Howdy, Stranger!

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

After a quick & successful vaccine rollout, this is the second most thing I want to see in 2021 – po

1234568»

Comments

  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,165
    edited January 2021

    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Bloody hell. Every time you think it can't get any worse it does.
    The graph is misleading because of the lack of testing in the spring.

    The peak then would have been about double what it is now.
    There certainly does seem to be a huge amount more testing. Even if more people are also surviving, the situation of NHS capacity is beginning to look really worrying independently of everything else. As mentioned, Johnson is beginning to have little choice than the severest form of national lockdown, very soon.
  • As reported earlier, went past my local hospital earlier today, the ambulances were queued up way back right up to entrance off the main road. Haven't seen it like that before (although I didn't see it during first wave).
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,126
    Scott_xP said:
    I think it'd be too depressing to listen to. No doubt Trump is sufficiently vague in his threats it doesn't cross a line enough for it to matter.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,126

    Do you think he'll be getting Iran to sign this?

    https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1345820224063356930

    We are in the midst of a terrible second wave of deadly pandemic and what's Jezza campaigning on...i am sure it is at thr forefront of all vulnerable oldies and parents who worried about kids going back to school (or not).
    3rd wave. Though the point remains.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    As reported earlier, went past my local hospital earlier today, the ambulances were queued up way back right up to entrance off the main road. Haven't seen it like that before (although I didn't see it during first wave).
    Which hospital was that?

    I'm tempted to walk the dog past Colchester hospital as we seem to be getting a lot more cases recently
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,617
    edited January 2021

    Sandpit said:

    o

    Sandpit said:

    Basically, if this BBC article is anything to go by then the well is pretty empty in terms of "tighter" restrictions: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55524764

    Not even close.
    What do you think may still be to come then? Just out of interest.
    A quick list from the top of my head. These have all been seen elsewhere. In rough order of severity.

    Closure of places of organised worship.
    Ban on weddings
    Schools and universities closed. All non-essential staff to leave campus.
    Ban on all public meetings between households
    Ban on attending funerals.
    Capacity restrictions in supermarkets, compulsory wearing of gloves.
    Closure of all non-essential businesses where social distancing cannot be guaranteed.
    Ban on visits to care homes
    Ban on takeaway food collections
    Ban on being more than 3 miles from home.
    Night-time curfew
    Ban on deliveries of non-essential items, drivers diverted to supermarket deliveries.
    Ban on single-meal hot food deliveries, except to vulnerable, drivers reallocated to supermarkets.
    Lockdown. Require permission in advance to leave home, for supermarket or pharmacy only.
    Was already factoring in some of these to the current position already anyway, but rules may vary in different regions.

    There's a small few other ones in there that are sensible. Mostly they're just stuff to say you're doing something - they're desperate measures. Not many of these are going to be statistically significant in the R calculation. Purely off the top of my head, many of these are from regions that didn't particularly suppress the virus well first time round. Mostly they're just going to piss a significant section of the population off even more.

    Probably only the last one, if you've got the people to enforce/police it, would be obviously effective.

    I stand by the thinking that other than schools/unis we are scraping the bottom of the barrel for things to take any meaningful chunks out of the R rate.
    It will be impossible to mobilise vaccination volunteers if you preface such a programme with an oppressive regime that suggests it’s deadly to leave your home, never mind encounter other people.
    It would make it more difficult.

    But there are two groups who will not be overly frightened - the young and those who have already been infected.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,165
    edited January 2021

    Scott_xP said:
    Cases are going up almost vertically, but deaths are not at all - so far. Either within a couple of weeks we're in for the most almighty catastrophe, or the pattern is going to stay different. If the NHS is overwhelmed though, who will be able to say what the pattern is.
    With over a million including nearly a million of the most vulnerable already vaccinated hopefully we will soon start seeing a divergence between case numbers and deaths.
    Compared to the Spring and also autumn we already are, as far as I can understand any of the figures, but if the NHS is overwhelmed that all goes to pot. No choice other than very heavy action across the country now, I think.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,001
    kle4 said:

    No doubt Trump is sufficiently vague in his threats it doesn't cross a line enough for it to matter.

    Maybe

    https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1345843783091544064
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381
    Scott_xP said:
    With my nearly 60 year old eye sight, I initially noted that the graph was dramatically levelling off. Impressive I thought! Then I realised it was not a line but text "United Kingdom".

    Indeed, it does look terrible.
  • DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Bloody hell. Every time you think it can't get any worse it does.
    The graph is misleading because of the lack of testing in the spring.

    The peak then would have been about double what it is now.
    How do you know it would have been about double?
    Infection rates were running at over 100k per day.

    With the zoe covid app peaking at 2.2m infected at the start of April.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,934

    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Bloody hell. Every time you think it can't get any worse it does.
    The graph is misleading because of the lack of testing in the spring.

    The peak then would have been about double what it is now.
    How do you know it would have been about double?
    Weren't there calculations based on the number of people with antibodies? Rates of 100,000 per day were estimated.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    Scott_xP said:

    kle4 said:

    No doubt Trump is sufficiently vague in his threats it doesn't cross a line enough for it to matter.

    Maybe

    https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1345843783091544064
    Lock him up.
  • GaussianGaussian Posts: 831

    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Bloody hell. Every time you think it can't get any worse it does.
    The graph is misleading because of the lack of testing in the spring.

    The peak then would have been about double what it is now.
    How do you know it would have been about double?
    Infection rates were running at over 100k per day.

    With the zoe covid app peaking at 2.2m infected at the start of April.
    We're probably well over 100k per day right now, considering we manage to catch 55k while presumably still missing out on lots of mild and asymptomatic cases, and the 55k actually were infected a week ago while cases are still going up.
  • DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Bloody hell. Every time you think it can't get any worse it does.
    The graph is misleading because of the lack of testing in the spring.

    The peak then would have been about double what it is now.
    How do you know it would have been about double?
    Infection rates were running at over 100k per day.

    With the zoe covid app peaking at 2.2m infected at the start of April.
    Aren't infection rates running at over 100k per day now? And have been for a while.

    There may be only 53k daily testing positive but that's not all of the positives.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,468
    MrEd said:

    Think this is final, or VERY close to it:

    Pelosi = 216

    McCarthy = 208

    Others = 2 (Duckworth & Jeffries)

    Present - 3

    C-Span saying she has been elected speaker. Presumably it's because of the non-present / determined seats?
    As some commentator over here remarked, one thing about Pelosi is that she is very good at counting.
  • MrEd said:

    Pelosi 216, McCarthy 208 - C-Span saying Pelosi elected speaker. Is that right?

    Yes.

    There are 435 members of the US House. Currently, there is one vacancy (from Louisiana) and another one that has not yet been decided (in New York State).

    Number present and voting today = 431; the other three are two Reps with COVID, and one Dem with pancreatic cancer.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    Anecdata:

    My Sainsbury's delivery was cancelled this afternoon with half an hour notice. Too many drivers off sick they said.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,126
    edited January 2021
    Scott_xP said:

    kle4 said:

    No doubt Trump is sufficiently vague in his threats it doesn't cross a line enough for it to matter.

    Maybe

    https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1345843783091544064
    1 minute in and he says its clear he won just judging by rally size alone. I'm shutting it off, my brain cells are not worth that.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533

    Do you think he'll be getting Iran to sign this?

    https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1345820224063356930

    We are in the midst of a terrible second wave of deadly pandemic and what's Jezza campaigning on...i am sure it is at thr forefront of all vulnerable oldies and parents who worried about kids going back to school (or not).
    I'm a vulnerable oldie, if you like to look at it like that, but I don't want politicians to ignore every other issue. In some ways I think he's found his niche, as a backbencher with a substantial national following willing to raise issues that the majority don't care about.It's a minority view, but minorities need to be heard too.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    Sandpit said:

    o

    Sandpit said:

    Basically, if this BBC article is anything to go by then the well is pretty empty in terms of "tighter" restrictions: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55524764

    Not even close.
    What do you think may still be to come then? Just out of interest.
    A quick list from the top of my head. These have all been seen elsewhere. In rough order of severity.

    Closure of places of organised worship.
    Ban on weddings
    Schools and universities closed. All non-essential staff to leave campus.
    Ban on all public meetings between households
    Ban on attending funerals.
    Capacity restrictions in supermarkets, compulsory wearing of gloves.
    Closure of all non-essential businesses where social distancing cannot be guaranteed.
    Ban on visits to care homes
    Ban on takeaway food collections
    Ban on being more than 3 miles from home.
    Night-time curfew
    Ban on deliveries of non-essential items, drivers diverted to supermarket deliveries.
    Ban on single-meal hot food deliveries, except to vulnerable, drivers reallocated to supermarkets.
    Lockdown. Require permission in advance to leave home, for supermarket or pharmacy only.
    Was already factoring in some of these to the current position already anyway, but rules may vary in different regions.

    There's a small few other ones in there that are sensible. Mostly they're just stuff to say you're doing something - they're desperate measures. Not many of these are going to be statistically significant in the R calculation. Purely off the top of my head, many of these are from regions that didn't particularly suppress the virus well first time round. Mostly they're just going to piss a significant section of the population off even more.

    Probably only the last one, if you've got the people to enforce/police it, would be obviously effective.

    I stand by the thinking that other than schools/unis we are scraping the bottom of the barrel for things to take any meaningful chunks out of the R rate.
    It will be impossible to mobilise vaccination volunteers if you preface such a programme with an oppressive regime that suggests it’s deadly to leave your home, never mind encounter other people.
    It would make it more difficult.

    But there are two groups who will not be overly frightened - the young and those who have already been infected.
    In fairness I think you are right insofar as there are probably enough people who won’t be frightened. The question is how easily that overlaps with those willing to volunteer. I think it just shrinks the overall labour pool.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Scott_xP said:
    The most obvious thing you can see from that graph is just how amazingly coincidental the flattening of cases was when schools closed for half term and the equally massive coincidence of the November fall coinciding with lockdown.

    The world is just full of coincidences.
  • Gaussian / PT

    There are certainly more people being infected than the headline number but I'm not sure what proportion more.

    We are not yet seeing positivity rates that many other countries have had.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,001
    At least the BoZograph will highlight his triumph on Marr this morning...

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1345850215409078278
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868

    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Bloody hell. Every time you think it can't get any worse it does.
    The graph is misleading because of the lack of testing in the spring.

    The peak then would have been about double what it is now.
    How do you know it would have been about double?
    Infection rates were running at over 100k per day.

    With the zoe covid app peaking at 2.2m infected at the start of April.
    The Zoe App has Cornwall and the NE looking worse than the published case data yet suggests
  • Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The most obvious thing you can see from that graph is just how amazingly coincidental the flattening of cases was when schools closed for half term and the equally massive coincidence of the November fall coinciding with lockdown.

    The world is just full of coincidences.
    There effect of schools and universities must be some way along the law of diminishing returns by now.

    How far I've no idea.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,165
    edited January 2021
    Floater said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Cases are going up as good as vertically, but deaths are not at all - so far. Either within a couple of weeks we're in for the most almighty catastrophe, or the pattern is going to stay different. If the NHS is overwhelmed though, who will be able to say what the pattern is.
    As Foxy said deaths lag

    The good news is that the death rate is lower now than it was in March

    The bad news is we have to worry about the scenes in Italy being replicated here in a couple of weeks if the hospitals are overwhelmed.

    There are couple of separate points here, though - Foxy mentioned that the deaths per case are about half that of March. What still looks odd to me, as I've mentioned a few times, is that cases exploded in late November - we've already had quite a long lag time for that initial huge leap in cases.

    Regardless of all that, it will all go to hell in a handcart if the NHS crumbles, so Johnson has to take maximum action now.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,468
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    kle4 said:

    No doubt Trump is sufficiently vague in his threats it doesn't cross a line enough for it to matter.

    Maybe

    https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1345843783091544064
    1 minute in and he says its clear he won just judging by rally size alone. I'm shutting it off, my brain cells are not worth that.
    Did not get much further myself. I've tried to listen to this twice, but cannot bring myself to do it.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited January 2021
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    kle4 said:

    No doubt Trump is sufficiently vague in his threats it doesn't cross a line enough for it to matter.

    Maybe

    https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1345843783091544064
    1 minute in and he says its clear he won just judging by rally size alone. I'm shutting it off, my brain cells are not worth that.
    Wait, has anyone seen contrarian and Trump in the same room?
  • Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Basically, if this BBC article is anything to go by then the well is pretty empty in terms of "tighter" restrictions: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55524764

    Not even close.
    What do you think may still be to come then? Just out of interest.
    A quick list from the top of my head. These have all been seen elsewhere. In rough order of severity.

    Closure of places of organised worship.
    Ban on weddings
    Schools and universities closed. All non-essential staff to leave campus.
    Ban on all public meetings between households
    Ban on attending funerals.
    Capacity restrictions in supermarkets, compulsory wearing of gloves.
    Closure of all non-essential businesses where social distancing cannot be guaranteed.
    Ban on visits to care homes
    Ban on takeaway food collections
    Ban on being more than 3 miles from home.
    Night-time curfew
    Ban on deliveries of non-essential items, drivers diverted to supermarket deliveries.
    Ban on single-meal hot food deliveries, except to vulnerable, drivers reallocated to supermarkets.
    Lockdown. Require permission in advance to leave home, for supermarket or pharmacy only.
    Don’t give them ideas
    Do you genuinely not grasp the problem of the hospitals getting overwhelmed?

    You seem to believe that the death rates we see across the various age bands are like a law of nature, rather than the result of medical action.

    If the hospitals get overwhelmed, they’re going to start triaging on age. The death rates in the older echelons will go through the roof, despite the vaccinations to date.

    Some in the younger age bands will be denied treatment even with that triaging. When that happens, their death rates will start to exceed the ones we’ve seen in the elderly and vulnerable.

    The death tolls we saw in April will look like a love pat in comparison.

    And when this is finally over, because all nights end in dawn eventually, regardless of the eventual butcher’s bill, we will see an outflow from the medical profession the likes of which we’ve never seen before, as those soul-destroyed and heart-broken from the horrific decisions they had to make again and again and again will break and give in.

    The death rates that people keep quoting will not hold past the point of overload.
    In the spring the triaging responsibility was passed to the potential patients.

    Remember the 'do not ring 999 unless you are about to die' advice.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766

    NEW THREAD

  • TimT said:

    MrEd said:

    Think this is final, or VERY close to it:

    Pelosi = 216

    McCarthy = 208

    Others = 2 (Duckworth & Jeffries)

    Present - 3

    C-Span saying she has been elected speaker. Presumably it's because of the non-present / determined seats?
    As some commentator over here remarked, one thing about Pelosi is that she is very good at counting.
    That is true. But she won the old fashioned way (sort of) by winning a majority of members present AND voting. That number was 427, of which Pelosi got 50.6%

    Being absent OR just being present did NOT count, what counted where votes.

    Assuming that any more votes she MIGHT have lost went to someone other than McCarthy, she ended up with just two votes to spare to win a majority.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Bloody hell. Every time you think it can't get any worse it does.
    The graph is misleading because of the lack of testing in the spring.

    The peak then would have been about double what it is now.
    How do you know it would have been about double?
    The peak death rate implied between 120k and 140k daily symptomatic cases.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,355

    malcolmg said:

    Blooming heck!


    Similar to England on a population basis is it not.
    No.

    Cases 40% worse Malc.

    Nats & Maths, eh?
    Can you explain your Maths
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,355
    rcs1000 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Blooming heck!


    Similar to England on a population basis is it not.
    The US averages about 7,500 deaths on a normal day. If they're now at 12,500+, that would be staggering, a 70+% increase in the average daily death rate.
    What is comparison , they have roughly 6-7 times population of England , so covid deaths appear similar. How do normal deaths in England compare. Am I missing something.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,355
    Gaussian said:

    malcolmg said:

    Gaussian said:

    Alistair said:

    Sturgeon retweeted this

    Scotland is getting full fat lockdown

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1345802429036699653?s=19

    Bet she's regretting leaving the level 4 lockdown until Boxing Day when the findings about the new strain came in the weekend before. Cases in Scotland on a steep upward trajectory as well the last few days.
    do you have the data showing the steep trajectory
    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=nation&areaName=Scotland

    Cases by date reported doubled in little more than a week. (Cases by specimen date are on a Jan 1-4 holiday.)
    Thanks @Gaussian
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,713
    Wow. Not some twitter random. That is the CEO of a major hospital.
This discussion has been closed.