Easy to pretend it's not a problem, until it slaps them in the face like last time.
I still recall one of those gove advisors saying football grounds were low risk.
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
I still recall one of those gove advisors saying football grounds were low risk.
I dunno, perhaps they’re fully committed to the idea that keeping the schools open is a priority at almost any cost but feel they can’t sell this idea to the public.
But yeah, that’s probably reaching too much. I really hope they’re right on this.
I think there will be lots of internal disagreements and careful management with regards to what details of these disagreements get out. I just can’t imagine anyone flat out lying about what the data they’re looking at is showing.
Having said that, it’s also possible that the data isn’t giving them the full picture. In medicine it’s definitely possible to make bad decisions based on incomplete data. Unfortunately, incomplete data is sometimes all you have. Especially in a scenario that’s changing as rapidly as this epidemic right now.
Staggers me how little we still know about this virus with any degree of certainty.
It’s just so damn new. We’re still learning new stuff about viruses we’ve been living with for generations. This fecking thing has really only been with us for a blink of an eye.
There’s so many factors we don’t know about possible cures, for example does burning Dominic Cummings and the current Cabinet cure it? Who can say with any degree of certainty until we try it??”
Schools will turn out to be the main driver in transmission throughout winter.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
More government sources talking to media
Quarter to 11 with Johnson due to speak tomorrow, and there is still confusion, ambiguity and uncertainty
I wonder what Johnson will announce for London specifically. No one seems to give a shit here about covid.
I can’t say I’m surprised that there’s confusion and uncertainty, the government throughout this pandemic have leaked stories or headlines to the media before announcement.
Whether that is to take the edge off what’s being announced or to test/gauge the public reaction before their next announcement, it’s getting a bit tedious. If they want to put measures in, I don’t see the fascination in waiting over the weekend.
There has been some learning taking place. While we see infection rates around the world climbing faster than hoped we are also seeing death rates are much lower than the beginning of the pandemic. There has been a lot learned and we are seeing that new knowledge in that area being put in place. I am a bit of an optimist and I hope this does signal that we are learning all the time and that there will be some level of stability becoming clear next year
Because China’s people committed to social distancing and facemasks since the very beginning, accepted a draconian lockdown around Wuhan stopping virus getting into major cities, authorities have enforced a proper digital track and trace system. Look at Thailand and Malaysia for even more profound results.
The UK may think it has also done the above, but I’d estimate it’s been at 25% of the severity of implementation that China and other Asian countries.
Been flicking through freesports channel on TV over here and they show Polish league regularly, stands look packed!
Apparently 50% of capacity is allowed?I think we know a great deal albeit evolving as the pandemic matures. Certainky enough to do better than we have been doing. I think often the problem is that governments aren't prepared to take consistent hard decisions that are in line with the best current medical advice for economic reasons (which is of course not irrelevant) or political considerations (which should be). That combined with a lack of willingness to use the precaution principle to save lives.
The utter shambles of the UK government's response has made it far harder to get the UK people to cooperate due to the confusion they government have created and the feeling that the initial lockdown was squandered or (even worse) that it didn't work. Letting the sacrifice the British people made in the initial lockdown go to waste is the worst thing the government have done and that is quite a list to top.
SARS-CoV-2 survives for up to 28 days on some surfaces, 10 days longer than influenza and survives far better at lower temperatures. That doesn't mean infections can occur from surface transmission but it doesn't mean it can't either.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ive-up-to-28-days-on-surfaces-scientists-find
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ive-up-to-28-days-on-surfaces-scientists-find
In Australia, NSW and Victoria can't quite stamp out community transmission. NSW had about 3 new cases a day after going 11 days without any and Victoria seems stuck in the 10-15 range. That said Victoria school kids went back to school today. So some parents will be very happy.
Edit: NSW down to 1 new infection connected to a known source
Edit: NSW down to 1 new infection connected to a known source
Last edited:
Infection rates were estimated to be approx 100k un-diagnosed cases a day during the first wave. The only cases that were being picked up, were at hospitals due to low testing capacity. That would explain the skewed numbers to some degree (amongst other factors)
Thanks for that. I hadnt thought of it.
25% since last Saturday but was 50% in most areas before then.Been flicking through freesports channel on TV over here and they show Polish league regularly, stands look packed!
I'm probably in a minority here but the northern mayors showing public dissent is really not helpful. It's all about who gets the blame but the by product is going to be lack of compliance.
I always complain when they do it but for once perhaps the government should have devolved the decision because if it was schools or hospitality these mayors would end up making the same decision anyway.
I always complain when they do it but for once perhaps the government should have devolved the decision because if it was schools or hospitality these mayors would end up making the same decision anyway.
The trouble is that Manchester has had special restrictions since July. Meanwhile, the infection rates have been rising and the councils have been asking to talk about test/trace and local services. It's going to take more than more rules and bigger fines to get through this winter.
They've got to go back to why people aren't quarantining themselves and asking for tests as soon as they develop symptoms; why people aren't giving proper information to the tracing teams if they finally do test positive; and why they and their households/friends/contacts don't then follow the quarantine rules.
A lot of it is financial, some of it is enforcement, some of it is sheer practicality.
Informal care of kids and the vulnerable means there will be households mixing (whatever the rules say) especially if people are going to work, kids are going to school. Life does have to go on - even for the over 70s and others who are at most risk - and they do need help.
Delivery slots three weeks hence if you're told to quarantine now will get dismissed as irrelevant - especially if they come with minimum orders or delivery charges. Multigeneration households need options if someone tests positive - even if the option is a (free!) hotel room for the next week.
Focusing on pub closing times etc weakens the mayors' arguments in my opinion. But maybe that's just the TV headline and the real discussions they want have more practical detail on how to get locals to act in a public spirited way to each other and a protective way towards their own families etc.
Copying the same policy and expecting the same results across cultures is pretty pointless, agreed. Bit of a straw man argument though. It's not about whether it has the same degree of impact, but whether it has an impact in the same direction; is it a successful harm reduction strategy, even to a small degree? The core argument against it applies across countries: if you're going to restrict pubs and alcohol consumption, why not just close them rather than setting an arbitrary time limit? The strategies some UK pub-goers have taken in response - going to the pub earlier, drinking more in a shorter period of time, going to house parties afterwards - are the same that happens in any of these countries, there's nothing unique in that part of UK drinking culture.
It's very easy to say this a nonsensical idea entirely driven by the buffoonery of my government. It isn't a very credible argument when applied to the rest of the countries, some who employed the strategy when they were doing worse than the UK, and some who employed it when they were doing better. You can argue that they are all making the decision in the absence of any science supporting it, but that seems unlikely. Why would they want to do it, if they didn't have good reason to believe it was helpful? Again, you can point fingers at the UK government for their ideology, their competence and create an answer out of thin air, but when you map that onto the rest of the countries, it no longer fits because they cover a broad range of ideologies and competence levels.
The basic logic underpinning placing limits on drinking seems pretty sensible to me. It was hugely controversial to stop alcohol sales in South Africa but the positive impact on public health outcomes was stark, for obvious reasons. It's a reason for people to congregate in larger groups, surrounded by strangers, with less adherence to social distancing and personal hygiene, and encourages people to get out of the house for a lot longer. You would want to put a limit to those kinds of activities at this point in a pandemic. From a coronavirus risk reduction perspective, you would want to stop them altogether. But stopping them altogether would have an impact on people's mental and social well-being, it could have much deeper economic costs, and it would chip away at people's desire to adhere to other restrictions. So limiting rather than closing those avenues for spread is a reasonable compromise, in the current situation.
Whether they have the evidence to support that decision now, I don't know. If they do have data on the subject I suspect it's very noisy. The research presented by the CDC on the impact of pubs and restaurants on the spread of coronavirus was not particularly robust, but it was directional evidence that some limits would make a difference. Exactly what those limits should be is not that clear, which is why countries have drawn different arbitrary lines on venues and timings. The fact the overall strategy is so widespread does suggest that it's not just some hair-brained idea from Dominic Cummings, though. From my perspective that's the best evidence on the subject, in the public sphere.
I really dislike studies like this. The conditions they used are so unrepresentative of the real environment that we can safely ignore it.
Interesting story on how quick they move to
Last edited:
Surprise!
Why would we ignore it? This is exactly where they should start as you need carefully controlled studies to have decent baseline data. The study did not aim to see if, and if so how long, infection can be transmitted on surfaces. That might be the next step now that we know itcan survive far longer than the influenza virus can. Other very interesting data found was how much better it survived at lower temperatures. Again now a possibility for further research.
Anyone else getting really annoyed with the government constantly harping on about how being able to travel to see your family on Christmas and boxing day will absolutely, definitively happen, with a 0% chance of being lockdowned during that period?
In July/August, everyone thought the world would be back to normality by now, not heading into another wave, so not sure how that statement can be made with so much confidence.
Telling people that if they don't respect rules and try to lower the risk, otherwise there's a chance we don't get to see family at Christmas would surely install a bit of worry amongst the doubters, and get people to abide a lot more.
But oh wait, what about the Christmas economy....
In July/August, everyone thought the world would be back to normality by now, not heading into another wave, so not sure how that statement can be made with so much confidence.
Telling people that if they don't respect rules and try to lower the risk, otherwise there's a chance we don't get to see family at Christmas would surely install a bit of worry amongst the doubters, and get people to abide a lot more.
But oh wait, what about the Christmas economy....
As a baseline in unrealistic conditions fair enough. The more useful studies will be looking at real environment settings, the nicest one I’ve seen so far was Simulated summer vs winter sunlight. The virus is deactivated in 6 and 19 minutes respectively if I’m remembering it correctly.
I think we should also target the question of why surface transmission of covid-19 doesn’t appear to be particularly efficient vs what’s commonly understood with the flu.
damn autocorrect on the phone. Suppress!He'll go easy on the Capital. He knows that he can't afford to keep it locked down.
I have no idea how reliable the data this bloke is quoting is but it’s an interesting idea. Humidity and rate of viral spread.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Interesting yellow box! Presumably more humid conditions allow virus laden aerosol to sediment out of the air more quickly?
the only explanations I’ve seen for some countries in Asia escaping are either environmental conditions or some sort of immunity from previous coronavirus outbreaks (e.g. SARS)
The point is actually that countries like Thailand are so humid it makes it harder for the virus to survive. Dry conditions are optimal for long term survival outside the body. According to the graphs he’s tweeting the humidity in the Uk is perfect for viral spread, all year round.
Obviously humidity not the only factor. UV light and high temperatures also kills the virus. So longer, hotter, sunnier days (and more time spent outside) have helped to damp things down during summer in the UK.
If you live in a country that’s hot, sunny and humid all year round (e.g. Thailand, Singapore, Hong Kong) then that’s optimal conditions for keeping case numbers down. Which puts all the praise they’re getting for mask use etc into perspective.
Last edited:
I have read a few places about humidity being a factor... But I cant find the ~5 to ~11.5 g/m3 range that person is claiming to be the risky zone.
There was a study published in India a few months back that said something similar, but that claimed India would be fine from the humidity point of view.. But that's just one factor.. There are plenty of cases here.
We had our moonsoon (rains) from mid June to Sept.. It rains a lot.. Mumbai is very very humid.. cases were at a record high.. so even if humidity plays a part, its not the only factor. Countries that have managed to keep it in check are doing a lot of things right..
There was a study published in India a few months back that said something similar, but that claimed India would be fine from the humidity point of view.. But that's just one factor.. There are plenty of cases here.
We had our moonsoon (rains) from mid June to Sept.. It rains a lot.. Mumbai is very very humid.. cases were at a record high.. so even if humidity plays a part, its not the only factor. Countries that have managed to keep it in check are doing a lot of things right..
Absolutely. Environment factors only part of the picture. With them in your favour, though, it probably gives a load of impetus to all the other PH measures. Conversely, you wonder if there’s much point agonising about schools vs pubs when a virus is just waxing and waning with the weather. Exactly like loads of other viruses do each year.
Which is something I would like to know. Do you have cold/flu seasons in countries that are warm/humid all year round?
EDIT: Quick google reveals that influenza markedly less seasonal in tropical climates. So there you go.
Last edited:
Knew it was but surprise sounded better. Brings images of medical staff surprise injecting residents at opportune momentsWent down a google scholar rabbit hole. Quick glance through this article (2009) shows it’s not very well understood how the humidity influences transmission but they’ve got good ideas about what the mechanisms could be.
humid rainy conditions discourage transmission. presumably through reduced aerosol production from an infected host. However they also suspect a damaging effect on the virus itself.
they noted that this would however potentially increase surface deposition, increasing chances of infection from touching infected surfaces. But if covid-19 really isn’t effectively spread from surface contamination this would be a clear advantage.
they also found that the Absolute Humidity rather than the relative humidity was more important. I kind of suspected the RH would be important in stopping droplets evaporating and increasing deposition to the surface.
https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.0030151
What are the government even doing about this? It seems completely necessary in the long-term, particularly now as it's clear that certain sectors aren't going back to normal.But my redcafe.net post isn't.
And in fact, worrying about the 10pm curfew is massively oversimplifying the problem.
This is Eureka park in Ashford
There are a bunch of different industries here, including a Travelodge, and a Garden Centre but the big draw is definitely the Cineworld Cinema.
The Nandos, Pizza Hut, KFC, McDonalds, Frankie and Bennys, Beefeater etc all rely on the Cinema to draw in crowds. Some of those can survive without the cinema (Beef-Eater and Dobbies)
Lock Meadow, Maidstone is the same story. There is a Gym, a bowling alley, a Frankie and Bennys, a trampoline bouncy place, a bunch of other restaurants, etc. But once again the main draw is the cinema. Without the
The government hasn't ordered cinemas to close, but cinemas are closing anyway
All over the country, the live-entertainment industries, and associated industries are in crisis.
People are going to lose their job. People are going to re-train. That is the government's priority. Not pampering to those who won't socially distance.
There might be data to show the virus lingers longer in the air in dry conditions and not as much in humid areas, but those tweets was cherry picking data.
The spike the US had in June was largely in the southern states which arent dry at that time.... Texas and Florida
It doesnt spread as fast in open areas anyway.. In closed conditions, inside buildings with air conditioning, the humidity outside is hardly a factor.
Yeah, true. In very hot/humid countries people are driven indoors to air conditioned environments which could give the virus cool, dry conditions and a captive audience!