The big Coronavirus thread
Comments
-
This is an interesting read, about the problems at the DVLA... not least for the excuse for not allowing WFH because of the "60,000 pieces of mail they receive per day". I wonder if they've heard of email or Google Forms. (Other systems of electronic communication are available.)
Sounds more like a totally shambolic organisation stuck with archaic systems.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/oct/01/dvla-chiefs-and-staff-clash-over-safety-issues-and-hgv-licence-backlog0 -
briantrumpet said:
Is it this one?jimmyjams said:
Do you mean being able to tie them? I've never been able to, at least in the manner which 99.9% of people tie them. When I was about 10 years old, noticing my inability, an aunt showed me a different, more intricate method, and which I still use to this day, decades later.First.Aspect said:
Shoelaces.elbowloh said:
What's the threshold for being judged as clever?rick_chasey said:Oh everyone.
In work, in life, in childhood, all of it. Being smart is valued too highly.
So you're clever - so what.
Over the years several people have noticed, and been fascinated (or irritated) by my unorthodox technique, but the high point was about 2 years ago when I was in a doctor's waiting room, and noticed my shoelace undone. I bent over to re-tie it, and an old woman sitting opposite, 90 years old if she were a day but 'all there', suddenly exclaimed out that she was delighted to see my method, not having seen that technique since she was a little girl.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh7y_weyMw0
I'd never heard of the Berluti Knot before but, yes, my method is basically the same.
I did some research this morning: apparently Olga Berluti, artistic director then at the Berluti shoe company in Paris, 'introduced' the knot to the public in the mid-1970s, having learnt it from the Duke of Windsor before he died. Supposedly he learnt the knot from his grandmother, Alexandra of Denmark, who died in 1925.
I learnt it before the mid-1970s, so before Berluti introduced it, but not through any aristocratic connections.
The knot is no. 1216 in 'The Ashley Book Of Knots' (a book first published in 1944 with drawings of how to make nearly 4000 different knots), where it is called a 'Double Shoestring Knot' (not to be confused with no. 1215, the 'Double Shoelace Knot'). So it must have been known decades ago, including to my aunt, not just to the Windsors.0 -
Above I should have written my shoelace had become 'loose' not 'undone'; I like my shoelaces to be fairly tight all the time, and so will re-tie them if at all the slightest bit loose.pblakeney said:
I'd say if they come undone then the method is not all that good*.jimmyjams said:...when I was in a doctor's waiting room, and noticed my shoelace undone. I bent over to re-tie it, ...
PS - Ring flashes used for filming videos is a real distraction in the subject's eyes.
*Edit :- Method I use. Starts at 1:25 and does not include the bonus tip.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deymL_kfHuk
And maybe that day I was particularly sensitive to a slight bit of looseness, as in doctor's waiting rooms I don't read the provided magazines or play with my phone, but nor do I want to sit there motionless like a tailor's dummy, so any excuse for a bit of movement.
Like any knot, if you do it quickly and sloppily, or if the lace material is of the slippy type, even this knot can slightly loosen.
Still, thanks for your tip.0 -
jimmyjams said:briantrumpet said:
Is it this one?jimmyjams said:
Do you mean being able to tie them? I've never been able to, at least in the manner which 99.9% of people tie them. When I was about 10 years old, noticing my inability, an aunt showed me a different, more intricate method, and which I still use to this day, decades later.First.Aspect said:
Shoelaces.elbowloh said:
What's the threshold for being judged as clever?rick_chasey said:Oh everyone.
In work, in life, in childhood, all of it. Being smart is valued too highly.
So you're clever - so what.
Over the years several people have noticed, and been fascinated (or irritated) by my unorthodox technique, but the high point was about 2 years ago when I was in a doctor's waiting room, and noticed my shoelace undone. I bent over to re-tie it, and an old woman sitting opposite, 90 years old if she were a day but 'all there', suddenly exclaimed out that she was delighted to see my method, not having seen that technique since she was a little girl.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh7y_weyMw0
I'd never heard of the Berluti Knot before but, yes, my method is basically the same.
I did some research this morning: apparently Olga Berluti, artistic director then at the Berluti shoe company in Paris, 'introduced' the knot to the public in the mid-1970s, having learnt it from the Duke of Windsor before he died. Supposedly he learnt the knot from his grandmother, Alexandra of Denmark, who died in 1925.
I learnt it before the mid-1970s, so before Berluti introduced it, but not through any aristocratic connections.
The knot is no. 1216 in 'The Ashley Book Of Knots' (a book first published in 1944 with drawings of how to make nearly 4000 different knots), where it is called a 'Double Shoestring Knot' (not to be confused with no. 1215, the 'Double Shoelace Knot'). So it must have been known decades ago, including to my aunt, not just to the Windsors.
Just tried it - easier than following the instructions for a bow tie, not least as you cant see what you're doing with a bow tie without looking in a mirror.
I was bribed with a half crown to learn to tie my laces.0 -
The pre-flight home Covid tests seem open to abuse. Ours just arrived and it struck me that if the first one is negative we could just use the same liquid for the other two to avoid the risk of a positive. Also, whilst it is supposed to be taken no more than 48 hours before flying there doesn't seem to be any way to stop someone taking it earlier then uploading the results on the correct day. The wife is currently having weekly PCR tests as well as daily lateral flows so we could just get her to do all the tests for us as we know it is almost certainly going to be negative.
Still, someone (probably a Party donor) is making money from it so all's good.0 -
I suppose it relies on honesty largely, especially if self-administered. I guess the Government know the positivity rate of these tests - it would be interesting to know how close to zero it is, and whether that is credible.Pross said:The pre-flight home Covid tests seem open to abuse. Ours just arrived and it struck me that if the first one is negative we could just use the same liquid for the other two to avoid the risk of a positive. Also, whilst it is supposed to be taken no more than 48 hours before flying there doesn't seem to be any way to stop someone taking it earlier then uploading the results on the correct day. The wife is currently having weekly PCR tests as well as daily lateral flows so we could just get her to do all the tests for us as we know it is almost certainly going to be negative.
Still, someone (probably a Party donor) is making money from it so all's good.0 -
I never got the result for my day 2 return from travel test. 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
Noone checked my test result before I flew back to the UK 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️0 -
rick_chasey said:
I never got the result for my day 2 return from travel test. 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
Noone checked my test result before I flew back to the UK 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
My return Day 2 test took two or three days longer than the outward 'Fit to tunnel' test from the same company at the same lab.0 -
This is a decent read on why governments and others have been slow to recognise aerosols and ventilation as being the key to covid spread:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/every-medical-authority-failed-realise-covid-airborne-late/A new paper published by leading academics argues that the western medical profession’s centuries-long battle against miasma theory initially blinded it to the fact that Sars-CoV-2 was airborne.
As a result, a whole string of precautions, including the wearing of masks and the better ventilation of hospitals, schools, airports and other public spaces, were tragically and unnecessarily delayed, it says.
Entitled Echoes Through Time: The Historical Origins of the Droplet Dogma and its Role in the Misidentification of Airborne Respiratory Infection Transmission, the paper is co-authored by more than 20 leading academics from around the world and is likely to cause a major stir as it moves through the peer-review process.
“Resistance to the idea of airborne spread of a respiratory infection is not new,” says the paper. “It has occurred repeatedly over much of the last century and greatly hampered understanding of how diseases transmit.
Professor Jose-Luis Jimenez, lead author of the paper and a chemistry professor at the University of Colorado, says the medical profession’s history left it blinkered to a startling degree.
He says it helps explain an experimental error made over a century ago which has been taught in medical schools ever since.
In 1910, an American doctor, Charles Chapin, made a name for himself by proving pathogens could spread via exhaled droplets but he over interpreted his results.
His finding that pathogens could be “sprayborne” was accepted - wrongly - as proof that more general aerosol transmission did not exist.
Droplet borne infection freed us “from the specter of infected air - a specter which has pursued the race from the time of Hippocrates”, declared Dr Chapin at the time.
Policymakers and politicians also have a natural bias against the idea that diseases may be airborne, says Professor Jimenez.
“Droplets on surfaces is very convenient for people in power - all of the responsibility is on the individual,” he said. “On the other hand, if you admit it is airborne, institutions, governments and companies have to do something.”
But the realisation that Sars-Cov-2 and almost certainly most influenza viruses are to some extent properly airborne will bring with it major costs.
Dr Julian Tang, associate professor of respiratory sciences at the University of Leicester Hospitals, and one of the paper’s authors, said major investment would be needed to update the ventilation systems in Britain’s hospitals.
“I’ve worked in hospitals in Singapore, Hong Kong and Canada. And NHS hospitals are falling apart,” he says.0 -
Thanks that’s really interesting.
Final sentence is entirely irrelevant to the rest but is a massive confirmation of my own view so I’m glad someone with some actual authority is saying it out loud.0 -
It seems so blindingly obvious I never realised that it was controversialrick_chasey said:Thanks that’s really interesting.
Final sentence is entirely irrelevant to the rest but is a massive confirmation of my own view so I’m glad someone with some actual authority is saying it out loud.0 -
Not even joking, a few years ago as a guest at dinner I once said i didn’t rate the NHS and refused to back down and basically got asked to leave.surrey_commuter said:
It seems so blindingly obvious I never realised that it was controversialrick_chasey said:Thanks that’s really interesting.
Final sentence is entirely irrelevant to the rest but is a massive confirmation of my own view so I’m glad someone with some actual authority is saying it out loud.
We weren’t getting on generally but it was that that was beyond the pale.0 -
From a quick Google search though whilst there is some form of universal health system in Canada and Singapore (I haven't looked up Hong Kong) they aren't as extensive / free as in the UK. From what I can gather Canada has a system paid through tax for basic care but you need a private insurance scheme for other things including ambulances and it on a provincial basis so you may not be covered outside your own area. Singapore is full cover but paid by a mandatory health insurance (as I say, a quick Google search so I may be wrong).rick_chasey said:Thanks that’s really interesting.
Final sentence is entirely irrelevant to the rest but is a massive confirmation of my own view so I’m glad someone with some actual authority is saying it out loud.
The question is would we prefer to go for a system like that to have a better service or stick with what we have?0 -
It’s not either or.Pross said:
From a quick Google search though whilst there is some form of universal health system in Canada and Singapore (I haven't looked up Hong Kong) they aren't as extensive / free as in the UK. From what I can gather Canada has a system paid through tax for basic care but you need a private insurance scheme for other things including ambulances and it on a provincial basis so you may not be covered outside your own area. Singapore is full cover but paid by a mandatory health insurance (as I say, a quick Google search so I may be wrong).rick_chasey said:Thanks that’s really interesting.
Final sentence is entirely irrelevant to the rest but is a massive confirmation of my own view so I’m glad someone with some actual authority is saying it out loud.
The question is would we prefer to go for a system like that to have a better service or stick with what we have?
But yes I would pay more for better care.0 -
Why am I not surprised? ;-)rick_chasey said:
Not even joking, a few years ago as a guest at dinner I once said i didn’t rate the NHS and refused to back down and basically got asked to leave.surrey_commuter said:
It seems so blindingly obvious I never realised that it was controversialrick_chasey said:Thanks that’s really interesting.
Final sentence is entirely irrelevant to the rest but is a massive confirmation of my own view so I’m glad someone with some actual authority is saying it out loud.
We weren’t getting on generally but it was that that was beyond the pale.2 -
-
We still pay a lot less than many countries as a percentage of GDP on healthcare, for example Germany.
The WHO consistently ranks the UK as one of the most cost effective health services/systems in the world.
I'd rather we just paid more tax and funded the NHS properly. Doing it that way is effectively everyone paying a premium in the event that we get sick, just like insurance, but without insurance companies taking a slice first.0 -
Sure I agree but my point was that comparing hospitals in a country where all your care is covered from general taxation to those in countries were either some services or the whole thing are paid for by Government run insurance schemes in addition to normal taxation is a touch unfairrick_chasey said:
It’s not either or.Pross said:
From a quick Google search though whilst there is some form of universal health system in Canada and Singapore (I haven't looked up Hong Kong) they aren't as extensive / free as in the UK. From what I can gather Canada has a system paid through tax for basic care but you need a private insurance scheme for other things including ambulances and it on a provincial basis so you may not be covered outside your own area. Singapore is full cover but paid by a mandatory health insurance (as I say, a quick Google search so I may be wrong).rick_chasey said:Thanks that’s really interesting.
Final sentence is entirely irrelevant to the rest but is a massive confirmation of my own view so I’m glad someone with some actual authority is saying it out loud.
The question is would we prefer to go for a system like that to have a better service or stick with what we have?
But yes I would pay more for better care.
I suspect most people want a "world class healthcare system" as we keep getting told we have but think it should be funded from current resources.
I'd be happy for the NHS to be a more basic free service with the extras covered by an additional Government run insurance scheme (with means testing so that those who can't afford it get full care). I also find it odd that health insurance through your work is a taxable benefit, it would make sense to encourage it although a lot of private healthcare uses the same resources as the NHS so increasing it could drain resources further.0 -
It shouldn’t be truly airborne. All previously known coronaviruses have been too large to be airborne. This one is now known to be small enough to be airborne. It’s yet another inexplicable part of the jigsaw.briantrumpet said:This is a decent read on why governments and others have been slow to recognise aerosols and ventilation as being the key to covid spread:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/every-medical-authority-failed-realise-covid-airborne-late/A new paper published by leading academics argues that the western medical profession’s centuries-long battle against miasma theory initially blinded it to the fact that Sars-CoV-2 was airborne.
As a result, a whole string of precautions, including the wearing of masks and the better ventilation of hospitals, schools, airports and other public spaces, were tragically and unnecessarily delayed, it says.
Entitled Echoes Through Time: The Historical Origins of the Droplet Dogma and its Role in the Misidentification of Airborne Respiratory Infection Transmission, the paper is co-authored by more than 20 leading academics from around the world and is likely to cause a major stir as it moves through the peer-review process.
“Resistance to the idea of airborne spread of a respiratory infection is not new,” says the paper. “It has occurred repeatedly over much of the last century and greatly hampered understanding of how diseases transmit.
Professor Jose-Luis Jimenez, lead author of the paper and a chemistry professor at the University of Colorado, says the medical profession’s history left it blinkered to a startling degree.
He says it helps explain an experimental error made over a century ago which has been taught in medical schools ever since.
In 1910, an American doctor, Charles Chapin, made a name for himself by proving pathogens could spread via exhaled droplets but he over interpreted his results.
His finding that pathogens could be “sprayborne” was accepted - wrongly - as proof that more general aerosol transmission did not exist.
Droplet borne infection freed us “from the specter of infected air - a specter which has pursued the race from the time of Hippocrates”, declared Dr Chapin at the time.
Policymakers and politicians also have a natural bias against the idea that diseases may be airborne, says Professor Jimenez.
“Droplets on surfaces is very convenient for people in power - all of the responsibility is on the individual,” he said. “On the other hand, if you admit it is airborne, institutions, governments and companies have to do something.”
But the realisation that Sars-Cov-2 and almost certainly most influenza viruses are to some extent properly airborne will bring with it major costs.
Dr Julian Tang, associate professor of respiratory sciences at the University of Leicester Hospitals, and one of the paper’s authors, said major investment would be needed to update the ventilation systems in Britain’s hospitals.
“I’ve worked in hospitals in Singapore, Hong Kong and Canada. And NHS hospitals are falling apart,” he says.
0 -
Would you not better trying to get the right position on your wrong size bike muncher instead of taking sh*t on here.3
-
webboo said:
Would you not better trying to get the right position on your wrong size bike muncher instead of taking sh*t on here.
'Talking sh*t' is the only mode. I've still absolutely no idea
1) why he persists
2) why anyone pays it any attention
The only plus is that his pixels don't waste quite as much energy as bitcoins, although (allegedly) bitcoins do have value.-1 -
So much to learn about a british linguistic culturerick_chasey said:
Not even joking, a few years ago as a guest at dinner I once said i didn’t rate the NHS and refused to back down and basically got asked to leave.surrey_commuter said:
It seems so blindingly obvious I never realised that it was controversialrick_chasey said:Thanks that’s really interesting.
Final sentence is entirely irrelevant to the rest but is a massive confirmation of my own view so I’m glad someone with some actual authority is saying it out loud.
We weren’t getting on generally but it was that that was beyond the pale.
I am not a racist but...
I don’t mean to criticise but...
The people who work in the NHS are great but...
Most Brits have no experience of other systems so have no idea how laughably sh1t parts of the NHS are.
0 -
I think people confuse compassionate care from the staff & survival with good quality care.surrey_commuter said:
So much to learn about a british linguistic culturerick_chasey said:
Not even joking, a few years ago as a guest at dinner I once said i didn’t rate the NHS and refused to back down and basically got asked to leave.surrey_commuter said:
It seems so blindingly obvious I never realised that it was controversialrick_chasey said:Thanks that’s really interesting.
Final sentence is entirely irrelevant to the rest but is a massive confirmation of my own view so I’m glad someone with some actual authority is saying it out loud.
We weren’t getting on generally but it was that that was beyond the pale.
I am not a racist but...
I don’t mean to criticise but...
The people who work in the NHS are great but...
Most Brits have no experience of other systems so have no idea how laughably censored parts of the NHS are.
0 -
How many dinner parties have you been asked to leave?surrey_commuter said:
So much to learn about a british linguistic culturerick_chasey said:
Not even joking, a few years ago as a guest at dinner I once said i didn’t rate the NHS and refused to back down and basically got asked to leave.surrey_commuter said:
It seems so blindingly obvious I never realised that it was controversialrick_chasey said:Thanks that’s really interesting.
Final sentence is entirely irrelevant to the rest but is a massive confirmation of my own view so I’m glad someone with some actual authority is saying it out loud.
We weren’t getting on generally but it was that that was beyond the pale.
I am not a racist but...
I don’t mean to criticise but...
The people who work in the NHS are great but...
Most Brits have no experience of other systems so have no idea how laughably censored parts of the NHS are.1 -
rick_chasey said:
I think people confuse compassionate care from the staff & survival with good quality care.surrey_commuter said:
So much to learn about a british linguistic culturerick_chasey said:
Not even joking, a few years ago as a guest at dinner I once said i didn’t rate the NHS and refused to back down and basically got asked to leave.surrey_commuter said:
It seems so blindingly obvious I never realised that it was controversialrick_chasey said:Thanks that’s really interesting.
Final sentence is entirely irrelevant to the rest but is a massive confirmation of my own view so I’m glad someone with some actual authority is saying it out loud.
We weren’t getting on generally but it was that that was beyond the pale.
I am not a racist but...
I don’t mean to criticise but...
The people who work in the NHS are great but...
Most Brits have no experience of other systems so have no idea how laughably censored parts of the NHS are.
I've no axe to grind, but a quick Google suggests that not everyone shares your negative view of the NHS:
https://www.euronews.com/next/2021/08/13/these-are-the-world-s-best-healthcare-systems-and-also-the-united-states
https://ceoworld.biz/2021/04/27/revealed-countries-with-the-best-health-care-systems-2021/
https://photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
https://www.internationalinsurance.com/health/systems/
What is striking is the divergence of rankings between all of these, so one can only assume that the methodology of ranking is widely divergent.
I suspect we're nearly all subject to ranking it by personal experience, and that's generally going to be strongly negative or positive, and it's generally not going to encompass anything more than a tiny snapshot, plus what we read in the press, where we'll tend towards confirmation bias in our interpretations.
0 -
On a macro level the NHS delivers a developed world service and in a BAU environment it is one of the most effective in terms of efficiency.
I think we can all agree that rona has showed up its limitations.
https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/big-election-questions-nhs-international-comparisons
This is a fairly decent summary, which is a more detailed version of my summary above.
Healthcare is a really tough nut to crack as it is really hard to get all the incentives aligned.
I am holding it to a very high standard when I complain about it, but as one of the richest nations on earth, I don't think that is unreasonable.0 -
I clicked on the first link there, which at a glance seems to show the UK doing quite well with an overall ranking of 4th out of the 11 countries they looked at.
What that means if you look at the first chart here: https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2021/aug/mirror-mirror-2021-reflecting-poorly#rank is that the NHS performs pretty well on access to care, care process, administrative efficiency and equity, but 9th out of 11 on Health Care Outcomes.0 -
When people talk about competent governments, it's worth noting that the coalition government abolished PCTs leading to all sorts of NHS problems and introduced student loans that wouldn't be repaid.0
-
No point having a system with great out comes if no one can access it though?kingstongraham said:I clicked on the first link there, which at a glance seems to show the UK doing quite well with an overall ranking of 4th out of the 11 countries they looked at.
What that means if you look at the first chart here: https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2021/aug/mirror-mirror-2021-reflecting-poorly#rank is that the NHS performs pretty well on access to care, care process, administrative efficiency and equity, but 9th out of 11 on Health Care Outcomes.
Also, this one shows the NHS being pretty darn good on quality of care (the best), but is from 2013, before the Tories could start running it into the ground.
https://www.internationalinsurance.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/ranking-11-best-international-healthcare-countries-800x600@2x.png0 -
Surprised he gets invited. People must like his wifeTheBigBean said:
How many dinner parties have you been asked to leave?surrey_commuter said:
So much to learn about a british linguistic culturerick_chasey said:
Not even joking, a few years ago as a guest at dinner I once said i didn’t rate the NHS and refused to back down and basically got asked to leave.surrey_commuter said:
It seems so blindingly obvious I never realised that it was controversialrick_chasey said:Thanks that’s really interesting.
Final sentence is entirely irrelevant to the rest but is a massive confirmation of my own view so I’m glad someone with some actual authority is saying it out loud.
We weren’t getting on generally but it was that that was beyond the pale.
I am not a racist but...
I don’t mean to criticise but...
The people who work in the NHS are great but...
Most Brits have no experience of other systems so have no idea how laughably censored parts of the NHS are.0
