing words like "hatred" around. People have a right to ask questions, scrutinise what is being down in their name and criticise it if they don't agree or understand.
    I am referring to the posters who loath Boris and they know who they are

    Boris is not perfect and should be held to account but some of the attacks are coming from those who hate brexit
    Guilty of loathing Boris
    And you are entitled to your view but in this epic fight a sense of balance and proportion is needed
    I have been fairly supportive so far as I would have been of a corbyn or swinson government as long as they are following scientific advice
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The only possible argument is they fear a backlash, possibly violence in some hotspots.
    Get the troops in and if there is violence shoot a few of them.
    OK, HYUFD.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    bunnco said:

    I'm probably one of the few people on here who has met Boris this week in Downing Street as part of a team working to coordinate the work of National and Local Government, much of which has been announced this evening.

    Having seen Boris at first hand sat around the Cabinet table in No10, I can report that he is absolutely focused on his brief, engaged and driven, compassionate but decisive. He has wrapped around him some excellent public servants and, in particular Robert Jenrick and Matt Hancock in significant leadership roles with Rishi Sunak doing the economic heavy lifting.

    I haven't always been a Boris fan. But he is absolutely the right man for the moment with exceptional strength in depth focused on the right response. My meeting demonstrated that there is a plan from Whitehall to your Village Hall that focuses on one family at a time. Together we will beat this virus.

    Bunnco - Your Man on the Spot

    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job
    Time he got on with the job, then.
    He appears to be listening to the experts

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Boomers’ parents would appear to be those at risk.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,228

    Nigelb said:

    Can Johnson just resign in favour of Sunak now?

    Johnson's press conferences have been mortifying. At best several yards off the pace, and at worst utterly callous and Cummings-driven. He does not have a grip of the situation and never lets a chance of under-steering pass him by. The inquiry when all this is over will be horrific.

    Utter nonsense
    Look at the "advice" Johnson has given out at his press conferences, and look at how far it has been followed.

    Res ipsa loquitur.

    I don't say it as an anti-Tory point - I think Sunak has handled his role very well for example. But Johnson and the wider strategy has been dreadful.
    How far has it been followed? Put a number to it?

    I'd estimate on a normal Mothering Sunday with sunny weather at least half of the country would have gone out. 40 million plus socially gathering?

    How many people are socially gathering today? Bars, restaurants etc that would be SOLD OUT today normally are shut and empty. We're seeing reports of thousands in parks - not tens of millions.

    If 40 million would go out normally and 400,000 have today then 99% have got the message.
    A guy from Snowdonia National Park said the numbers today were greater than anything he’d seen in thirty years...
    And the point of that is?

    Given that virtually every pub, bar and restaurant in the entire country (which would have overwhelmingly been sold out today) have been shut and the only place people have been told it is appropriate to go to is a park - that should surely be filed under "No Shit Sherlock".

    It says nothing about numbers.
    The point of that is a LOT of people have got into their cars to travel some distance for a day’s holiday.
    That is not going out for a bit of exercise.
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    stodge said:


    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job

    You're the one throwing words like "hatred" around. People have a right to ask questions, scrutinise what is being down in their name and criticise it if they don't agree or understand.
    I am referring to the posters who loath Boris and they know who they are

    Boris is not perfect and should be held to account but some of the attacks are coming from those who hate brexit
    Guilty of loathing Boris
    And you are entitled to your view but in this epic fight a sense of balance and proportion is needed
    I have been fairly supportive so far as I would have been of a corbyn or swinson government as long as they are following scientific advice
    I am supportive in so far as unity within Cobra attendees is complete and they are following advice. Indeed I would be at the front of the queue demanding Boris's resignation if he was not following the advice
  • MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 757
    Charles said:

    Monkeys said:

    The question haunting me about the public's behaviour is: What's wrong with venison? It's lean and pound-for-pound must be one of the most nutritious things out there. If you're panic-buying meat for a lockdown, I mean forget fucking Bambi you sentimental idiots.

    In the smaller, more local world, where we stay within our communities, we will be thrilled that we have venison.

    until you get hung for poaching the King's deer...
    That will only serve to make it more delicious when we get it.
  • alex_ said:


    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”

    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Why would I do that. I respect all life, it is precious
    So you are just going to ignore their opinions because you do not like them? There is a segment of the population who view the virus as a leveller. Ignoring them will not make them go away. You have to ask why they feel that way and are they justified and, if so, what can be done to address their issues.
    I do not have to ask why anyone wants the death of others

    It is sick
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,210
    When I go out for exercise, I'm on my own not touching anything. Crossing the road even to avoid people.
    My out and back route (Roads and pavements) today was quietish - the park was heaving more than likely.
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,878

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    Without opining on the substance of the measures, I have no problem with Johnson's demeanour and tone in these briefings. It works OK for me.

    People are desperate for us to be treated like children, or for an authoritarian regime. Today was Sunday, and Mother’s Day, obviously tomorrow and the rest of the week will see fewer people out and about in parks etc
    With schools and businesses shut up and down the country I wouldn't rely upon Monday seeing parks be massively less popular.
    My wife is home schooling my daughter tomorrow. She has spent the weekend timetabling, lesson planning and printing study material.

    Everything has been planned out for school between 10am and 3pm in our house.

    She’s probably the only one in the country to do this!
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The only possible argument is they fear a backlash, possibly violence in some hotspots.
    Get the troops in and if there is violence shoot a few of them.
    The reason is that you need to get buy-in to the social distancing from 90% of the public. This is what Italy, Spain etc have been struggling to achieve. The only way to do this is to progressively tighten the screws.

    On pub Landlords - the local couple of pubs near me closed at their regular hour when it was announced. No stupid midnight last-night stuff. Just closed. So not every landlord is an arse.
    Overwhelming majority of landlords are part of their local community. Last thing almost any of them will want is to be responsible for their community being ill.

    I think we are getting social distancing from 90% plus of the public. Issue is 10% of the public is over 7 million people. The idiots who flout the rules will get more attention than the people sitting in their living rooms.

    We need to keep steadily increasing the pressure taking the public with us, you can't just jump overnight to a new normal without taking the public along with you.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Boomers’ parents would appear to be those at risk.
    given boomers are from 1946 onwards that would make them 74 to 64 they seem right in the target zone I dont imaging to many 74 year olds have living parents nor 64 year olds for that matter

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,228
    My new favourite eccentric mathematician....

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Grothendieck
    ....He gave lectures on category theory in the forests surrounding Hanoi while the city was being bombed, to protest against the Vietnam War....
    ... His growing preoccupation with spiritual matters was also evident in a letter titled Lettre de la Bonne Nouvelle sent to 250 friends in January 1990. In it, he described his encounters with a deity and announced that a "New Age" would commence on 14 October 1996....
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    Without opining on the substance of the measures, I have no problem with Johnson's demeanour and tone in these briefings. It works OK for me.

    People are desperate for us to be treated like children, or for an authoritarian regime. Today was Sunday, and Mother’s Day, obviously tomorrow and the rest of the week will see fewer people out and about in parks etc
    With schools and businesses shut up and down the country I wouldn't rely upon Monday seeing parks be massively less popular.
    Office People will be expected to work from home, and the building trade is still at work.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    Without opining on the substance of the measures, I have no problem with Johnson's demeanour and tone in these briefings. It works OK for me.

    People are desperate for us to be treated like children, or for an authoritarian regime. Today was Sunday, and Mother’s Day, obviously tomorrow and the rest of the week will see fewer people out and about in parks etc
    With schools and businesses shut up and down the country I wouldn't rely upon Monday seeing parks be massively less popular.
    My wife is home schooling my daughter tomorrow. She has spent the weekend timetabling, lesson planning and printing study material.

    Everything has been planned out for school between 10am and 3pm in our house.

    She’s probably the only one in the country to do this!
    LOL! I'm curious how many here are going to be in that situation? Never thought it would happen but I'm at home tomorrow homeschooling my children as my wife's a "key worker" and I'm not.
  • Andy_JS said:

    Just been out for a walk in a moorland area. It wasn't very busy at 4pm. Easy to keep a distance from other people.

    Have done something similar and it is easy.
    Likewise on Cleeve Hill, Gloucestershire - unusually busy but easy to maintain a respectful distance.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    stodge said:


    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job

    You're the one throwing words like "hatred" around. People have a right to ask questions, scrutinise what is being down in their name and criticise it if they don't agree or understand.
    I am referring to the posters who loath Boris and they know who they are

    Boris is not perfect and should be held to account but some of the attacks are coming from those who hate brexit
    Guilty of loathing Boris
    And you are entitled to your view but in this epic fight a sense of balance and proportion is needed
    I have been fairly supportive so far as I would have been of a corbyn or swinson government as long as they are following scientific advice
    I am supportive in so far as unity within Cobra attendees is complete and they are following advice. Indeed I would be at the front of the queue demanding Boris's resignation if he was not following the advice
    Where I did lay into them was not doing enough to prevent job losses of businesses that no longer could trade and when Sunak announced help that was satisfactory I did post an apology to doubting him
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    stodge said:


    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job

    You're the one throwing words like "hatred" around. People have a right to ask questions, scrutinise what is being down in their name and criticise it if they don't agree or understand.
    I am referring to the posters who loath Boris and they know who they are

    Boris is not perfect and should be held to account but some of the attacks are coming from those who hate brexit
    Guilty of loathing Boris
    And you are entitled to your view but in this epic fight a sense of balance and proportion is needed
    I have been fairly supportive so far as I would have been of a corbyn or swinson government as long as they are following scientific advice
    I am supportive in so far as unity within Cobra attendees is complete and they are following advice. Indeed I would be at the front of the queue demanding Boris's resignation if he was not following the advice
    Where I did lay into them was not doing enough to prevent job losses of businesses that no longer could trade and when Sunak announced help that was satisfactory I did post an apology to doubting him
    Yes I recall that and it is a great credit to you
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Pagan2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Boomers’ parents would appear to be those at risk.
    given boomers are from 1946 onwards that would make them 74 to 64 they seem right in the target zone I dont imaging to many 74 year olds have living parents nor 64 year olds for that matter

    Many 64 year olds could have 82-85 or older living parents.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    stodge said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Just been out for a walk in a moorland area. It wasn't very busy at 4pm. Easy to keep a distance from other people.

    Have done something similar and it is easy.
    I think I will venture out tomorrow if the weather's reasonable. Remember to growl at anyone who gets too close. I have to say our local corner shops have been invaluable - "local shops for local people" - well, not quite Royston Vaizey.

    The truth is everyone knows where the big supermarkets are but the locals know where the corner shops are and that's been a big lesson of me of this crisis.
    Yeah we used the local butcher this weekend for the first time. Much nicer too
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    Charles said:



    My Dad is on day 16 in HDU. I would rather not have believed 7 days, if only momentarily.


    Day 16 - that's appalling. i hope he pulls through soon.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    Pagan2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Boomers’ parents would appear to be those at risk.
    given boomers are from 1946 onwards that would make them 74 to 64 they seem right in the target zone I dont imaging to many 74 year olds have living parents nor 64 year olds for that matter

    The at risk group is the over 70s, so just the very front end of the boomer generation that runs well into births during the 1960s, to parents many of whom are now in their 80s
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    stodge said:


    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job

    You're the one throwing words like "hatred" around. People have a right to ask questions, scrutinise what is being down in their name and criticise it if they don't agree or understand.
    I am referring to the posters who loath Boris and they know who they are

    Boris is not perfect and should be held to account but some of the attacks are coming from those who hate brexit
    Guilty of loathing Boris
    And you are entitled to your view but in this epic fight a sense of balance and proportion is needed
    I have been fairly supportive so far as I would have been of a corbyn or swinson government as long as they are following scientific advice
    I am supportive in so far as unity within Cobra attendees is complete and they are following advice. Indeed I would be at the front of the queue demanding Boris's resignation if he was not following the advice
    Where I did lay into them was not doing enough to prevent job losses of businesses that no longer could trade and when Sunak announced help that was satisfactory I did post an apology to doubting him
    Yes I recall that and it is a great credit to you
    shrugs I am not tribal, if someone does something good for the country I don't feel the need not to applaud because its the wrong team
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Pulpstar said:

    When I go out for exercise, I'm on my own not touching anything. Crossing the road even to avoid people.
    My out and back route (Roads and pavements) today was quietish - the park was heaving more than likely.

    Me too. Great 10k time by the way. I am struggling to break 25 mins for 5k at the moment, very poor
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    Pagan2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Boomers’ parents would appear to be those at risk.
    given boomers are from 1946 onwards that would make them 74 to 64 they seem right in the target zone I dont imaging to many 74 year olds have living parents nor 64 year olds for that matter

    Many 64 year olds could have 82-85 or older living parents.
    some could yes I doubt the percentage is high but must admit havent checked it
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Can Johnson just resign in favour of Sunak now?

    Johnson's press conferences have been mortifying. At best several yards off the pace, and at worst utterly callous and Cummings-driven. He does not have a grip of the situation and never lets a chance of under-steering pass him by. The inquiry when all this is over will be horrific.

    Utter nonsense
    Look at the "advice" Johnson has given out at his press conferences, and look at how far it has been followed.

    Res ipsa loquitur.

    I don't say it as an anti-Tory point - I think Sunak has handled his role very well for example. But Johnson and the wider strategy has been dreadful.
    How far has it been followed? Put a number to it?

    I'd estimate on a normal Mothering Sunday with sunny weather at least half of the country would have gone out. 40 million plus socially gathering?

    How many people are socially gathering today? Bars, restaurants etc that would be SOLD OUT today normally are shut and empty. We're seeing reports of thousands in parks - not tens of millions.

    If 40 million would go out normally and 400,000 have today then 99% have got the message.
    A guy from Snowdonia National Park said the numbers today were greater than anything he’d seen in thirty years...
    And the point of that is?

    Given that virtually every pub, bar and restaurant in the entire country (which would have overwhelmingly been sold out today) have been shut and the only place people have been told it is appropriate to go to is a park - that should surely be filed under "No Shit Sherlock".

    It says nothing about numbers.
    The point of that is a LOT of people have got into their cars to travel some distance for a day’s holiday.
    That is not going out for a bit of exercise.
    Yes but that will be a tiny fraction of those who would have gone out otherwise.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    So the government advice for over 70s is clear, stay in your home and no you shouldn't go out for any reason, including for a walk.

    So I presume Jezza will still be in the HoC on Monday morning.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,359
    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    Which area of Glasgow did you think the younger pub goers came from, many areas of Glagow will have longer life expectancy than your other examples. Typical short sighted thick southern ignoramus opinion methinks, or even worse an arsehole Scottish unionist.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    edited March 2020

    So the government advice for over 70s is clear, stay in your home and no you shouldn't go out for any reason, including for a walk.

    So I presume Jezza will still be in the HoC on Monday morning.

    "he is not the messiah he is a very naughty boy"
  • glwglw Posts: 9,910
    bunnco said:

    I'm probably one of the few people on here who has met Boris this week in Downing Street as part of a team working to coordinate the work of National and Local Government, much of which has been announced this evening.

    Having seen Boris at first hand sat around the Cabinet table in No10, I can report that he is absolutely focused on his brief, engaged and driven, compassionate but decisive. He has wrapped around him some excellent public servants and, in particular Robert Jenrick and Matt Hancock in significant leadership roles with Rishi Sunak doing the economic heavy lifting.

    I haven't always been a Boris fan. But he is absolutely the right man for the moment with exceptional strength in depth focused on the right response. My meeting demonstrated that there is a plan from Whitehall to your Village Hall that focuses on one family at a time. Together we will beat this virus.

    Bunnco - Your Man on the Spot

    That is encouraging. Also thank you for what you are doing, you must be extraordinarily busy.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    stodge said:


    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job

    You're the one throwing words like "hatred" around. People have a right to ask questions, scrutinise what is being down in their name and criticise it if they don't agree or understand.
    I am referring to the posters who loath Boris and they know who they are

    Boris is not perfect and should be held to account but some of the attacks are coming from those who hate brexit
    Guilty of loathing Boris
    And you are entitled to your view but in this epic fight a sense of balance and proportion is needed
    I have been fairly supportive so far as I would have been of a corbyn or swinson government as long as they are following scientific advice
    I am supportive in so far as unity within Cobra attendees is complete and they are following advice. Indeed I would be at the front of the queue demanding Boris's resignation if he was not following the advice
    Were Boris and Cummings following the advice at the start (see header above).
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Boomers’ parents would appear to be those at risk.
    given boomers are from 1946 onwards that would make them 74 to 64 they seem right in the target zone I dont imaging to many 74 year olds have living parents nor 64 year olds for that matter

    Many 64 year olds could have 82-85 or older living parents.
    some could yes I doubt the percentage is high but must admit havent checked it
    There may not be many that many 80s+ with 60ish kids but they are very at risk.
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    stodge said:


    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job

    You're the one throwing words like "hatred" around. People have a right to ask questions, scrutinise what is being down in their name and criticise it if they don't agree or understand.
    I am referring to the posters who loath Boris and they know who they are

    Boris is not perfect and should be held to account but some of the attacks are coming from those who hate brexit
    Guilty of loathing Boris
    And you are entitled to your view but in this epic fight a sense of balance and proportion is needed
    I have been fairly supportive so far as I would have been of a corbyn or swinson government as long as they are following scientific advice
    I am supportive in so far as unity within Cobra attendees is complete and they are following advice. Indeed I would be at the front of the queue demanding Boris's resignation if he was not following the advice
    Where I did lay into them was not doing enough to prevent job losses of businesses that no longer could trade and when Sunak announced help that was satisfactory I did post an apology to doubting him
    Yes I recall that and it is a great credit to you
    shrugs I am not tribal, if someone does something good for the country I don't feel the need not to applaud because its the wrong team
    I agree. I even voted for Tony Blair twice
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,359

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    What an absolute moron
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 6,285

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    Without opining on the substance of the measures, I have no problem with Johnson's demeanour and tone in these briefings. It works OK for me.

    People are desperate for us to be treated like children, or for an authoritarian regime. Today was Sunday, and Mother’s Day, obviously tomorrow and the rest of the week will see fewer people out and about in parks etc
    With schools and businesses shut up and down the country I wouldn't rely upon Monday seeing parks be massively less popular.
    My wife is home schooling my daughter tomorrow. She has spent the weekend timetabling, lesson planning and printing study material.

    Everything has been planned out for school between 10am and 3pm in our house.

    She’s probably the only one in the country to do this!
    Many schools will be sending pupils work to do on each subject. I am planning on being online ready to answer questions when they would have been having their Physics lessons.
    That said, it would be much harder to to for primary aged pupils.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,210
    Strava is going to go remarkably quiet if/when we're on lockdown...
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    alex_ said:


    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”

    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Why would I do that. I respect all life, it is precious
    So you are just going to ignore their opinions because you do not like them? There is a segment of the population who view the virus as a leveller. Ignoring them will not make them go away. You have to ask why they feel that way and are they justified and, if so, what can be done to address their issues.
    I wouldn't ignore such people - I'd just treat them like the contemptible little shits they are.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518

    alex_ said:


    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”

    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Why would I do that. I respect all life, it is precious
    So you are just going to ignore their opinions because you do not like them? There is a segment of the population who view the virus as a leveller. Ignoring them will not make them go away. You have to ask why they feel that way and are they justified and, if so, what can be done to address their issues.
    I do not have to ask why anyone wants the death of others

    It is sick
    Nobody wants the deaths of others. They reasonably question whether it is correct or fair to radically alter society, potentially destroy the economy, take decisions which will fundamentally alter their lives for days, weeks, months, years to come to meet this particular threat. When there are many other threats and causes of deaths which are more preventable but for which society accepts a balance between the two.

    And yes they may be underestimating the potential final potential death toll outcome of this. But with each new measure taking greater and greater curtailment on the ability to live normal lives are we looking to save a relatively small 1000s of lives or 100s of thousands? And where will it all end if in several weeks not much has changed in terms of numbers or the potential threat. Or if we find ourselves here again in November?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    stodge said:


    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job

    You're the one throwing words like "hatred" around. People have a right to ask questions, scrutinise what is being down in their name and criticise it if they don't agree or understand.
    I am referring to the posters who loath Boris and they know who they are

    Boris is not perfect and should be held to account but some of the attacks are coming from those who hate brexit
    Guilty of loathing Boris
    And you are entitled to your view but in this epic fight a sense of balance and proportion is needed
    I have been fairly supportive so far as I would have been of a corbyn or swinson government as long as they are following scientific advice
    I am supportive in so far as unity within Cobra attendees is complete and they are following advice. Indeed I would be at the front of the queue demanding Boris's resignation if he was not following the advice
    Were Boris and Cummings following the advice at the start (see header above).
    It seems like they were yes - the advisors were speaking on camera explaining the plan, while Sturgeon etc were attending COBR.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    I know some of the crowding in places like Richmond Park is potentially dodgy, but Sky News have just shown a right busy body in Posh Derbyshire.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Boomers’ parents would appear to be those at risk.
    given boomers are from 1946 onwards that would make them 74 to 64 they seem right in the target zone I dont imaging to many 74 year olds have living parents nor 64 year olds for that matter

    Many 64 year olds could have 82-85 or older living parents.
    some could yes I doubt the percentage is high but must admit havent checked it
    It’s not age 64, it’s 1964, hence down to age 55
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,359

    Monkeys said:

    The question haunting me about the public's behaviour is: What's wrong with venison? It's lean and pound-for-pound must be one of the most nutritious things out there. If you're panic-buying meat for a lockdown, I mean forget fucking Bambi you sentimental idiots.

    In the smaller, more local world, where we stay within our communities, we will be thrilled that we have venison.

    Probably because people don't know what to do with it. When I've gone to the supermarket the pasta shelves are stripped bare, the dried noodle ones directly opposite are all full.
    Lot of them will not know what it is.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,228
    Merkel bans meetings of more than two....
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,622

    Andy_JS said:

    Just been out for a walk in a moorland area. It wasn't very busy at 4pm. Easy to keep a distance from other people.

    Have done something similar and it is easy.
    Likewise on Cleeve Hill, Gloucestershire - unusually busy but easy to maintain a respectful distance.
    For most of the country a short drive will bring you to some nice countryside where you can get a good hour or two of walking.

    It isn't necessary to go to Snowdonia or the Lake District.

    A thing which always surprises me is how ignorant many people are of the area they live in.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    Without opining on the substance of the measures, I have no problem with Johnson's demeanour and tone in these briefings. It works OK for me.

    People are desperate for us to be treated like children, or for an authoritarian regime. Today was Sunday, and Mother’s Day, obviously tomorrow and the rest of the week will see fewer people out and about in parks etc
    With schools and businesses shut up and down the country I wouldn't rely upon Monday seeing parks be massively less popular.
    My wife is home schooling my daughter tomorrow. She has spent the weekend timetabling, lesson planning and printing study material.

    Everything has been planned out for school between 10am and 3pm in our house.

    She’s probably the only one in the country to do this!
    Many schools will be sending pupils work to do on each subject. I am planning on being online ready to answer questions when they would have been having their Physics lessons.
    That said, it would be much harder to to for primary aged pupils.
    My daughters' primary school have a similar plan, they will be uploading materials each week on a Tuesday for the children to do at home, while being accessible online too. If parents can't get online they have alternative methods for getting the materials out.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    Nigelb said:

    Merkel bans meetings of more than two....

    And she always has the casting vote?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    edited March 2020
    alex_ said:

    alex_ said:


    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”

    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Why would I do that. I respect all life, it is precious
    So you are just going to ignore their opinions because you do not like them? There is a segment of the population who view the virus as a leveller. Ignoring them will not make them go away. You have to ask why they feel that way and are they justified and, if so, what can be done to address their issues.
    I do not have to ask why anyone wants the death of others

    It is sick
    Nobody wants the deaths of others. They reasonably question whether it is correct or fair to radically alter society, potentially destroy the economy, take decisions which will fundamentally alter their lives for days, weeks, months, years to come to meet this particular threat. When there are many other threats and causes of deaths which are more preventable but for which society accepts a balance between the two.

    And yes they may be underestimating the potential final potential death toll outcome of this. But with each new measure taking greater and greater curtailment on the ability to live normal lives are we looking to save a relatively small 1000s of lives or 100s of thousands? And where will it all end if in several weeks not much has changed in terms of numbers or the potential threat. Or if we find ourselves here again in November?
    Lets put this in perspective life is changing for a short while maybe 3 months maybe 6 probably not much longer before things start normalising again given an 80 year life span that is 0.3% to 0.6% of their lifespan...to much to give up to save a couple of hundrend thousand people from dying?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,442

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Can Johnson just resign in favour of Sunak now?

    Johnson's press conferences have been mortifying. At best several yards off the pace, and at worst utterly callous and Cummings-driven. He does not have a grip of the situation and never lets a chance of under-steering pass him by. The inquiry when all this is over will be horrific.

    Utter nonsense
    Look at the "advice" Johnson has given out at his press conferences, and look at how far it has been followed.

    Res ipsa loquitur.

    I don't say it as an anti-Tory point - I think Sunak has handled his role very well for example. But Johnson and the wider strategy has been dreadful.
    How far has it been followed? Put a number to it?

    I'd estimate on a normal Mothering Sunday with sunny weather at least half of the country would have gone out. 40 million plus socially gathering?

    How many people are socially gathering today? Bars, restaurants etc that would be SOLD OUT today normally are shut and empty. We're seeing reports of thousands in parks - not tens of millions.

    If 40 million would go out normally and 400,000 have today then 99% have got the message.
    A guy from Snowdonia National Park said the numbers today were greater than anything he’d seen in thirty years...
    And the point of that is?

    Given that virtually every pub, bar and restaurant in the entire country (which would have overwhelmingly been sold out today) have been shut and the only place people have been told it is appropriate to go to is a park - that should surely be filed under "No Shit Sherlock".

    It says nothing about numbers.
    The point of that is a LOT of people have got into their cars to travel some distance for a day’s holiday.
    That is not going out for a bit of exercise.
    Yes but that will be a tiny fraction of those who would have gone out otherwise.
    The modelling advice assumed 50-75% compliance with social-distancing measures. The government must be desperate for some way to measure what is going on.
    Do we know if they're using mobile phone data?
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    stodge said:


    Time some on here got over their hatred of Boris and let him get on with the job

    You're the one throwing words like "hatred" around. People have a right to ask questions, scrutinise what is being down in their name and criticise it if they don't agree or understand.
    I am referring to the posters who loath Boris and they know who they are

    Boris is not perfect and should be held to account but some of the attacks are coming from those who hate brexit
    Guilty of loathing Boris
    And you are entitled to your view but in this epic fight a sense of balance and proportion is needed
    I have been fairly supportive so far as I would have been of a corbyn or swinson government as long as they are following scientific advice
    I am supportive in so far as unity within Cobra attendees is complete and they are following advice. Indeed I would be at the front of the queue demanding Boris's resignation if he was not following the advice
    Were Boris and Cummings following the advice at the start (see header above).
    Cummings is not on Cobra and we are where we are

    As long as Boris follows Cobra recommendations agreed by the leaders of the devolved adminstration then how can anyone doubt his advice

    Of course those in Cobra could be wrong but Cobra is where I see the decisions being made and in years to come these decisions will be analysed beyond my lifetime
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    malcolmg said:

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    What an absolute moron
    The post was in quote marks. It is what many young people think (ifnot generally expressed so bluntly). It is not what I think. You can’t ignore it by putting you fingers in your ears.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Can Johnson just resign in favour of Sunak now?

    Johnson's press conferences have been mortifying. At best several yards off the pace, and at worst utterly callous and Cummings-driven. He does not have a grip of the situation and never lets a chance of under-steering pass him by. The inquiry when all this is over will be horrific.

    Utter nonsense
    Look at the "advice" Johnson has given out at his press conferences, and look at how far it has been followed.

    Res ipsa loquitur.

    I don't say it as an anti-Tory point - I think Sunak has handled his role very well for example. But Johnson and the wider strategy has been dreadful.
    How far has it been followed? Put a number to it?

    I'd estimate on a normal Mothering Sunday with sunny weather at least half of the country would have gone out. 40 million plus socially gathering?

    How many people are socially gathering today? Bars, restaurants etc that would be SOLD OUT today normally are shut and empty. We're seeing reports of thousands in parks - not tens of millions.

    If 40 million would go out normally and 400,000 have today then 99% have got the message.
    A guy from Snowdonia National Park said the numbers today were greater than anything he’d seen in thirty years...
    And the point of that is?

    Given that virtually every pub, bar and restaurant in the entire country (which would have overwhelmingly been sold out today) have been shut and the only place people have been told it is appropriate to go to is a park - that should surely be filed under "No Shit Sherlock".

    It says nothing about numbers.
    The point of that is a LOT of people have got into their cars to travel some distance for a day’s holiday.
    That is not going out for a bit of exercise.
    Yes but that will be a tiny fraction of those who would have gone out otherwise.
    The modelling advice assumed 50-75% compliance with social-distancing measures. The government must be desperate for some way to measure what is going on.
    Do we know if they're using mobile phone data?
    BT I believe have offered data though how useful it is I don't know for example I have a smart phone but only take it to work. I don't take it out when shopping or socialising
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,359

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    Without opining on the substance of the measures, I have no problem with Johnson's demeanour and tone in these briefings. It works OK for me.

    People are desperate for us to be treated like children, or for an authoritarian regime. Today was Sunday, and Mother’s Day, obviously tomorrow and the rest of the week will see fewer people out and about in parks etc
    With schools and businesses shut up and down the country I wouldn't rely upon Monday seeing parks be massively less popular.
    My wife is home schooling my daughter tomorrow. She has spent the weekend timetabling, lesson planning and printing study material.

    Everything has been planned out for school between 10am and 3pm in our house.

    She’s probably the only one in the country to do this!
    She might have given them one day off at least
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,037

    I am still struggling to figure out how sitting in the park swigging tinnies constitutes beneficial exercise.

    And while those twats are sitting in the park, Bozo is sitting on the fence.

    What makes you think people swigging tinnies will listen to the PM in the first place?
    Of course they won't. That's why we need more than just advice, so that the police can sort the feckers out.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,228
    Coronavirus: ‘strange pneumonia’ seen in Lombardy in November, leading Italian doctor says

    https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3076334/coronavirus-strange-pneumonia-seen-lombardy-november-leading
    Virus was circulating ‘before we were aware of the outbreak in China’, says Giuseppe Remuzzi, director of the Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,359

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The only possible argument is they fear a backlash, possibly violence in some hotspots.
    Get the troops in and if there is violence shoot a few of them.
    OK, HYUFD.
    I am channeling my inner HYFUD.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914
    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Boomers’ parents would appear to be those at risk.
    Once you have given a name to a group of people it is easier to demonise them. I am a 'Boomer' by age - nothing I could do about that - but would not fit in to the pattern expected for Boomers with regard to Brexit and many other things.
    I wouldn't consider myself a 'Gammon' either by omplexion or outlook, but that's another group that has come in for stick recently. Is it any better to attack any group of people based on age or skin colour?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    Pagan2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Can Johnson just resign in favour of Sunak now?

    Johnson's press conferences have been mortifying. At best several yards off the pace, and at worst utterly callous and Cummings-driven. He does not have a grip of the situation and never lets a chance of under-steering pass him by. The inquiry when all this is over will be horrific.

    Utter nonsense
    Look at the "advice" Johnson has given out at his press conferences, and look at how far it has been followed.

    Res ipsa loquitur.

    I don't say it as an anti-Tory point - I think Sunak has handled his role very well for example. But Johnson and the wider strategy has been dreadful.
    How far has it been followed? Put a number to it?

    I'd estimate on a normal Mothering Sunday with sunny weather at least half of the country would have gone out. 40 million plus socially gathering?

    How many people are socially gathering today? Bars, restaurants etc that would be SOLD OUT today normally are shut and empty. We're seeing reports of thousands in parks - not tens of millions.

    If 40 million would go out normally and 400,000 have today then 99% have got the message.
    A guy from Snowdonia National Park said the numbers today were greater than anything he’d seen in thirty years...
    And the point of that is?

    Given that virtually every pub, bar and restaurant in the entire country (which would have overwhelmingly been sold out today) have been shut and the only place people have been told it is appropriate to go to is a park - that should surely be filed under "No Shit Sherlock".

    It says nothing about numbers.
    The point of that is a LOT of people have got into their cars to travel some distance for a day’s holiday.
    That is not going out for a bit of exercise.
    Yes but that will be a tiny fraction of those who would have gone out otherwise.
    The modelling advice assumed 50-75% compliance with social-distancing measures. The government must be desperate for some way to measure what is going on.
    Do we know if they're using mobile phone data?
    BT I believe have offered data though how useful it is I don't know for example I have a smart phone but only take it to work. I don't take it out when shopping or socialising
    I don’t think it can fix you with an accuracy of less than two metres, anyway
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    I am still struggling to figure out how sitting in the park swigging tinnies constitutes beneficial exercise.

    And while those twats are sitting in the park, Bozo is sitting on the fence.

    What makes you think people swigging tinnies will listen to the PM in the first place?
    Of course they won't. That's why we need more than just advice, so that the police can sort the feckers out.
    We have limited police resources, I'm more worried by the feckers throwing bricks through windows while we're asking the public to abandon their businesses for months.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,210
    Nigelb said:

    Merkel bans meetings of more than two....

    That's perfectly sensible actually. It allows people to walk the dog, get exercise etc.
  • Andy_JS said:

    Just been out for a walk in a moorland area. It wasn't very busy at 4pm. Easy to keep a distance from other people.

    Have done something similar and it is easy.
    Likewise on Cleeve Hill, Gloucestershire - unusually busy but easy to maintain a respectful distance.
    For most of the country a short drive will bring you to some nice countryside where you can get a good hour or two of walking.

    It isn't necessary to go to Snowdonia or the Lake District.

    A thing which always surprises me is how ignorant many people are of the area they live in.
    Snowdonia is 20 minutes away for us but we are in 12 weeks lockdown and would not put others at risk by going for a walk around Betws y Coed
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    Nigelb said:

    Coronavirus: ‘strange pneumonia’ seen in Lombardy in November, leading Italian doctor says

    https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3076334/coronavirus-strange-pneumonia-seen-lombardy-november-leading
    Virus was circulating ‘before we were aware of the outbreak in China’, says Giuseppe Remuzzi, director of the Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research

    This is why we need an antibody test, I had a bad flu beginning of feb with all corona symptoms got better only to have it resurge 2 weeks late total 10 days on my back. Was it normal flu or corona ....no idea. Did for the first time in a while give me asthma symptoms of not being able to breathe though and still not back to full steam
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,359
    alex_ said:

    malcolmg said:

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    What an absolute moron
    The post was in quote marks. It is what many young people think (ifnot generally expressed so bluntly). It is not what I think. You can’t ignore it by putting you fingers in your ears.
    Hopefully those that think that way have crap lives and are poor till the end, they want to get out and earn money like people had to do years ago. Bunch of lazy woke losers wanting everything for nothing.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Boomers’ parents would appear to be those at risk.
    Once you have given a name to a group of people it is easier to demonise them. I am a 'Boomer' by age - nothing I could do about that - but would not fit in to the pattern expected for Boomers with regard to Brexit and many other things.
    I wouldn't consider myself a 'Gammon' either by omplexion or outlook, but that's another group that has come in for stick recently. Is it any better to attack any group of people based on age or skin colour?
    always the same....label them first with a deprecative name then slowly ramp up the hate
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,228
    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    Merkel bans meetings of more than two....

    That's perfectly sensible actually. It allows people to walk the dog, get exercise etc.
    I agree - in the circumstances it makes considerable sense. (And there is a limited exemption for those who live together in greater numbers.)
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Pagan2 said:

    alex_ said:

    alex_ said:


    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”

    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Why would I do that. I respect all life, it is precious
    So you are just going to ignore their opinions because you do not like them? There is a segment of the population who view the virus as a leveller. Ignoring them will not make them go away. You have to ask why they feel that way and are they justified and, if so, what can be done to address their issues.
    I do not have to ask why anyone wants the death of others

    It is sick
    Nobody wants the deaths of others. They reasonably question whether it is correct or fair to radically alter society, potentially destroy the economy, take decisions which will fundamentally alter their lives for days, weeks, months, years to come to meet this particular threat. When there are many other threats and causes of deaths which are more preventable but for which society accepts a balance between the two.

    And yes they may be underestimating the potential final potential death toll outcome of this. But with each new measure taking greater and greater curtailment on the ability to live normal lives are we looking to save a relatively small 1000s of lives or 100s of thousands? And where will it all end if in several weeks not much has changed in terms of numbers or the potential threat. Or if we find ourselves here again in November?
    Lets put this in perspective life is changing for a short while maybe 3 months maybe 6 probably not much longer before things start normalising again given an 80 year life span that is 0.3% to 0.6% of their lifespan...to much to give up to save a couple of hundrend thousand people from dying?
    That is why I posed the question about whether it is 1000s or 100s of thousands. And even then nobody is clear on the distinction between deaths caused by and deaths with Coronavirus. You are very optimistic on you timescales. We are likely to add up to 1trillion to our national debt. There is a non trivial possibility that the economy goes down the Zimbabwe route (serious papers are speculating that literal money printing will happen). And in six months we could be doing it all again as a second wave hits going into winter. We hope it won’t. But nobody can say that with hand on heart.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,228
    Pagan2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Coronavirus: ‘strange pneumonia’ seen in Lombardy in November, leading Italian doctor says

    https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3076334/coronavirus-strange-pneumonia-seen-lombardy-november-leading
    Virus was circulating ‘before we were aware of the outbreak in China’, says Giuseppe Remuzzi, director of the Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research

    This is why we need an antibody test, I had a bad flu beginning of feb with all corona symptoms got better only to have it resurge 2 weeks late total 10 days on my back. Was it normal flu or corona ....no idea. Did for the first time in a while give me asthma symptoms of not being able to breathe though and still not back to full steam
    We need a cheap and accurate test in big numbers to work out just where we are.
    At the moment, everyone is fumbling in the dark quite a lot.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,712
    Nigelb said:

    Coronavirus: ‘strange pneumonia’ seen in Lombardy in November, leading Italian doctor says

    https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3076334/coronavirus-strange-pneumonia-seen-lombardy-november-leading
    Virus was circulating ‘before we were aware of the outbreak in China’, says Giuseppe Remuzzi, director of the Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research

    Chinese media outlets seem very keen to promote this narrative...
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518

    So the government advice for over 70s is clear, stay in your home and no you shouldn't go out for any reason, including for a walk.

    So I presume Jezza will still be in the HoC on Monday morning.

    Is it? I thought it was just the 1500 people they are writing to personally. They aren’t writing to every 70 year old in the country.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    alex_ said:

    Pagan2 said:

    alex_ said:

    alex_ said:


    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”

    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Why would I do that. I respect all life, it is precious
    So you are just going to ignore their opinions because you do not like them? There is a segment of the population who view the virus as a leveller. Ignoring them will not make them go away. You have to ask why they feel that way and are they justified and, if so, what can be done to address their issues.
    I do not have to ask why anyone wants the death of others

    It is sick
    Nobody wants the deaths of others. They reasonably question whether it is correct or fair to radically alter society, potentially destroy the economy, take decisions which will fundamentally alter their lives for days, weeks, months, years to come to meet this particular threat. When there are many other threats and causes of deaths which are more preventable but for which society accepts a balance between the two.

    And yes they may be underestimating the potential final potential death toll outcome of this. But with each new measure taking greater and greater curtailment on the ability to live normal lives are we looking to save a relatively small 1000s of lives or 100s of thousands? And where will it all end if in several weeks not much has changed in terms of numbers or the potential threat. Or if we find ourselves here again in November?
    Lets put this in perspective life is changing for a short while maybe 3 months maybe 6 probably not much longer before things start normalising again given an 80 year life span that is 0.3% to 0.6% of their lifespan...to much to give up to save a couple of hundrend thousand people from dying?
    That is why I posed the question about whether it is 1000s or 100s of thousands. And even then nobody is clear on the distinction between deaths caused by and deaths with Coronavirus. You are very optimistic on you timescales. We are likely to add up to 1trillion to our national debt. There is a non trivial possibility that the economy goes down the Zimbabwe route (serious papers are speculating that literal money printing will happen). And in six months we could be doing it all again as a second wave hits going into winter. We hope it won’t. But nobody can say that with hand on heart.
    I am not doubting that their will be a huge economic hit to deal with, I think though where we are lucky is all countries have this issue. If it was us alone depreciating out currency by having to print that would be hugely bad. However it looks like almost all countries will have to print money so net effect 0.

    If it was only our government doing lockdowns then I would be open to them overreacting. The fact all european governments are doing the same suggests to me though that if anything things are worse than they tell us and they are trying to scare us just enough without causing us to panic

    I have no special knowledge, merely common sense tells me if all governments are reacting the same there is a damn good reason too
  • alex_ said:

    So the government advice for over 70s is clear, stay in your home and no you shouldn't go out for any reason, including for a walk.

    So I presume Jezza will still be in the HoC on Monday morning.

    Is it? I thought it was just the 1500 people they are writing to personally. They aren’t writing to every 70 year old in the country.
    Not 1,500 but 1 and a half million.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    I am still struggling to figure out how sitting in the park swigging tinnies constitutes beneficial exercise.

    And while those twats are sitting in the park, Bozo is sitting on the fence.

    What makes you think people swigging tinnies will listen to the PM in the first place?
    Of course they won't. That's why we need more than just advice, so that the police can sort the feckers out.
    We have limited police resources, I'm more worried by the feckers throwing bricks through windows while we're asking the public to abandon their businesses for months.

    I am still struggling to figure out how sitting in the park swigging tinnies constitutes beneficial exercise.

    And while those twats are sitting in the park, Bozo is sitting on the fence.

    What makes you think people swigging tinnies will listen to the PM in the first place?
    Of course they won't. That's why we need more than just advice, so that the police can sort the feckers out.
    We have limited police resources, I'm more worried by the feckers throwing bricks through windows while we're asking the public to abandon their businesses for months.
    Crime has dropped by over 50% in Spain since the lockdown began although as it is illegal to be out without a valid Lawful reason I doubt burglary counts.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,359

    Nigelb said:

    Coronavirus: ‘strange pneumonia’ seen in Lombardy in November, leading Italian doctor says

    https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3076334/coronavirus-strange-pneumonia-seen-lombardy-november-leading
    Virus was circulating ‘before we were aware of the outbreak in China’, says Giuseppe Remuzzi, director of the Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research

    Chinese media outlets seem very keen to promote this narrative...
    Interesting, they have yet to find out what pneumonia my wife had/has, over a month in HDU and they could not work out what it was and still don't know. Her recovery is patchy at best as well.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518

    alex_ said:

    So the government advice for over 70s is clear, stay in your home and no you shouldn't go out for any reason, including for a walk.

    So I presume Jezza will still be in the HoC on Monday morning.

    Is it? I thought it was just the 1500 people they are writing to personally. They aren’t writing to every 70 year old in the country.
    Not 1,500 but 1 and a half million.
    Ok but still not “all 70 year olds”
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    malcolmg said:

    Nigelb said:

    Coronavirus: ‘strange pneumonia’ seen in Lombardy in November, leading Italian doctor says

    https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3076334/coronavirus-strange-pneumonia-seen-lombardy-november-leading
    Virus was circulating ‘before we were aware of the outbreak in China’, says Giuseppe Remuzzi, director of the Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research

    Chinese media outlets seem very keen to promote this narrative...
    Interesting, they have yet to find out what pneumonia my wife had/has, over a month in HDU and they could not work out what it was and still don't know. Her recovery is patchy at best as well.
    My dad is convinced he got it in South Africa. Not likely, but still...
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    I have posted a couple of links before for things to do for the self isolating may I add this one if anyone enjoys settlers of Catan

    https://colonist.io/#
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    All McDonalds to close from 7pm tomorrow.
    All staff on zero hrs contracts furloughed
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    All McDonalds to close from 7pm tomorrow.
    All staff on zero hrs contracts furloughed

    presumably they will get 80% of previous months wages
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    All McDonalds to close from 7pm tomorrow.
    All staff on zero hrs contracts furloughed

    Official announcement our at 9pm this evening.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,288

    I am still struggling to figure out how sitting in the park swigging tinnies constitutes beneficial exercise.

    And while those twats are sitting in the park, Bozo is sitting on the fence.

    What makes you think people swigging tinnies will listen to the PM in the first place?
    Of course they won't. That's why we need more than just advice, so that the police can sort the feckers out.
    We have limited police resources, I'm more worried by the feckers throwing bricks through windows while we're asking the public to abandon their businesses for months.
    In my brief town centre excursion this weekend, that already seemed to be underway. And in my car on Thursday evening around 8, the ne'er do well count seemed even higher than usual on the main roads fronting the rough areas. I mean I know from being a perfectly middling Northern town, HD has been going up the shithole charts faster than Bryan Adams ever went up the real charts, but still.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    Pagan2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Boomers’ parents would appear to be those at risk.
    Once you have given a name to a group of people it is easier to demonise them. I am a 'Boomer' by age - nothing I could do about that - but would not fit in to the pattern expected for Boomers with regard to Brexit and many other things.
    I wouldn't consider myself a 'Gammon' either by omplexion or outlook, but that's another group that has come in for stick recently. Is it any better to attack any group of people based on age or skin colour?
    always the same....label them first with a deprecative name then slowly ramp up the hate
    The label "Boomer" has been around for decades. Somebody did not think it up last week.

    For the avoidance of doubt, I am either one of the last Boomers to be born or one of the first of the next generation to be born. It is not like I am a 20 year old wishing death on pensioners.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,622
    eadric said:

    rcs1000 said:

    So, from Lombardy and Veneto, the heart of Italy's CV-19 crisis:

    New cases in Lombardy increased by 1,691 today against 3,251 yesterday and 2,380 the day before.

    New cases in Veneto increased by 505 today against 586 and 549.

    So, encouraging from both regions. (Although the Lombardy drop looks suspciously large.)

    Perhaps the most encouraging number in all the figures out of Italy was the percentage positive, which at 22% is the lowest for some time.

    That is the best news in a while. Total lockdown works, perhaps, as well in the west as it does in the East.

    But two points.

    How long can you sustain the economic damage?

    And

    What happens when you unshackle the people, and the virus returns?

    Until we have a vaccine or effective treatment this is going to menace us and kill us in numbers.
    The Italian lockdown seems to be rather more lax than total.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    Pagan2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    alex_ said:

    algarkirk said:

    David Spiegelhalter (Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge) is always good at his job, here's his take on COVID-19. Apologies if you've seen it before. Worth looking at the website to see the graph. His point is that whatever your risk of dying is in a year (which varies based on age) is pretty close to your risk of dying if you catch COVID-19.

    https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

    So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year’s worth of risk into a week or two. Which is why it’s important to spread out the infections to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

    It’s important to note that all the risks quoted are the average (mean) risks for people of the relevant age, but are not the risks of the average person! This is because, both for COVID and in normal circumstances, much of the risk is held by people whom are already chronically ill. So for the large majority of healthy people, their risks of either dying from COVID, or dying of something else, are much lower than those quoted here. Although of course for every death there will be others who are seriously ill.

    Also, as Triggle points out, there will be substantial overlap in these two groups — many people who die of COVID would have died anyway within a short period — and so these risks cannot be simply added, and it does not simply double the risk of people who get infected. It is crucially important that the NHS is not overwhelmed, but if COVID deaths can be kept in the order of say 20,000 by stringent suppression measures, as is now being suggested, there may end up being a minimal impact on overall mortality for 2020 (although background mortality could increase due to pressures on the health services and the side-effects of isolation). Although, as we are seeing, at vast cost.

    This may rationally explain why some younger pub goers in Glasgow are doubtful about the policy. In an area and social group where male life expectancy is short, why abolish fun of every sort for party and pub goers so that middle class old people in Oxfordshire and Morningside can live a little longer in a care home at the cost not only of fun now ("youth's a thing will not endure"), but at the cost of millions of working class jobs and prospects, the world economy and future fun. None of the pointy heads are making that argument right now, and indeed I am not either, but it may have force in the long run.

    I suspect Boris is instinctively always on the side of 'fun now, draw conclusions later' school. He may be finding all this a little hard going.

    “The oldies destroyed my future by voting for Brexitand not satisfied they’re destroying my present by forcing us all indoor for weeks/months for their own protection”
    That is just a horrible post - shame on you
    Nonetheless, there is a section of society that feels that way. They see the Boomer's generation as having had it all and their generation having their future mortgaged by the elderly

    Google "Boomer Remover"...
    Boomers’ parents would appear to be those at risk.
    Once you have given a name to a group of people it is easier to demonise them. I am a 'Boomer' by age - nothing I could do about that - but would not fit in to the pattern expected for Boomers with regard to Brexit and many other things.
    I wouldn't consider myself a 'Gammon' either by omplexion or outlook, but that's another group that has come in for stick recently. Is it any better to attack any group of people based on age or skin colour?
    always the same....label them first with a deprecative name then slowly ramp up the hate
    The label "Boomer" has been around for decades. Somebody did not think it up last week.

    For the avoidance of doubt, I am either one of the last Boomers to be born or one of the first of the next generation to be born. It is not like I am a 20 year old wishing death on pensioners.
    I wasnt criticizing you Beverly merely observing thats how the hate is grown
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    All McDonalds to close from 7pm tomorrow.
    All staff on zero hrs contracts furloughed

    No deliveries either? Seems like an oversight.
This discussion has been closed.