The big Coronavirus thread

11181191211231241347

Comments

  • capt_slog
    capt_slog Posts: 3,974
    orraloon said:

    SF, get out on your bike tomorrow, go for a solo ride, is good for the mental health and sanity. Is what I've been doing, with no problems whatsoever with other road users, few though they are other than non motoriseds.

    These times are censored . These times will pass. And when the new normal takes form, then we go back to what used to be 'our' society, or alternatively aux armes citoyens. Who knows? In meantime, I recommend the chill pill in bike riding form.

    Good call that man.

    It's easy to get bogged down in all this, I got the same at the start of the week (see conspiracy theories thread). We CAN still go out, make the most of this weather if you are able.


    The older I get, the better I was.

  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    orraloon said:

    SF, get out on your bike tomorrow, go for a solo ride, is good for the mental health and sanity. Is what I've been doing, with no problems whatsoever with other road users, few though they are other than non motoriseds.

    These times are censored . These times will pass. And when the new normal takes form, then we go back to what used to be 'our' society, or alternatively aux armes citoyens. Who knows? In meantime, I recommend the chill pill in bike riding form.

    Yes you're right. I actually got out today on the bike and it was great. Glass.of wine tonight and family quiz on Zoom.
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,183
    orraloon said:

    SF, get out on your bike tomorrow, go for a solo ride, is good for the mental health and sanity. Is what I've been doing, with no problems whatsoever with other road users, few though they are other than non motoriseds.

    These times are censored . These times will pass. And when the new normal takes form, then we go back to what used to be 'our' society, or alternatively aux armes citoyens. Who knows? In meantime, I recommend the chill pill in bike riding form.

    That sh1t be true!

    On that note I'm off to the song thread, because that's how I roll.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,291
    Does anyone think that if we had followed the Sweden route, we would have had Sweden's numbers? They have had 870 deaths, the UK on the equivalent day (23 days after 10th death) was at 4,314.

    I don't know the reason, but I can't see how the UK without lockdown would have had lower numbers. There's an awful lot of unknowns, and a lot of luck.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867

    Does anyone think that if we had followed the Sweden route, we would have had Sweden's numbers? They have had 870 deaths, the UK on the equivalent day (23 days after 10th death) was at 4,314.

    I don't know the reason, but I can't see how the UK without lockdown would have had lower numbers. There's an awful lot of unknowns, and a lot of luck.

    6/7 times as many people in the UK so they are doing worse and presumably will accelerate.
    Interesting to compare Sweden to Norway
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,474
    shortfall said:

    shortfall said:

    rjsterry said:

    shortfall said:

    shortfall said:

    Jeez. Do some of you tug your forelocks when you leave house arrest?

    I don't view the current situation as house arrest.

    I don't understand who you think I'd be tugging my forelocks to or why.

    I dont get this bizarre mindset.

    I call it house arrest. We used to be a free law governed country where everything was permitted unless it was officially proscribed by laws that had been scrutinised by an elected parliament where the ruling party was held to account by an opposition and a free press. What we have now is the government ruling by dictat, ramming laws through parliament with no dissent and no debate, passing legislation that demands we stay in our own homes day and night save for a few exceptions that are officially allowed. Enforcing that we have a newly zealous police force flying drones to.spy on us and threatening to check our shopping baskets for approved goods, all aided and abetted by an army of curtain twitches desperate to snitch on their neighbours. Anyone (like me) who finds this all quite terrifying and dares to challenge and debate it is viewed as either and eccentric or a dangerous fool. The world has gone mad, and the longer it goes on the further our economy goes down the toilet. I'm obviously wasting my time here but it will be revealing to see how attitudes have changed by this time next year.
    A government with a comfortable majority has always been able to do more or less what it pleases between elections. You seem to have a very rose tinted view of our political system before Covid 19.
    Not at all, our system had its flaws, but what we have now with this Covid situation is a suppine opposition who nodded draconian legislation through parliament which is itself now suspended and unable to question and hold the government to account. We also have a press and media class that largely accepts wholesale the government lockdown and assault on civil liberties. There a few notable commentators brave enough to speak out and challenge the consensus but they are few and they face a furious mob on social media for daring to challenge conventional wisdom. Then you get wiseacres like Pross who make up strawmen and attribute language such as chem trails and sheeple to dissenting voices. This is all terribly depressing and I'm amazed so many people swallow it without question. Li ke I've repeatedly said it will be informative to revisit these arguments 12 months hence when attitudes have changed, when jobs have been lost, industries wiped out, savings and pensions eroded and the Western world's unproven experiment of putting it's economies into deep freeze for months has panned out.
    Have you thoughts on an alternative.

    Sweden. Yes I know the demographic is different and I don't draw direct comparisons but it will be interesting to see how they fare. But really I don't pretend to have any great knowledge or a magic pill, I'm only asking that Parliament be recalled to hold the government to account, I ask the press to use its freedom to challenge, I ask commentators and public alike not to be blinded by panic and emotion in their responses. Can we at least go back to critical thinking?
    The government should be held to account

    The press should be asking better questions in order that the government can be held to account.

    No one disagrees.

    No one's under house arrest or tugging their forelocks here.


    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190

    It is weird how when the same numbers were going on in Italy the tone was very grave and serious but now the U.K. is at that level the tone feels much more jovial.

    I agree this is what has happened but I think there are two things that at least partly explain this.
    1) we’re becoming desensitised to the numbers.
    2) the NHS doesn’t seem to be in as much of a crisis as Italy’s.

    I have no idea whether point 2 is luck, judgement or different reporting. It is not an attempt to judge what happened in Italy.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,893
    morstar said:

    It is weird how when the same numbers were going on in Italy the tone was very grave and serious but now the U.K. is at that level the tone feels much more jovial.

    I agree this is what has happened but I think there are two things that at least partly explain this.
    1) we’re becoming desensitised to the numbers.
    2) the NHS doesn’t seem to be in as much of a crisis as Italy’s.

    I have no idea whether point 2 is luck, judgement or different reporting. It is not an attempt to judge what happened in Italy.
    I think, judging by John Burn Murdich's comparison of regions, that our outbreak is not as concentrated as Italy's, and that this has spread the load on health services. Also, I think our demographics work slightly more in our favour. But I also think it's very important to remember that this is just Episode 1.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • DeVlaeminck
    DeVlaeminck Posts: 9,110
    edited April 2020
    Pross said:

    Do we also have to walk to the nearest shop ? If not why not?

    If all you needed was a loaf of bread and you were traveling further than necessary because you wanted to go to a shop selling fancy artisan loaves then I would question the necessity.

    If you were going to do a weekly shop then it sounds reasonable. If you think travelling to a park is reasonable carry on but don't be a hypocrite and whinge if the Government decide to restrict our freedoms further or if you get the virus. I'll keep limiting my exercise to short walks or runs from home and topping it up with the turbo trainer.
    If I get the virus it's most likely because my son works in Sainsbury's and my wife is also a key worker - it won't be because I sat in my car for 5 minutes to go to a park will it.

    I mean if you can give me a rational explanation why I shouldn't I'm all ears - it's not even against the new law it's just that you have made your choice and you want to demonise people that have made other choices in order to validate your own.

    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,682
    orraloon said:

    SF, get out on your bike tomorrow, go for a solo ride, is good for the mental health and sanity. Is what I've been doing, with no problems whatsoever with other road users, few though they are other than non motoriseds.

    These times are censored . These times will pass. And when the new normal takes form, then we go back to what used to be 'our' society, or alternatively aux armes citoyens. Who knows? In meantime, I recommend the chill pill in bike riding form.

    Can't, police state innit
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,474

    Pross said:

    Do we also have to walk to the nearest shop ? If not why not?

    If all you needed was a loaf of bread and you were traveling further than necessary because you wanted to go to a shop selling fancy artisan loaves then I would question the necessity.

    If you were going to do a weekly shop then it sounds reasonable. If you think travelling to a park is reasonable carry on but don't be a hypocrite and whinge if the Government decide to restrict our freedoms further or if you get the virus. I'll keep limiting my exercise to short walks or runs from home and topping it up with the turbo trainer.
    If I get the virus it's most likely because my son works in Sainsbury's and my wife is also a key worker - it won't be because I sat in my car for 5 minutes to go to a park will it.

    I mean if you can give me a rational explanation why I shouldn't I'm all ears - it's not even against the new law it's just that you have made your choice and you want to demonise people that have made other choices in order to validate your own.

    You're only evaluting one side of the equation
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 22,079

    It is weird how when the same numbers were going on in Italy the tone was very grave and serious but now the U.K. is at that level the tone feels much more jovial.

    Yes, we are now having larger daily numbers than Italy ever had. So much for us not being Italy because we got it under control early.

    We're no longer following Italy, we've got worse numbers.
    All else equal I would expect London to be battered based on population density and commuting. I don't think there is another comparable city in western Europe. I have no idea if this is the explanation for the worse figures in the UK as a whole.

  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660

    It is weird how when the same numbers were going on in Italy the tone was very grave and serious but now the U.K. is at that level the tone feels much more jovial.

    Yes, we are now having larger daily numbers than Italy ever had. So much for us not being Italy because we got it under control early.

    We're no longer following Italy, we've got worse numbers.
    Maybe I’m remembering it wrong but I got called out for being too negative for pointing out this was where the U.K. was heading.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867

    It is weird how when the same numbers were going on in Italy the tone was very grave and serious but now the U.K. is at that level the tone feels much more jovial.

    Yes, we are now having larger daily numbers than Italy ever had. So much for us not being Italy because we got it under control early.

    We're no longer following Italy, we've got worse numbers.
    Maybe I’m remembering it wrong but I got called out for being too negative for pointing out this was where the U.K. was heading.
    You need to cheer up. I am sure some indolence in the counting over the Easter weekend will see the situation radically improving.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 22,079
    Here is a summary of the UK from above. Everywhere is deserted and fine. Then there is London,

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-52249942/coronavirus-the-uk-s-easter-lockdown-from-above
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,183

    Here is a summary of the UK from above. Everywhere is deserted and fine. Then there is London,

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-52249942/coronavirus-the-uk-s-easter-lockdown-from-above

    Yeah, I heard Manchester had problems too. Again where I live people are being very respectful of the guidelines.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867

    Here is a summary of the UK from above. Everywhere is deserted and fine. Then there is London,

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-52249942/coronavirus-the-uk-s-easter-lockdown-from-above

    Maybe I missed the start but other than London all I saw were deserted seaside resorts which seems like a fascile comparison
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,931

    Here is a summary of the UK from above. Everywhere is deserted and fine. Then there is London,

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-52249942/coronavirus-the-uk-s-easter-lockdown-from-above


    It would be interesting to see similar for Birmingham too. I go back to the graph of regional deaths per 100,000 I posted upthread. Maybe there are both population density and societal/behavioural differences at play here. It's going to be hard to keep everyone on board if regulations are imposed nationwide if the problems are concentrated in tight geographical areas.


  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,594

    Here is a summary of the UK from above. Everywhere is deserted and fine. Then there is London,

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-52249942/coronavirus-the-uk-s-easter-lockdown-from-above

    Going purely on that video, London is fooked.
    The rest of the country will be fine. Concurs with my small sample size too.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,291

    fenix said:

    Pross said:



    I still haven't seen / heard one expert on mainstream TV or radio say anything similar to some of the quotes in print or online media. They are still very much in the nothing to be overly concerned about unless you're elderly and / or have underlying health issues. Is this that TV / radio are toeing the official line or that the wider media are using hyperbole to get hits? I guess we'll find out within a month.

    Doctor in Italy on breakfast TV today saying their health system is almost at breaking point. They're just a couple of weeks ahead.

    Countries who prepare well - death rate might be 1%. Countries with poor plans - 5%.

    We need to flatten the infection curve. Do what the Italians have announced now.
    We are not 2 weeks behind Italy. It's rubbish to look at their numbers and then find the UK equivalent of positives and say that is how far behind we are. Both countries had patient zero at a similar time however Italy went weeks before catching up with contact tracing this patient. We knew all patient zero contacts (Brighton) very quickly.
    Thought I'd look back. Well...
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    London is really really dense compared to other cities.

    Of course there will be higher levels of infection.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,594

    London is really really dense compared to other cities.

    Of course there will be higher levels of infection.

    If that is in response to my comment then it can be clearly seen in the video that there is plenty of space but people choose not to use it.
    There is no cure for idiocy.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    edited April 2020
    Think how many idiots there are in London per square mile.

    And that’s before you get to things like Londoners being much more likely to be in really small homes and flats blah blah blah.
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,474
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,594

    Think how many idiots there are in London per square mile.

    Fair point. Well made. 🤣🤣🤣
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,682

    London is really really dense compared to other cities.

    Of course there will be higher levels of infection.

    Just looked at the population densities and some Boroughs at the top are what I'd expect (not knowing the city very well) such as Islington and Tower Hamlets but others surprised me e.g. Westminster never feels like it has a lot of residential space and feels like it should be less densely populated than other areas of Greater London. Same with Kensington & Chelsea, it conjures up images but I was aware from Grenfell that it isn't all like that.

    Others that I thought would have a lot of high rise packed in are much lower and similar to Portsmouth and Southampton which, surprisingly, are the most densely populated cities outside London.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,893
    pblakeney said:

    Here is a summary of the UK from above. Everywhere is deserted and fine. Then there is London,

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-52249942/coronavirus-the-uk-s-easter-lockdown-from-above

    Going purely on that video, London is fooked.
    The rest of the country will be fine. Concurs with my small sample size too.
    What, the entirely representative clip of Hyde Park? That's pretty empty for a sunny Bank Holiday. Not that I have done an exhaustive survey of the local parks, but from the sounds coming over the fence, everyone was in their gardens today in my bit of not-dense London.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,594
    edited April 2020
    rjsterry said:

    pblakeney said:

    Here is a summary of the UK from above. Everywhere is deserted and fine. Then there is London,

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-52249942/coronavirus-the-uk-s-easter-lockdown-from-above

    Going purely on that video, London is fooked.
    The rest of the country will be fine. Concurs with my small sample size too.
    What, the entirely representative clip of Hyde Park? That's pretty empty for a sunny Bank Holiday. Not that I have done an exhaustive survey of the local parks, but from the sounds coming over the fence, everyone was in their gardens today in my bit of not-dense London.
    I made that clear if you read the first words. 👏
    They are still too close. Idiots.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,893
    Pross said:

    London is really really dense compared to other cities.

    Of course there will be higher levels of infection.

    Just looked at the population densities and some Boroughs at the top are what I'd expect (not knowing the city very well) such as Islington and Tower Hamlets but others surprised me e.g. Westminster never feels like it has a lot of residential space and feels like it should be less densely populated than other areas of Greater London. Same with Kensington & Chelsea, it conjures up images but I was aware from Grenfell that it isn't all like that.

    Others that I thought would have a lot of high rise packed in are much lower and similar to Portsmouth and Southampton which, surprisingly, are the most densely populated cities outside London.
    Only zone 1 is really densely populated and even that is low by international standards.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,931
    This is an interesting read, suggesting that large social gatherings and households have been the key drivers of the spread. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/09/the-cluster-effect-how-social-gatherings-were-rocket-fuel-for-coronavirus