"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Contrary to popular wisdom, fat people aren't, generally speaking, wanton gluttons. Many also carry disabilities that make it difficult or impossible to do the kind of strenuous aerobic exercise that helps fit people to maintain a healthy weight, without having to endure the discipline of an endless low energy diet.
It's also very easy to get big and a bloody damned sight harder to get it back off again. I speak from experience in this matter.
Obesity, like poverty (with which it is commonly associated,) is typically a result of misfortune rather than moral deficiency.
Plus it can be related to working environments as well. There's a reason there's a lot of overweight chefs for instance and its not because they can't cook. A lot of people doing long shifts away from home can rely upon takeaways more than they'd like if they were doing a different job.
And the shift from long hours of anaerobic work (agriculture, construction without power tools, early industry) to a sedentary knowledge-based economy has contributed too.
Do you mean aerobic?
No, anaerobic. Anaerobic activity burns fat more efficiently. The term seems to have become associated in the fitness world with sprints, but it is really brought on by high levels of exertion, e.g. by weightlifting. Think of how much heavy exertion all those jobs used to entail. I've just been pulling tree and vine roots out in my overgrown kitchen garden. Every bit as hard as max weight reps in the gym, and considerably more of them that during a typical visit to the gym.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
No, it will be under trial on the Isle of Wight later this week.
My mistake but it does not take away that HMG are arranging the trial
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
I wouldn't trust this Govt organising a pissup at an Irish wake....I hold nothing but contempt for their ability to acheive anything other than just talk utter gobshyte...
worst deaths, worst economy, clueless about lockdown, clueless about coming out, clueless about anything...oh, yes..one thing.. they agree on Brexit
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
I wouldn't trust this Govt organising a pissup at an Irish wake....I hold nothing but contempt for their ability to acheive anything other than just talk utter gobshyte...
worst deaths, worst economy, clueless about lockdown, clueless about coming out, clueless about anything...oh, yes..one thing.. they agree on Brexit
I expected your response Tyson but of more interest have you just changed your avatar
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
"In some ways [in the outbreak in china was never] there was never any exponential growth. From the minute I started looking at it, there were never any two days that exactly the same growth rate, and they were getting slower. The growth was always sub-exponential."
"Older people will "rebel and risk prison" if they are forced to remain in lockdown longer while restrictions are eased, a former Tory pensions minister has warned.
Conservative peer Baroness Altmann argued such a requirement would be "age discrimination" and could cost lives as well as threaten social unrest."
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Perhaps you're right, but I'd have marked him as doing ok in this.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Why wouldn't you count a test sent via the post using a same day courier service?
Are you thinking those who can't drive should simply not be tested?
On topic. He deserves it. Will be interesting to see if the usual parade of time servers, sycophants, donors and no marks get their gongs too. Trump is becoming dangerous. A significant number of his followers believe his Presidency is fulfilling prophecy. And presages the End.Times Hopefully he hasn't gone so far. But I wouldn't be at all surprised.
There are more folk who think like that than I find altogether comfortable. An American GP who I've been in touch with (through games) for many years, who always seemed very calm and level-headed, reveals that he and his wife joined a remote valley community 20 years ago to prepare for End Times, and feel their expectation has now started to come to pass. He expects it to become much worse, and is musing on his ability to hunt game and chop firewood.
America was founded on fruitcakes and loons escaping Europe.....
The only problem is that not all of the batshit crazies got away...a few unfortunately stayed, since thrived and inexplicably (thanks to David Cameron thinking he could control the fuckers) are now running the country...,
David Cameron is responsible for the current political situation in the US?
No...he's just responsible for letting these fuckwit crazies take over the Tory party...
Never underestimate a virus..the fruitcakes and loons... a case in point...
Now we have these tossers ruining the country causing bedlam and countless deaths at this moment in time....
Sorry old chap, misread your comment! Thought you were referring to the crazies over there are not the ones back home.
Gove is so much better at this kind of stuff than the likes of Raab.
Raab cannot lie as easily , he has a smidgeon of conscience, Gove on the other hand makes Boris look truthful and that is very hard indeed. The lying slimeball of Slimeballs.
Hey malc, I recall that you like a panzer. This is good with the sound turned up.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Why wouldn't you count a test sent via the post using a same day courier service?
Are you thinking those who can't drive should simply not be tested?
It really is quite bizarre, you would have thought they would welcome the massive increase in both capacity and eligibility.
"Older people will "rebel and risk prison" if they are forced to remain in lockdown longer while restrictions are eased, a former Tory pensions minister has warned.
Conservative peer Baroness Altmann argued such a requirement would be "age discrimination" and could cost lives as well as threaten social unrest."
"Older people will "rebel and risk prison" if they are forced to remain in lockdown longer while restrictions are eased, a former Tory pensions minister has warned.
Conservative peer Baroness Altmann argued such a requirement would be "age discrimination" and could cost lives as well as threaten social unrest."
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
"WHO urges countries to 'track and trace' every Covid-19 case. Advice comes day after UK decides to stop community tests and only test hospital cases." Published on Friday the 13th. Of March.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
I wouldn't trust this Govt organising a pissup at an Irish wake....I hold nothing but contempt for their ability to acheive anything other than just talk utter gobshyte...
worst deaths, worst economy, clueless about lockdown, clueless about coming out, clueless about anything...oh, yes..one thing.. they agree on Brexit
I expected your response Tyson but of more interest have you just changed your avatar
No..it is from a trip to the Grand Canyon some years ago...I like yours BigG....
On a serious point...all my Italian friends are now asking me now regularly how we have managed to get this so wrong? My mother in law is worried about my wife staying in England. Our complete shitness is sadly the talk of Europe....
Your Isle of Wight reference was lighting the fuse....
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
Some years ago I was waiting for a train run by Southern, when as frequently happened an announcement came it had been cancelled.
The announcer started, ‘This is because...’ but was drowned out by somebody shouting loudly, ‘because you’re shit.’
The same reason applies to this government.
This government has only been in power for months but they seem to keep beating expectations to me.
We were told they couldn't renegotiate the EU exit withdrawal agreement. They did.
We were told they couldn't get Parliament to agree to an early election. They did.
We were told they couldn't win a large election majority. They did.
We were told they couldn't exit the EU smoothly. They did.
We were told they couldn't get a hundred thousand tests. They did.
Not a bad record after a few months. What exactly has gone so badly wrong that they're shit?
1. The bar you have set must have been very low. 2. To Remainers it is seen as a poor Withdrwal Agreement even compared to Mrs May's deal. 3. Jeremy Corbyn is an idiot! 4. Jeremy Corbyn is an idiot! 5. We are still in transition, watch this space... 6. They didn't, even by their own standards until they changed them. 7. See 1 to 6 above.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Why wouldn't you count a test sent via the post using a same day courier service?
Are you thinking those who can't drive should simply not be tested?
It upsets BJO political agenda
However, the subject has moved as it is widely accepted Hancock achieved his target
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
"WHO urges countries to 'track and trace' every Covid-19 case. Advice comes day after UK decides to stop community tests and only test hospital cases." Published on Friday the 13th. Of March.
"Older people will "rebel and risk prison" if they are forced to remain in lockdown longer while restrictions are eased, a former Tory pensions minister has warned.
Conservative peer Baroness Altmann argued such a requirement would be "age discrimination" and could cost lives as well as threaten social unrest."
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Contrary to popular wisdom, fat people aren't, generally speaking, wanton gluttons. Many also carry disabilities that make it difficult or impossible to do the kind of strenuous aerobic exercise that helps fit people to maintain a healthy weight, without having to endure the discipline of an endless low energy diet.
It's also very easy to get big and a bloody damned sight harder to get it back off again. I speak from experience in this matter.
Obesity, like poverty (with which it is commonly associated,) is typically a result of misfortune rather than moral deficiency.
Plus it can be related to working environments as well. There's a reason there's a lot of overweight chefs for instance and its not because they can't cook. A lot of people doing long shifts away from home can rely upon takeaways more than they'd like if they were doing a different job.
And the shift from long hours of anaerobic work (agriculture, construction without power tools, early industry) to a sedentary knowledge-based economy has contributed too.
Do you mean aerobic?
No, anaerobic. Anaerobic activity burns fat more efficiently. The term seems to have become associated in the fitness world with sprints, but it is really brought on by high levels of exertion, e.g. by weightlifting. Think of how much heavy exertion all those jobs used to entail. I've just been pulling tree and vine roots out in my overgrown kitchen garden. Every bit as hard as max weight reps in the gym, and considerably more of them that during a typical visit to the gym.
Thanks for the explanation. So oxygen is not involved in burning fats in strenuous exercise. You live and learn. Btw coincidentally I was pulling up tree roots (wild cherry) in our garden last week - a very tough gig, I can confirm.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
I wouldn't trust this Govt organising a pissup at an Irish wake....I hold nothing but contempt for their ability to acheive anything other than just talk utter gobshyte...
worst deaths, worst economy, clueless about lockdown, clueless about coming out, clueless about anything...oh, yes..one thing.. they agree on Brexit
I expected your response Tyson but of more interest have you just changed your avatar
No..it is from a trip to the Grand Canyon some years ago...I like yours BigG....
On a serious point...all my Italian friends are now asking me now regularly how we have managed to get this so wrong? My mother in law is worried about my wife staying in England. Out complete shitness is sadly the talk of Europe....
Your Isle of Wight reference was lighting the fuse....
"Get this so wrong" What are they on about? Have they been watching the news in the UK relative to the scenes in Italy, or are they basing their assessment on what you are telling them?
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Perhaps you're right, but I'd have marked him as doing ok in this.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Perhaps you're right, but I'd have marked him as doing ok in this.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Perhaps you're right, but I'd have marked him as doing ok in this.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Perhaps you're right, but I'd have marked him as doing ok in this.
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
"WHO urges countries to 'track and trace' every Covid-19 case. Advice comes day after UK decides to stop community tests and only test hospital cases." Published on Friday the 13th. Of March.
He's a politician with an awful brief at the moment. The facts about how the UK has dealt with this are problematic for him. You can't win though when fighting an unknown in terms of choosing a perfect path.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
I wouldn't trust this Govt organising a pissup at an Irish wake....I hold nothing but contempt for their ability to acheive anything other than just talk utter gobshyte...
worst deaths, worst economy, clueless about lockdown, clueless about coming out, clueless about anything...oh, yes..one thing.. they agree on Brexit
I expected your response Tyson but of more interest have you just changed your avatar
No..it is from a trip to the Grand Canyon some years ago...I like yours BigG....
On a serious point...all my Italian friends are now asking me now regularly how we have managed to get this so wrong? My mother in law is worried about my wife staying in England. Out complete shitness is sadly the talk of Europe....
Your Isle of Wight reference was lighting the fuse....
"Get this so wrong" What are they on about? Have they been watching the news in the UK relative to the scenes in Italy, or are they basing their assessment on what you are telling them?
Maybe you haven't caught up with the news this last two months..but after having a couple of weeks advantage, and the best pandemic plan in the locker,.,.,,thanks to BoJo and his chums we now have the highest fatality rate and are completely clueless about extricating ourselves from the incoming economic, social and health meltdown....
It is not just the fact that we have the highest amount of deaths...we do not have a plan to get ourselves out of this shithole.....
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
Some years ago I was waiting for a train run by Southern, when as frequently happened an announcement came it had been cancelled.
The announcer started, ‘This is because...’ but was drowned out by somebody shouting loudly, ‘because you’re shit.’
The same reason applies to this government.
This government has only been in power for months but they seem to keep beating expectations to me.
We were told they couldn't renegotiate the EU exit withdrawal agreement. They did.
We were told they couldn't get Parliament to agree to an early election. They did.
We were told they couldn't win a large election majority. They did.
We were told they couldn't exit the EU smoothly. They did.
We were told they couldn't get a hundred thousand tests. They did.
Not a bad record after a few months. What exactly has gone so badly wrong that they're shit?
They have failed to invent time travel, go back to just before the Referendum and allow all those Remainers who sat on their arses expecting our staying in the EU was a foregone conclusion to actually get out and try and persuade people of the merits of the EU this time. Assuaging their guilt at letting Brexit happen on their watch in the process.
Deliver all that - and they might not be seen as so shit.
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
"WHO urges countries to 'track and trace' every Covid-19 case. Advice comes day after UK decides to stop community tests and only test hospital cases." Published on Friday the 13th. Of March.
That was when we didn't have the capacity to track and trace every case anymore. In case you missed it the government's spent over a month building that capacity.
So what's your point? The government's spent a month building capacity to do what you/the WHO want, is that your point?
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Perhaps you're right, but I'd have marked him as doing ok in this.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Why wouldn't you count a test sent via the post using a same day courier service?
Are you thinking those who can't drive should simply not be tested?
It upsets BJO political agenda
However, the subject has moved as it is widely accepted Hancock achieved his target
Only in the minds of simpletons and rabid Tory supporters, every sane person knows the truth.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
I wouldn't trust this Govt organising a pissup at an Irish wake....I hold nothing but contempt for their ability to acheive anything other than just talk utter gobshyte...
worst deaths, worst economy, clueless about lockdown, clueless about coming out, clueless about anything...oh, yes..one thing.. they agree on Brexit
I expected your response Tyson but of more interest have you just changed your avatar
No..it is from a trip to the Grand Canyon some years ago...I like yours BigG....
On a serious point...all my Italian friends are now asking me now regularly how we have managed to get this so wrong? My mother in law is worried about my wife staying in England. Out complete shitness is sadly the talk of Europe....
Your Isle of Wight reference was lighting the fuse....
"Get this so wrong" What are they on about? Have they been watching the news in the UK relative to the scenes in Italy, or are they basing their assessment on what you are telling them?
Maybe you haven't caught up with the news this last two months..but after having a couple of weeks advantage, and the best pandemic plan in the locker,.,.,,thanks to BoJo and his chums we now have the highest fatality rate and are completely clueless about extricating ourselves from the incoming economic, social and health meltdown....
It is not just the fact that we have the highest amount of deaths...we do not have a plan to get ourselves out of this shithole.....
I don't know what news you are watching.....
Yet still managed to avoid the scenes that were seen in Italy.
It looks like a regionalised mechanism for easing restrictions may be in the pipeline. Northern Ireland is looking at a slightly different timeline versus other parts of the UK.
Re: restrictions on older people. Given the evidence on, and lets not mince our words, fat people and their higher death/hospitalisation rate, shouldn't they be subject to the possibility of tighter restrictions if older people are too?
Personally I think they should. A fit healthy 70 year old doesn't deserve to be tagged as any more a problem than a fat 40 year old. If you want to do this on science, older people, the obese and those with underlying conditions have notably higher risk of serious illness. There is probably quite a bit of overlap between the first two and number three.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Why wouldn't you count a test sent via the post using a same day courier service?
Are you thinking those who can't drive should simply not be tested?
How many of the tests counted as tests are unprocessed by a Lab.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
I wouldn't trust this Govt organising a pissup at an Irish wake....I hold nothing but contempt for their ability to acheive anything other than just talk utter gobshyte...
worst deaths, worst economy, clueless about lockdown, clueless about coming out, clueless about anything...oh, yes..one thing.. they agree on Brexit
I expected your response Tyson but of more interest have you just changed your avatar
No..it is from a trip to the Grand Canyon some years ago...I like yours BigG....
On a serious point...all my Italian friends are now asking me now regularly how we have managed to get this so wrong? My mother in law is worried about my wife staying in England. Our complete shitness is sadly the talk of Europe....
Your Isle of Wight reference was lighting the fuse....
Hi Tyson.
I recognised your Grand Canyon and mine is a poor imitation of the scene from the Titanic taken on a beautiful sailing yacht in a strong wind on a lake in Nova Scotia last Autumn
It is too early to call the rights and wrongs but mistakes were made and will continue to be made by all governments as they fight this disease
The tests in the Isle of Wight this coming week are important so I cannot understand why it 'lighted the fuse'
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Why wouldn't you count a test sent via the post using a same day courier service?
Are you thinking those who can't drive should simply not be tested?
It really is quite bizarre, you would have thought they would welcome the massive increase in both capacity and eligibility.
Fake as a Tory, just cannot help lying , it is despicable. What kind of idiots got these cheating lying wasters elected.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Why wouldn't you count a test sent via the post using a same day courier service?
Are you thinking those who can't drive should simply not be tested?
How many of the tests counted as tests are unprocessed by a Lab.
Over 100k ?
Over 10% of the total test numbers?
Over 20%?
Honestly, does that really matter? They are sent back a day later and processed.
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
"WHO urges countries to 'track and trace' every Covid-19 case. Advice comes day after UK decides to stop community tests and only test hospital cases." Published on Friday the 13th. Of March.
Because it was pointless at that sage with the capacity available at the time.
Yes, the management of the expansion of test capacity was absymal for months, throwing away the opportunity to retrieve the situation after a failure to plan for an epidemic. But was it pointless to make no effort to at least ramp up the tracing of contacts, so that they could be warned to isolate? And why did it take until the end of April for the Government just to announce its intention to recruit people to do just that?
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Why wouldn't you count a test sent via the post using a same day courier service?
Are you thinking those who can't drive should simply not be tested?
It really is quite bizarre, you would have thought they would welcome the massive increase in both capacity and eligibility.
Fake as a Tory, just cannot help lying , it is despicable. What kind of idiots got these cheating lying wasters elected.
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Contrary to popular wisdom, fat people aren't, generally speaking, wanton gluttons. Many also carry disabilities that make it difficult or impossible to do the kind of strenuous aerobic exercise that helps fit people to maintain a healthy weight, without having to endure the discipline of an endless low energy diet.
It's also very easy to get big and a bloody damned sight harder to get it back off again. I speak from experience in this matter.
Obesity, like poverty (with which it is commonly associated,) is typically a result of misfortune rather than moral deficiency.
Plus it can be related to working environments as well. There's a reason there's a lot of overweight chefs for instance and its not because they can't cook. A lot of people doing long shifts away from home can rely upon takeaways more than they'd like if they were doing a different job.
And the shift from long hours of anaerobic work (agriculture, construction without power tools, early industry) to a sedentary knowledge-based economy has contributed too.
Do you mean aerobic?
No, anaerobic. Anaerobic activity burns fat more efficiently. The term seems to have become associated in the fitness world with sprints, but it is really brought on by high levels of exertion, e.g. by weightlifting. Think of how much heavy exertion all those jobs used to entail. I've just been pulling tree and vine roots out in my overgrown kitchen garden. Every bit as hard as max weight reps in the gym, and considerably more of them that during a typical visit to the gym.
Thanks for the explanation. So oxygen is not involved in burning fats in strenuous exercise. You live and learn. Btw coincidentally I was pulling up tree roots (wild cherry) in our garden last week - a very tough gig, I can confirm.
Eh? Even anaerobic glycolysis in strenuous exercise building up an oxygen debt consumes oxygen eventually - when the pyrivate produced is consumed in the same Krebs cycle as uses up proteins and fats. Or so I was taught. What am I missing?
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Perhaps you're right, but I'd have marked him as doing ok in this.
It's the weekend, so demand at the drive through sites and in hospitals is lower. Doesn't take a genius to work that out.
What, cos all the peepuls are doing important leisure time stuff?
Possibly childcare? No schools at the weekend, even if you are a health service worker.
People a) collecting samples; b) processing samples; c) collating data, also need days off and these will be enriched for at weekends. This trend is seen across most European countries.
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
Some years ago I was waiting for a train run by Southern, when as frequently happened an announcement came it had been cancelled.
The announcer started, ‘This is because...’ but was drowned out by somebody shouting loudly, ‘because you’re shit.’
The same reason applies to this government.
This government has only been in power for months but they seem to keep beating expectations to me.
We were told they couldn't renegotiate the EU exit withdrawal agreement. They did.
We were told they couldn't get Parliament to agree to an early election. They did.
We were told they couldn't win a large election majority. They did.
We were told they couldn't exit the EU smoothly. They did.
We were told they couldn't get a hundred thousand tests. They did.
Not a bad record after a few months. What exactly has gone so badly wrong that they're shit?
Not sure whether Johnson had no idea what he was signing up to in the revised Withdrawal Agreement or he had no intention of implementing it. Either way we're heading to the mother of screw ups. The "negotiation" with the EU won't be about future or current arrangements, it will be a massive dispute about breach of treaty.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Perhaps you're right, but I'd have marked him as doing ok in this.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Perhaps you're right, but I'd have marked him as doing ok in this.
No doubt malcy will be along to tell us that Hancock is personally taking busloads of them from hospitals in London and dropping them at Gretna Green.....
"Older people will "rebel and risk prison" if they are forced to remain in lockdown longer while restrictions are eased, a former Tory pensions minister has warned.
Conservative peer Baroness Altmann argued such a requirement would be "age discrimination" and could cost lives as well as threaten social unrest."
No she hasn't. *Metabolic health* counts considerably more than chronological age. One could think of it as one's true biological age. Look it up.
Prince Charles (71) had it, with very mild symptoms. Camilla (72) possibly had it with no symptoms. Or she might be genetically immune. Either way, she didn't get ill.
It looks like a regionalised mechanism for easing restrictions may be in the pipeline. Northern Ireland is looking at a slightly different timeline versus other parts of the UK.
Re: restrictions on older people. Given the evidence on, and lets not mince our words, fat people and their higher death/hospitalisation rate, shouldn't they be subject to the possibility of tighter restrictions if older people are too?
Personally I think they should. A fit healthy 70 year old doesn't deserve to be tagged as any more a problem than a fat 40 year old. If you want to do this on science, older people, the obese and those with underlying conditions have notably higher risk of serious illness. There is probably quite a bit of overlap between the first two and number three.
Ok if you want to do this on science what is the scientific risk for a fit, healthy 70 year old ... And what is the risk for a fat 40 year old? Numbers please since you said one was more risk than the other please quantify that.
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
Some years ago I was waiting for a train run by Southern, when as frequently happened an announcement came it had been cancelled.
The announcer started, ‘This is because...’ but was drowned out by somebody shouting loudly, ‘because you’re shit.’
The same reason applies to this government.
This government has only been in power for months but they seem to keep beating expectations to me.
We were told they couldn't renegotiate the EU exit withdrawal agreement. They did.
We were told they couldn't get Parliament to agree to an early election. They did.
We were told they couldn't win a large election majority. They did.
We were told they couldn't exit the EU smoothly. They did.
We were told they couldn't get a hundred thousand tests. They did.
Not a bad record after a few months. What exactly has gone so badly wrong that they're shit?
Not sure whether Johnson had no idea what he was signing up to in the revised Withdrawal Agreement or he had no intention of implementing it. Either way we're heading to the mother of screw ups. The "negotiation" with the EU won't be about future or current arrangements, it will be a massive dispute about breach of treaty.
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Contrary to popular wisdom, fat people aren't, generally speaking, wanton gluttons. Many also carry disabilities that make it difficult or impossible to do the kind of strenuous aerobic exercise that helps fit people to maintain a healthy weight, without having to endure the discipline of an endless low energy diet.
It's also very easy to get big and a bloody damned sight harder to get it back off again. I speak from experience in this matter.
Obesity, like poverty (with which it is commonly associated,) is typically a result of misfortune rather than moral deficiency.
Plus it can be related to working environments as well. There's a reason there's a lot of overweight chefs for instance and its not because they can't cook. A lot of people doing long shifts away from home can rely upon takeaways more than they'd like if they were doing a different job.
And the shift from long hours of anaerobic work (agriculture, construction without power tools, early industry) to a sedentary knowledge-based economy has contributed too.
Do you mean aerobic?
No, anaerobic. Anaerobic activity burns fat more efficiently. The term seems to have become associated in the fitness world with sprints, but it is really brought on by high levels of exertion, e.g. by weightlifting. Think of how much heavy exertion all those jobs used to entail. I've just been pulling tree and vine roots out in my overgrown kitchen garden. Every bit as hard as max weight reps in the gym, and considerably more of them that during a typical visit to the gym.
Thanks for the explanation. So oxygen is not involved in burning fats in strenuous exercise. You live and learn. Btw coincidentally I was pulling up tree roots (wild cherry) in our garden last week - a very tough gig, I can confirm.
Eh? Even anaerobic glycolysis in strenuous exercise building up an oxygen debt consumes oxygen eventually - when the pyrivate produced is consumed in the same Krebs cycle as uses up proteins and fats. Or so I was taught. What am I missing?
Bamboo and Mint, clearance of. Over the last couple of years this raised bed has been left mainly to mint, bamboo and pots. How can this be recovered for veg?
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Disgusting comment.
People can be overweight not because of not wanting to live, but simply due to enjoying life a bit too much. Enjoying food too much.
BMI 40 may not be good for you, but that equates to about 18 stone for the average man - a lot and an unhealthy amount sure but not absurdly overweight to the point of can't live.
I am seriously overweight and it is all down to alcohol and eating. I have enjoyed getting to where I am immensely. That said, I am also doing 65 press ups and sit ups every other day, as well as 75 squats and lounges. It is a horrific way to spend 20 minutes, but I think it helps!
One day below 100k matters not. There is only an issue is we start to see day after day next week.
How many unprocessed tests counted as tests do you think we have Francis?
My question is: why does this matter? The boffins analysing the data have access to far more than we do in the public, so missing specimens isn't an issue.
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
"WHO urges countries to 'track and trace' every Covid-19 case. Advice comes day after UK decides to stop community tests and only test hospital cases." Published on Friday the 13th. Of March.
That was when we didn't have the capacity to track and trace every case anymore. In case you missed it the government's spent over a month building that capacity.
So what's your point? The government's spent a month building capacity to do what you/the WHO want, is that your point?
The recognition of the need to expand testing and the subsequent achievement of that expansion was far too late, that's the point. The announcement of the expansion was only made 3 weeks after test and trace was abandoned, on 2nd April. And even you have to admit that results were very slow to bear fruit, with very little change in the numbers until the final week before the deadline.
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Contrary to popular wisdom, fat people aren't, generally speaking, wanton gluttons. Many also carry disabilities that make it difficult or impossible to do the kind of strenuous aerobic exercise that helps fit people to maintain a healthy weight, without having to endure the discipline of an endless low energy diet.
It's also very easy to get big and a bloody damned sight harder to get it back off again. I speak from experience in this matter.
Obesity, like poverty (with which it is commonly associated,) is typically a result of misfortune rather than moral deficiency.
Plus it can be related to working environments as well. There's a reason there's a lot of overweight chefs for instance and its not because they can't cook. A lot of people doing long shifts away from home can rely upon takeaways more than they'd like if they were doing a different job.
And the shift from long hours of anaerobic work (agriculture, construction without power tools, early industry) to a sedentary knowledge-based economy has contributed too.
Do you mean aerobic?
No, anaerobic. Anaerobic activity burns fat more efficiently. The term seems to have become associated in the fitness world with sprints, but it is really brought on by high levels of exertion, e.g. by weightlifting. Think of how much heavy exertion all those jobs used to entail. I've just been pulling tree and vine roots out in my overgrown kitchen garden. Every bit as hard as max weight reps in the gym, and considerably more of them that during a typical visit to the gym.
Thanks for the explanation. So oxygen is not involved in burning fats in strenuous exercise. You live and learn. Btw coincidentally I was pulling up tree roots (wild cherry) in our garden last week - a very tough gig, I can confirm.
Eh? Even anaerobic glycolysis in strenuous exercise building up an oxygen debt consumes oxygen eventually - when the pyrivate produced is consumed in the same Krebs cycle as uses up proteins and fats. Or so I was taught. What am I missing?
Can't answer. I'm an ingenu on this topic.
Thanks anyway - it's still good exercise whatever the rationale.
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
Some years ago I was waiting for a train run by Southern, when as frequently happened an announcement came it had been cancelled.
The announcer started, ‘This is because...’ but was drowned out by somebody shouting loudly, ‘because you’re shit.’
The same reason applies to this government.
This government has only been in power for months but they seem to keep beating expectations to me.
We were told they couldn't renegotiate the EU exit withdrawal agreement. They did.
We were told they couldn't get Parliament to agree to an early election. They did.
We were told they couldn't win a large election majority. They did.
We were told they couldn't exit the EU smoothly. They did.
We were told they couldn't get a hundred thousand tests. They did.
Not a bad record after a few months. What exactly has gone so badly wrong that they're shit?
You are easily fooled, I have a nice bridge here I could sell you.
No the whining here from people who where formerly known as Remainers comes across as just bitterness. It's as if Scotland had voted Yes, as if we had just seen Scotland leave and everyone here was ranting about how shit Scotland's Prime Minister Salmond is.
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
"WHO urges countries to 'track and trace' every Covid-19 case. Advice comes day after UK decides to stop community tests and only test hospital cases." Published on Friday the 13th. Of March.
Because it was pointless at that sage with the capacity available at the time.
Yes, the management of the expansion of test capacity was absymal for months, throwing away the opportunity to retrieve the situation after a failure to plan for an epidemic. But was it pointless to make no effort to at least ramp up the tracing of contacts, so that they could be warned to isolate? And why did it take until the end of April for the Government just to announce its intention to recruit people to do just that?
No...we had the best plan for a pandemic in the world...shut down, control, track and trace.....
we just ignored it...
the problem is we didn't have a Govt that believed in the power of the state when it was required.... instead we had people who thought we needed to prioritise keeping pubs and airports open....
those few weeks have really fucked us up....now god only knows how and when we come out safely...we are so much on the back foot that our only strategy to see how other countries are doing it....
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Why wouldn't you count a test sent via the post using a same day courier service?
Are you thinking those who can't drive should simply not be tested?
It really is quite bizarre, you would have thought they would welcome the massive increase in both capacity and eligibility.
Fake as a Tory, just cannot help lying , it is despicable. What kind of idiots got these cheating lying wasters elected.
Sorry, I'm lying?
Gove, Hancock , etc, nothing personal apart from you are a very silly boy supporting these monsters.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Why wouldn't you count a test sent via the post using a same day courier service?
Are you thinking those who can't drive should simply not be tested?
It really is quite bizarre, you would have thought they would welcome the massive increase in both capacity and eligibility.
Fake as a Tory, just cannot help lying , it is despicable. What kind of idiots got these cheating lying wasters elected.
Sorry, I'm lying?
Gove, Hancock , etc, nothing personal apart from you are a very silly boy supporting these monsters.
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
Some years ago I was waiting for a train run by Southern, when as frequently happened an announcement came it had been cancelled.
The announcer started, ‘This is because...’ but was drowned out by somebody shouting loudly, ‘because you’re shit.’
The same reason applies to this government.
This government has only been in power for months but they seem to keep beating expectations to me.
We were told they couldn't renegotiate the EU exit withdrawal agreement. They did.
We were told they couldn't get Parliament to agree to an early election. They did.
We were told they couldn't win a large election majority. They did.
We were told they couldn't exit the EU smoothly. They did.
We were told they couldn't get a hundred thousand tests. They did.
Not a bad record after a few months. What exactly has gone so badly wrong that they're shit?
You are easily fooled, I have a nice bridge here I could sell you.
No the whining here from people who where formerly known as Remainers comes across as just bitterness. It's as if Scotland had voted Yes, as if we had just seen Scotland leave and everyone here was ranting about how shit Scotland's Prime Minister Salmond is.
One day below 100k matters not. There is only an issue is we start to see day after day next week.
How many unprocessed tests counted as tests do you think we have Francis?
My question is: why does this matter? The boffins analysing the data have access to far more than we do in the public, so missing specimens isn't an issue.
So if we post 5 million tests out tomorrow and only 5,000 are reported as positive overall will we a)Have beaten this?
b) Have any idea whether we have beaten this
c) Need to start a track and trace system to find which tests are where?
Counting a test when its processed just gives us a clear picture of where we are at in terms of Community Spread.
The methodology we have now makes it a lot harder.
One day below 100k matters not. There is only an issue is we start to see day after day next week.
I'm still of the view the number of people being tested is far more important than the actual number of tests. Do we have any information as to how many people were tested yesterday?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
"WHO urges countries to 'track and trace' every Covid-19 case. Advice comes day after UK decides to stop community tests and only test hospital cases." Published on Friday the 13th. Of March.
Because it was pointless at that sage with the capacity available at the time.
Yes, the management of the expansion of test capacity was absymal for months, throwing away the opportunity to retrieve the situation after a failure to plan for an epidemic. But was it pointless to make no effort to at least ramp up the tracing of contacts, so that they could be warned to isolate? And why did it take until the end of April for the Government just to announce its intention to recruit people to do just that?
No...we had the best plan for a pandemic in the world...shut down, control, track and trace.....
we just ignored it...
the problem is we didn't have a Govt that believed in the power of the state when it was required.... instead we had people who thought we needed to prioritise keeping pubs and airports open....
those few weeks have really fucked us up....now god only knows how and when we come out safely...we are so much on the back foot that our only strategy to see how other countries are doing it....
That was in the pandemic plan? Have you got a link to it as I was under the impression the plan for pandemic influenza was herd immunity.
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
"WHO urges countries to 'track and trace' every Covid-19 case. Advice comes day after UK decides to stop community tests and only test hospital cases." Published on Friday the 13th. Of March.
That was when we didn't have the capacity to track and trace every case anymore. In case you missed it the government's spent over a month building that capacity.
So what's your point? The government's spent a month building capacity to do what you/the WHO want, is that your point?
The recognition of the need to expand testing and the subsequent achievement of that expansion was far too late, that's the point. The announcement of the expansion was only made 3 weeks after test and trace was abandoned, on 2nd April. And even you have to admit that results were very slow to bear fruit, with very little change in the numbers until the final week before the deadline.
Testing was already being expanded by that point. It was only when the target was set that a public target was set sure but numbers had already been going up. And do you think there was no consideration of testing numbers before the press conference where it was announced?
Numbers were slow because it takes time to build capacity. I've worked on projects before and understand how it works you work for weeks or months to build something and then you use it. That the numbers came online in the final week to me does not seem a coincidence - it seems to me that when he announced the numbers and date work had already been done to identify when the capacity could come online. The fact it came online when he said it would rather demonstates precisely how much work was already done before the announcement rather than countermanding it.
One day below 100k matters not. There is only an issue is we start to see day after day next week.
How many unprocessed tests counted as tests do you think we have Francis?
My question is: why does this matter? The boffins analysing the data have access to far more than we do in the public, so missing specimens isn't an issue.
So if we post 5 million tests out tomorrow and only 5,000 are reported as positive overall will we a)Have beaten this?
b) Have any idea whether we have beaten this
c) Need to start a track and trace system to find which tests are where?
Counting a test when its processed just gives us a clear picture of where we are at in terms of Community Spread.
The methodology we have now makes it a lot harder.
You really think they don't keep track of what has been sent, when it was sent, and who it was sent to? Do you think they are doing all their planning based on the numbers we get at the daily briefing, and only those numbers?
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Perhaps you're right, but I'd have marked him as doing ok in this.
It's the weekend, so demand at the drive through sites and in hospitals is lower. Doesn't take a genius to work that out.
What, cos all the peepuls are doing important leisure time stuff?
Possibly childcare? No schools at the weekend, even if you are a health service worker.
People a) collecting samples; b) processing samples; c) collating data, also need days off and these will be enriched for at weekends. This trend is seen across most European countries.
So planned then? Better explanation than 'lack of demand' bullshit I guess.
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Disgusting comment.
People can be overweight not because of not wanting to live, but simply due to enjoying life a bit too much. Enjoying food too much.
BMI 40 may not be good for you, but that equates to about 18 stone for the average man - a lot and an unhealthy amount sure but not absurdly overweight to the point of can't live.
I am seriously overweight and it is all down to alcohol and eating. I have enjoyed getting to where I am immensely. That said, I am also doing 65 press ups and sit ups every other day, as well as 75 squats and lounges. It is a horrific way to spend 20 minutes, but I think it helps!
Surely cardio is better for losing weight?
Its a mix, resistance training of any kind (body weight, weights, or bands or whatever don't matter) is just as important because they help maintain muscle mass which is very important for helping the body burn calories especially as people get older.
What may be considered standard cardio works because its burning calories but needs to be graded with increased work to keep knocking the fat off. That intensity can be seen in two ways, length of work and/or intensity. The problem with that after a while is doesn't help the muscle mass.
Both combined are better than a focus on one. The problem with exercise is so much of if is about 'the shortcut', every form claims its better calorie burning in a shorter time of effort. To keep it simple just mixing things up and doing whatever it is to sufficient intensity (i.e. you got to have pushed it a a bit, whatever your fitness) is the basic rule to work by.
Grant Shapps has come up with the helpful suggestion of staggering working hours. Whether he genuinely believes there is a "rush hour" any more I don't know but in my part of London the underground is busy from 6am to 9am heading into town.
MY guesstimate is the tube could run at 15% of normal passenger levels and that would allow reasonable social distancing but a lot more people use it. Re-opening construction sites will increase passenger numbers let alone other sectors which can't be governed by home working.
Currently on National Rail trains are running up and down the lines empty or nearly empty so there is capacity available but looking at the trains coming into Waterloo or Victoria of a morning and you see the social distancing issues.
London buses are now free and I'm told some of them are running pretty full as it is a useful way of those who either don't care about or believe they have no choice but to break the lock down are using them. Car traffic is around 40% of normal but has crept up slightly in the past week.
Public transport is the Big Problem. Not everyone drives to work. Yet on a bus or train you cannot separate yourself out enough for the powers that be to deem it safe, and without public transport people can't be ordered back to work and the economy can't attempt a restart.
The suggestion of a 1m spacing - would that make enough of a difference?
Suddenly a bus that sat 60 people now sits 15 or if in couples 20. It's still not going to work.
However most buses around here seem to have zero people on them so I wonder why Arriva are still running them.
Well then we're fucked. They can't transport people to work safely which means we can't go back to work. So unless we see a sudden drop in infection rates / the virus mutates to safe then we will face fun choices: 1. Government says "you have to go back to work regardless of the risk. We're cutting off your support" 2. Government says "we said whatever it takes and we meant it. Its Not Safe to have a full return to work or a full resumption in our Schools. Here's an endless supply of cash to keep you at home"
Why would it need to be endless?
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
It is already under trial in the Isle of Wight
Hancock Test Track & Trace strategy
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
Perhaps you're right, but I'd have marked him as doing ok in this.
It's the weekend, so demand at the drive through sites and in hospitals is lower. Doesn't take a genius to work that out.
What, cos all the peepuls are doing important leisure time stuff?
Possibly childcare? No schools at the weekend, even if you are a health service worker.
People a) collecting samples; b) processing samples; c) collating data, also need days off and these will be enriched for at weekends. This trend is seen across most European countries.
So planned then? Better than lack of demand bullshit I guess.
I started cardio with a skipping rope yesterday. After only 10 minutes yesterday, I’ve got muscles sore today I didn’t even know I had. I highly recommend.
As might be expected, the re-opening of some DIY stores and some fast food establishments has drawn people out of lock down.
Trying to use that as a rationale for a mass return to work is interesting - the transport systems in London and elsewhere could not cope and to what extent are companies with offices prepared for social distancing?
Most of the clients with whom I am working have not been happy to hear their offices can only function at 40% capacity to maintain social distancing - the situation is worse in meeting rooms as people tend to sit much closer.
I'm now waiting for some Government minister to tell me it's my patriotic duty to go back to the office even though I can work quite happily at home.
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
Some years ago I was waiting for a train run by Southern, when as frequently happened an announcement came it had been cancelled.
The announcer started, ‘This is because...’ but was drowned out by somebody shouting loudly, ‘because you’re shit.’
The same reason applies to this government.
This government has only been in power for months but they seem to keep beating expectations to me.
We were told they couldn't renegotiate the EU exit withdrawal agreement. They did.
We were told they couldn't get Parliament to agree to an early election. They did.
We were told they couldn't win a large election majority. They did.
We were told they couldn't exit the EU smoothly. They did.
We were told they couldn't get a hundred thousand tests. They did.
Not a bad record after a few months. What exactly has gone so badly wrong that they're shit?
You are easily fooled, I have a nice bridge here I could sell you.
No the whining here from people who where formerly known as Remainers comes across as just bitterness. It's as if Scotland had voted Yes, as if we had just seen Scotland leave and everyone here was ranting about how shit Scotland's Prime Minister Salmond is.
As might be expected, the re-opening of some DIY stores and some fast food establishments has drawn people out of lock down.
Trying to use that as a rationale for a mass return to work is interesting - the transport systems in London and elsewhere could not cope and to what extent are companies with offices prepared for social distancing?
Most of the clients with whom I am working have not been happy to hear their offices can only function at 40% capacity to maintain social distancing - the situation is worse in meeting rooms as people tend to sit much closer.
I'm now waiting for some Government minister to tell me it's my patriotic duty to go back to the office even though I can work quite happily at home.
If you can work from home I doubt the government will be asking you to go into the office any time soon.
"Pregnant women, people over the age of 70 and those with certain health conditions should consider the advice "particularly important", he (the PM) said.
People in at-risk groups will be asked within days to stay home for 12 weeks."
The natural assumption was that at risk groups were the above categories, yet those groups were defined differently but only by the following week.
My parents think they need to shelter for 12 weeks, presumably on that basis, and clearly they werent alone in that misunderstanding.
Those are two separate sentences, and classes of people.
Yes I can see that now, but specifying the first group one week before specifying the second group has clearly caused mass confusion, hence the Sunday Times article.
Little harm done by it as everyone is on lockdown now, but poor communication in explaining this from the govt (it has generally been good imo).
The formatting of a BBC article is hardly the fault of the government, the same with a times article. The advice is clearly stated on HMGs website. Those who needed the specific advice to stay at home for 12 weeks were each informed individually by letter.
When the formal advice came it was different to what had been trailed the week before. Fewer people were told to shield. However this change was not pointed out explicitly, so people who had paid more attention to the first announcement will have assumed that the initial criteria applied.
Wasn't the advice always that the most vulnerable would be the ones asked to shelter? I don't think they ever lumped all over-70s into that category.
They did include all over 70s in the pre announcement, but this changed by the time it was implemented.
Yes, I was worried it might apply to everyone who gets a flu jab on medical grounds, but for that group it became "follow social distancing especially stringently"
And the ridiculousness of basing it on influenza when we have seen how utterly different it is in its effect is still not being addressed. The lists have become a joke, bearing no real connection to the reality of this virus.
Research is being done, for example the growing realisation that pre-diabetics and the overweight (even people with a BMI as low as 30) can be at risk. A BMI of 40 and you're brown bread. In my case I'm hoping a cardiology appointment can give me an all-clear although how long it will take to organise one I don't know. I could probably afford to pay for a private consultation, but not for an angiogram if one is called for.
A BMI of 30 is the threshold at which "normal" folk (i.e. most people, except for muscular athletes for whom BMI is a very poor measure) transition from being merely overweight to obese. So 30 is not a low value; it's simply that the average person in the UK is now overweight, so it may not seem as excessive as it actually is. 40 is very obese and, based on my limited layman's knowledge, I would've thought there would be a good argument for getting anyone in that category to shield.
Or let Darwin do his work with the fatsos
BMI of 40 is ridiculous. This person does not want to live anyway
Disgusting comment.
People can be overweight not because of not wanting to live, but simply due to enjoying life a bit too much. Enjoying food too much.
BMI 40 may not be good for you, but that equates to about 18 stone for the average man - a lot and an unhealthy amount sure but not absurdly overweight to the point of can't live.
I am seriously overweight and it is all down to alcohol and eating. I have enjoyed getting to where I am immensely. That said, I am also doing 65 press ups and sit ups every other day, as well as 75 squats and lounges. It is a horrific way to spend 20 minutes, but I think it helps!
Surely cardio is better for losing weight?
Its a mix, resistance training of any kind (body weight, weights, or bands or whatever don't matter) is just as important because they help maintain muscle mass which is very important for helping the body burn calories especially as people get older.
What may be considered standard cardio works because its burning calories but needs to be graded with increased work to keep knocking the fat off. That intensity can be seen in two ways, length of work and/or intensity. The problem with that after a while is doesn't help the muscle mass.
Both combined are better than a focus on one. The problem with exercise is so much of if is about 'the shortcut', every form claims its better calorie burning in a shorter time of effort. To keep it simple just mixing things up and doing whatever it is to sufficient intensity (i.e. you got to have pushed it a a bit, whatever your fitness) is the basic rule to work by.
Reducing calorie intake is the way to lose weight. Exercise has a host of benefits, but isn't the primary route to shedding pounds.
I've lost half a stone since going into lockdown. Primarily due to less snacking, particularly chocolate. And no Greggs!
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
"WHO urges countries to 'track and trace' every Covid-19 case. Advice comes day after UK decides to stop community tests and only test hospital cases." Published on Friday the 13th. Of March.
Because it was pointless at that sage with the capacity available at the time.
Yes, the management of the expansion of test capacity was absymal for months, throwing away the opportunity to retrieve the situation after a failure to plan for an epidemic. But was it pointless to make no effort to at least ramp up the tracing of contacts, so that they could be warned to isolate? And why did it take until the end of April for the Government just to announce its intention to recruit people to do just that?
No...we had the best plan for a pandemic in the world...shut down, control, track and trace.....
we just ignored it...
the problem is we didn't have a Govt that believed in the power of the state when it was required.... instead we had people who thought we needed to prioritise keeping pubs and airports open....
those few weeks have really fucked us up....now god only knows how and when we come out safely...we are so much on the back foot that our only strategy to see how other countries are doing it....
If shutting down the country every time an an epidemic broke anywhere in the world was part of the plan we would be on roughly the 7th or 8th shutdown so far this century having already locked down for SARS, MERS, Ebola and all the others. Get real.
Late Corbyn-Early Starmer, leader ratings wise, is very similar to late Brown-early Miliband I think? I could only find Browns to end of 2009 when he was -40, similar to latter day Corbyn. Starmer and Ed both seem to be high teens positive, Starmer a bit higher on average
The Brown to Miliband comparisons are probably inelegant as you're comparing the PM at the end of thirteen years of Labour government and the GFC to a new LOTO.
Plus Miliband also had a boost because of a significant chunk of Lib Dems were appalled their party had gone into coalition with the Blue meanies and were about to increase tuition fees.
Inelegant!
Well they’re both replacing leaders who’d just lost GEs with -40 ratings at least.
With sufficient test, track and trace it should be possible to replace lockdown with containment.
This government are going to organise test track and trace? This government...
Yes. Why not this government?
Some years ago I was waiting for a train run by Southern, when as frequently happened an announcement came it had been cancelled.
The announcer started, ‘This is because...’ but was drowned out by somebody shouting loudly, ‘because you’re shit.’
The same reason applies to this government.
This government has only been in power for months but they seem to keep beating expectations to me.
We were told they couldn't renegotiate the EU exit withdrawal agreement. They did.
We were told they couldn't get Parliament to agree to an early election. They did.
We were told they couldn't win a large election majority. They did.
We were told they couldn't exit the EU smoothly. They did.
We were told they couldn't get a hundred thousand tests. They did.
Not a bad record after a few months. What exactly has gone so badly wrong that they're shit?
1) Well, my general expectations were a party split, Johnson bumbling along with incoherence and not knowing what he was doing, and a cabinet full of bullies and liars. So I would say those have been broadly met.
2) The ‘renegotiation’ was actually a caving in to the EU on every important point. It is of course possible that Johnson and Cummings don’t realise this - Cummings has been caught out like that before.
3) They did spend a lot of time failing to get agreement to an early election. Corbyn and Swinson caved in because, unwisely, they thought they had got what they wanted and could win.
4) I personally always thought it possible that anyone could beat Corbyn. Heck, even May managed it. And even Aaron Bastani admitted Labour were dire. Johnson ran a dismal campaign, but he was alert enough to avoid he hostages to fortune May had given. I will admit, that said, the size of the majority was a surprise to me.
5) We have left, but we’re still in transition so we haven’t actually felt the effects of leaving. This point remains in abeyance until that is over. I will agree it put that silliness about revoke that those morons at the European Courts came up with to cause maximum chaos and confusion to bed, but since that should never, ever have been invented I can’t give Johnson much credit for it.
6) My understanding is that they still haven’t. If I’m wrong, please correct me and I will be pleased.
This is a poor government, which to misquote Baldwin contains second class intellects with second class characters. It has exceeded expectations insofar as it continues not to collapse in an embarrassing help, but even Trump’s not quite got to that stage yet.
If you can work from home I doubt the government will be asking you to go into the office any time soon.
The question will be the extent to which we will be pressurised to try to the status quo ante pestilentum given unless we do the economic hit is going to continue and at some point somebody is going to have to take some tough decisions as to how long the largesse can continue.
Comments
The announcer started, ‘This is because...’ but was drowned out by somebody shouting loudly, ‘because you’re shit.’
The same reason applies to this government.
worst deaths, worst economy, clueless about lockdown, clueless about coming out, clueless about anything...oh, yes..one thing.. they agree on Brexit
TEST in the post lets count it
On TRACK to meet a political target even though its not processed
Not a TRACE of integrity
He seems to put a lot of weight on face masks and temperature measuring at public places.
We were told they couldn't renegotiate the EU exit withdrawal agreement. They did.
We were told they couldn't get Parliament to agree to an early election. They did.
We were told they couldn't win a large election majority. They did.
We were told they couldn't exit the EU smoothly. They did.
We were told they couldn't get a hundred thousand tests. They did.
Not a bad record after a few months. What exactly has gone so badly wrong that they're shit?
Conservative peer Baroness Altmann argued such a requirement would be "age discrimination" and could cost lives as well as threaten social unrest."
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-older-people-will-rebel-and-risk-prison-if-forced-to-be-locked-down-longer-11982459
Are you thinking those who can't drive should simply not be tested?
Published on Friday the 13th. Of March.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/13/who-urges-countries-to-track-and-trace-every-covid-19-case
On a serious point...all my Italian friends are now asking me now regularly how we have managed to get this so wrong? My mother in law is worried about my wife staying in England. Our complete shitness is sadly the talk of Europe....
Your Isle of Wight reference was lighting the fuse....
2. To Remainers it is seen as a poor Withdrwal Agreement even compared to Mrs May's deal.
3. Jeremy Corbyn is an idiot!
4. Jeremy Corbyn is an idiot!
5. We are still in transition, watch this space...
6. They didn't, even by their own standards until they changed them.
7. See 1 to 6 above.
However, the subject has moved as it is widely accepted Hancock achieved his target
Btw coincidentally I was pulling up tree roots (wild cherry) in our garden last week - a very tough gig, I can confirm.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/882881/2020-05-03_COVID-19_Press_Conference_Slides__5_.pdf
So I think he's done ok.
Maybe you haven't caught up with the news this last two months..but after having a couple of weeks advantage, and the best pandemic plan in the locker,.,.,,thanks to BoJo and his chums we now have the highest fatality rate and are completely clueless about extricating ourselves from the incoming economic, social and health meltdown....
It is not just the fact that we have the highest amount of deaths...we do not have a plan to get ourselves out of this shithole.....
I don't know what news you are watching.....
Deliver all that - and they might not be seen as so shit.
But they'd still hate Boris. Just...because.
So what's your point? The government's spent a month building capacity to do what you/the WHO want, is that your point?
Re: restrictions on older people. Given the evidence on, and lets not mince our words, fat people and their higher death/hospitalisation rate, shouldn't they be subject to the possibility of tighter restrictions if older people are too?
Personally I think they should. A fit healthy 70 year old doesn't deserve to be tagged as any more a problem than a fat 40 year old. If you want to do this on science, older people, the obese and those with underlying conditions have notably higher risk of serious illness. There is probably quite a bit of overlap between the first two and number three.
Over 100k ?
Over 10% of the total test numbers?
Over 20%?
I recognised your Grand Canyon and mine is a poor imitation of the scene from the Titanic taken on a beautiful sailing yacht in a strong wind on a lake in Nova Scotia last Autumn
It is too early to call the rights and wrongs but mistakes were made and will continue to be made by all governments as they fight this disease
The tests in the Isle of Wight this coming week are important so I cannot understand why it 'lighted the fuse'
As this guy puts it succinctly,
https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1256721498120900609
I also wonder whether Starmer is making a mistake in embracing Brexit at the point when it definitively goes pear shaped.
IE the one i was referring to
As we all know, a like for like comparison isn't possible it this stage given the differences in reporting methodologies.
No doubt malcy will be along to tell us that Hancock is personally taking busloads of them from hospitals in London and dropping them at Gretna Green.....
A third of the Island are too old for some app malarkey.
In my area at least, a third are second home owners who shouldn't be here so really won't want to advertise their location.
The carrot being offered is that if it is successful, we could end lockdown early. People really don't want that so won't help in any way.
That leaves a small minority that might take part. But they are too busy being where they shouldn't be that they won't sign up either
Prince Charles (71) had it, with very mild symptoms. Camilla (72) possibly had it with no symptoms. Or she might be genetically immune. Either way, she didn't get ill.
They need to get their acts together, and that is both of them
Bamboo and Mint, clearance of.
Over the last couple of years this raised bed has been left mainly to mint, bamboo and pots. How can this be recovered for veg?
(I think the bamboo is spreading not clumping)
https://twitter.com/mattwardman/status/1256990546352132098
No...we had the best plan for a pandemic in the world...shut down, control, track and trace.....
we just ignored it...
the problem is we didn't have a Govt that believed in the power of the state when it was required.... instead we had people who thought we needed to prioritise keeping pubs and airports open....
those few weeks have really fucked us up....now god only knows how and when we come out safely...we are so much on the back foot that our only strategy to see how other countries are doing it....
(Although I think we know the answer....)
a)Have beaten this?
b) Have any idea whether we have beaten this
c) Need to start a track and trace system to find which tests are where?
Counting a test when its processed just gives us a clear picture of where we are at in terms of Community Spread.
The methodology we have now makes it a lot harder.
From today's Observer, Page 8: "Care home owners are still warning that the sector is some way off a peak in cases, unlike the country as a whole."
Numbers were slow because it takes time to build capacity. I've worked on projects before and understand how it works you work for weeks or months to build something and then you use it. That the numbers came online in the final week to me does not seem a coincidence - it seems to me that when he announced the numbers and date work had already been done to identify when the capacity could come online. The fact it came online when he said it would rather demonstates precisely how much work was already done before the announcement rather than countermanding it.
Care Homes more likely to see a continued deaths after some initial decline, I think - as slower descent
What may be considered standard cardio works because its burning calories but needs to be graded with increased work to keep knocking the fat off. That intensity can be seen in two ways, length of work and/or intensity. The problem with that after a while is doesn't help the muscle mass.
Both combined are better than a focus on one. The problem with exercise is so much of if is about 'the shortcut', every form claims its better calorie burning in a shorter time of effort. To keep it simple just mixing things up and doing whatever it is to sufficient intensity (i.e. you got to have pushed it a a bit, whatever your fitness) is the basic rule to work by.
Pity.
As might be expected, the re-opening of some DIY stores and some fast food establishments has drawn people out of lock down.
Trying to use that as a rationale for a mass return to work is interesting - the transport systems in London and elsewhere could not cope and to what extent are companies with offices prepared for social distancing?
Most of the clients with whom I am working have not been happy to hear their offices can only function at 40% capacity to maintain social distancing - the situation is worse in meeting rooms as people tend to sit much closer.
I'm now waiting for some Government minister to tell me it's my patriotic duty to go back to the office even though I can work quite happily at home.
I've lost half a stone since going into lockdown. Primarily due to less snacking, particularly chocolate. And no Greggs!
Well they’re both replacing leaders who’d just lost GEs with -40 ratings at least.
2) The ‘renegotiation’ was actually a caving in to the EU on every important point. It is of course possible that Johnson and Cummings don’t realise this - Cummings has been caught out like that before.
3) They did spend a lot of time failing to get agreement to an early election. Corbyn and Swinson caved in because, unwisely, they thought they had got what they wanted and could win.
4) I personally always thought it possible that anyone could beat Corbyn. Heck, even May managed it. And even Aaron Bastani admitted Labour were dire. Johnson ran a dismal campaign, but he was alert enough to avoid he hostages to fortune May had given. I will admit, that said, the size of the majority was a surprise to me.
5) We have left, but we’re still in transition so we haven’t actually felt the effects of leaving. This point remains in abeyance until that is over. I will agree it put that silliness about revoke that those morons at the European Courts came up with to cause maximum chaos and confusion to bed, but since that should never, ever have been invented I can’t give Johnson much credit for it.
6) My understanding is that they still haven’t. If I’m wrong, please correct me and I will be pleased.
This is a poor government, which to misquote Baldwin contains second class intellects with second class characters. It has exceeded expectations insofar as it continues not to collapse in an embarrassing help, but even Trump’s not quite got to that stage yet.