Jump to content
Fuzzar

Corona Virus main thread

Recommended Posts

Sorry to belabor a point but if you don't believe the Virus is real, you won't take steps to stop transmission. The US has seen the decline on cases reverse - it was up 20% over last week's numbers, but within that it is Republican lead States performing worst. Why? Because so many of them are undermining efforts to control transmission. Karma has caught a few - the anti-mask Governor or Missouri and his wife are infected, and "leave it to God" pastors have become infected too, but way too many people take their lead from the President or Governors who are doing everything they can to downplay the risks and he is still holding rallies!

So you have the North East with infection rates below 1%, West Coast under 3% v  South and MidWest with rates between 8 and 16% ! (yes some of those States are showing "rapidly falling case numbers" but I'd point to "rapidly falling test numbers" too that obviously impact that)

Wearing a mask is not the only solution to transmission, but it so obviously directly impacts it that not wearing one is totally irresponsible. And the fact that the White House killed a plan by the US Post Office to mail five masks to every household in the US is a scandal that in any other time that would be front page news. Unfortunately we have a totally useless media and multiple scandals every day to hide that. (As Boris and Dom know full well and are exploiting this in the UK too) 

Edited by Surfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Van wink said:

Over 16000 today

image.thumb.png.bb0e35e93943578ec764eb5cb39f4508.png

I agree, I've been following this app since you first recommended it and I report my status every couple of days - so far I've been lucky and haven't had to do anything except report I feel "physically normal" as it elegantly puts it.

 

Over the summer, the number of daily cases and active cases had both shrunk to reassuringly low levels, from memory the "active cases" number had gone down to about 30,000.  Clearly we're seeing a major resurgence of the virus and let's hope that the measures taken are enough to rein it in, otherwise we need further restrictions for a certainty.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ricardo said:

I've  downloaded the NHS App 👍

Yep I hope we all will.


The UK has reported 6,634 new coronavirus cases - the highest daily total ever recorded.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, It's Character Forming said:

I agree, I've been following this app since you first recommended it and I report my status every couple of days - so far I've been lucky and haven't had to do anything except report I feel "physically normal" as it elegantly puts it.

 

Over the summer, the number of daily cases and active cases had both shrunk to reassuringly low levels, from memory the "active cases" number had gone down to about 30,000.  Clearly we're seeing a major resurgence of the virus and let's hope that the measures taken are enough to rein it in, otherwise we need further restrictions for a certainty.

We won’t see the effect of the new measures coming through for a while but my feeling is they won’t prove to be sufficient, also as hospitalisations and deaths rise and we see the news reporting from ICU the  pressure to do more will be overwhelming.

Edited by Van wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, It's Character Forming said:

Interesting although I suspect some people think face masks stop the virus, whereas all they actually do is reduce the level of transmission.  On TV from the US you often see people wearing face masks but in close proximity as if they think the face masks will stop them getting infected, when all they do is cut down on the transmission, so if you're close by someone with it, you can still catch it.

This was one of the reasons face masks were not recommended at the start of lockdown.  False sense of security

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Number of tests not updated yet but on yesterdays numbers it looks like around 3% positives today

Latest UK Numbers 

6643 - 40

Inpatients  1469  not updated yet

 

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

Yesterdays European.

Italy   1640 - 20

France 13072 - 43

Spain  11289 - 130

Germany  2029 - 17

Edited by ricardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth I think Johnson should have clamped down much harder yesterday.

This was his last shot, the last chance saloon at this to negate very heavy total lockdown later again.

He wants to keep the schools, business, retail and indeed pubs open as much as possible for good economic reasons (the 10pm is a 'political' compromise). I can accept that.

BUT - with all the above 'open in some manner he needed then to balance that with clamping down as hard as possible elsewhere - especially social gatherings at homes (one of if not the largest known risk), face masks, 'events' and the like.

Sadly I think he flunked the big call again. History will not be kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

For what it's worth I think Johnson should have clamped down much harder yesterday.

This was his last shot, the last chance saloon at this to negate very heavy total lockdown later again.

He wants to keep the schools, business, retail and indeed pubs open as much as possible for good economic reasons (the 10pm is a 'political' compromise). I can accept that.

BUT - with all the above 'open in some manner he needed then to balance that with clamping down as hard as possible elsewhere - especially social gatherings at homes (one of if not the largest known risk), face masks, 'events' and the like.

Sadly I think he flunked the big call again. History will not be kind.

The advice and the law have become quite distinct.  The advice is still strong on  what should and what should not be done. The law is weaker, only requiring that social events be limited to six or less (although that does mean there is very little scope for a family of  say 4 or 5 to meet any other family socially).

There is probably a deep philosophical question about liberalism and collectivism here somewhere and probably also one about whether or not it is righy to pass what is likely to prove unenforceable law to emphasise a point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ricardo said:

Number of tests not updated yet but on yesterdays numbers it looks like around 3% positives today

Latest UK Numbers 

6643 - 40

Inpatients  1469  not updated yet

 

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

Yesterdays European.

Italy   1640 - 20

France 13072 - 43

Spain  11289 - 130

Germany  2029 - 17

France records fourth record high in cases over eight day span

France has seen its case load increase by 16,096 across a 24 hour period - a new record for the country.

The daily figure comes after 13,072 cases were reported on Wednesday. It is the fourth record high for the country in eight days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barbe bleu said:

There is probably a deep philosophical question about liberalism and collectivism here somewhere and probably also one about whether or not it is righy to pass what is likely to prove unenforceable law to emphasise a point.

I think you've just answered and confirmed my own rhetorical question.

He flunked it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

I think you've just answered and confirmed my own rhetorical question.

He flunked it.

I wasn't aware that i was attempting to answer a question, rhetorical or otherwise, but glad to help😀

I suspect though that you have been firm in your opinion for a while now and I haven't really clarified anything!

For what it is worth i do feel that boris is very much a libertatian and will not easily demand that people surrender what would in years gone by seem the inalienable right to see who they want in  their own home

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ricardo said:

I've  downloaded the NHS App 👍

Lucky you. Neither Mrs KG or my phone are compatible.

So what is the point of Handoncock bulling about something half the population can't access.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, sonyc said:

Indeed. The worry is that they finish their autumn term and go home for Christmas taking the virus with them into their home towns. I read that one university might be considering not allowing students home (asking them) because of the worry!

If they get infected now they wouldn't still be infectious by Christmas... it should be a hurry up catch it and recover strategy? If you test positive you can go home after a mandatory 2 week quarantine... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Surfer said:

If they get infected now they wouldn't still be infectious by Christmas... it should be a hurry up catch it and recover strategy? If you test positive you can go home after a mandatory 2 week quarantine... 

Christmas is 3 months away... God knows what situation we'll be in by then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Van wink said:

Article behind paywall in Telegraph suggesting CV has mutated in the states to become more infectious and “ find its way around hand washing and facemasks” now I know this is a sneaky little **** but sounds like it might have an IQ higher than Trumps, which isnt a huge leap for a virus but still, a little sceptical on this one, but will have to see.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/24/coronavirus-mutate-contagious-study-us-cases
 

Also in Guardian, not unexpected that the virus mutates, it will be happening all the time, and not in the interest of the virus to kill its host, it wants its host to spread it around to more people.

Edited by Van wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

I wasn't aware that i was attempting to answer a question, rhetorical or otherwise, but glad to help😀

I suspect though that you have been firm in your opinion for a while now and I haven't really clarified anything!

For what it is worth i do feel that boris is very much a libertatian and will not easily demand that people surrender what would in years gone by seem the inalienable right to see who they want in  their own home

 

Maybe but what I'm trying to say is that he's being very authoritarian on businesses and similar  - but not on the 'rule of 6'. 

There is no half-way house with the virus - it's either growing or diminishing It grows quickly, diminishes slowly.

Not implementing stricter social distancing / visit rules because he's weak and wobbly simply undermines - indeed largely negates the new rules on businesses etc. Mixed messaging as ever.

Very obvious screeching U turn ahead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Surfer said:

If they get infected now they wouldn't still be infectious by Christmas... it should be a hurry up catch it and recover strategy? If you test positive you can go home after a mandatory 2 week quarantine... 

I always used to get ill in the first couple of weeks of the year  Fresher's flu we called it as it was rife in fresher's week.

Symptoms will be much less widely spread by December

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sunak.

He's been given a lot of credit for his furlough scheme to-date but it was alway going to make you popular giving away lots of public money with few caveats - many enjoying a 6 month staycation in good weather. No losers.

However, with the new scheme I think the wheels will (indeed are) are starting to come off. Making employers question whether a job is long term viable - and more so if if they will support it through is going to bring economic realities crashing in.

I suspect Sunak will rapidly lose his 'shine'  as many find they are 'unviable' rightly or wrongly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

Sunak.

He's been given a lot of credit for his furlough scheme to-date but it was alway going to make you popular giving away lots of public money with few caveats - many enjoying a 6 month staycation in good weather. No losers.

However, with the new scheme I think the wheels will (indeed are) are starting to come off. Making employers question whether a job is long term viable - and more so if if they will support it through is going to bring economic realities crashing in.

I suspect Sunak will rapidly lose his 'shine'  as many find they are 'unviable' rightly or wrongly.

I understand there are similar schemes in Germany/Europe, but I struggle with it a bit. 

As I understand it, if someone worked 50 per cent of their contracted hours, the employer would pay 100 per cent of that first fifty percent. The employer would pay 1/3 of the other half and the government pays another 1/3. So for an employee on, say, 20k, the company pays 10k for the shifts worked and then has to pay another £3,333 for shifts not worked.

So if I’m an employer with two members of staff earning 20k but only enough work for one of them, I have the option of (1) the two employees sharing half the available work each, both employees taking home £16,666 instead of £20,000 but me paying £26,666 for the equivalent of one full time worker or (2) keeping one of them and paying £20,000. 

Am I missing something? Does the employer get some sort of government incentive for choosing the more expensive option 1? If not, won’t we just end up with companies making the same number of redundancies anyway, the same number of people out of work as there would have been without any scheme and the government paying more in full benefits to the person made redundant in the above example than if the government had just paid the extra £6,666 itself anyway? 

I know it could be more than fifty percent worked (and less - I think the minimum is a third of contracted hours), but other than the goodwill of companies in doing the best by their employees at their own expense, I don’t see how the scheme works. Perhaps for large multinationals where the company can absorb the extra cost for unworked shifts, but smaller companies can’t. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Aggy said:

I understand there are similar schemes in Germany/Europe, but I struggle with it a bit. 

As I understand it, if someone worked 50 per cent of their contracted hours, the employer would pay 100 per cent of that first fifty percent. The employer would pay 1/3 of the other half and the government pays another 1/3. So for an employee on, say, 20k, the company pays 10k for the shifts worked and then has to pay another £3,333 for shifts not worked.

So if I’m an employer with two members of staff earning 20k but only enough work for one of them, I have the option of (1) the two employees sharing half the available work each, both employees taking home £16,666 instead of £20,000 but me paying £26,666 for the equivalent of one full time worker or (2) keeping one of them and paying £20,000. 

Am I missing something? Does the employer get some sort of government incentive for choosing the more expensive option 1? If not, won’t we just end up with companies making the same number of redundancies anyway, the same number of people out of work as there would have been without any scheme and the government paying more in full benefits to the person made redundant in the above example than if the government had just paid the extra £6,666 itself anyway? 

I know it could be more than fifty percent worked (and less - I think the minimum is a third of contracted hours), but other than the goodwill of companies in doing the best by their employees at their own expense, I don’t see how the scheme works. Perhaps for large multinationals where the company can absorb the extra cost for unworked shifts, but smaller companies can’t. 

Can't really comment as it doesn't really affect us - but it does focus the question for companies if you (really) need the staff and how many in 6 months even if things go well.

Easiest answer for the 'non-critical' (already furloughed) and easily re-employable and with lesser redundancy costs (and less still accruing) is to let them go now. At least you have certainty.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Easiest answer for the 'non-critical' (already furloughed) and easily re-employable and with lesser redundancy costs (and less still accruing) is to let them go now. At least you have certainty.    

Agreed difficult because there’s no certainty. With stricter rules announced this week I imagine more will be contemplating redundancies again who might have previously been more encouraged. As you say, some staff will be more easily replaceable in the future so suppose you just let them go and see how things go.

To pick up on another point you made earlier as arguably a link in to this...

3 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Maybe but what I'm trying to say is that he's being very authoritarian on businesses and similar - but not on the ‘rule of six’.

Possible argument that redundancies in hospitality and retail, and of ‘non critical’ staff is not massively likely to overly affect your “average” middle class, middle aged Tory voter . Seeing your family and friends though......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

28 minutes ago, Aggy said:

Possible argument that redundancies in hospitality and retail, and of ‘non critical’ staff is not massively likely to overly affect your “average” middle class, middle aged Tory voter . Seeing your family and friends though......

Being 'insensitive' it's not very helpful to Johnson's Brexity base if he 'loses' lots overwhelmingly Brexity Tory boomers (and the RW no mask set it's a hoax) to Covid-19. If I was into wacky conspiracy theories (I'm not) as some seem to be it's almost as if it perfectly 'targeted'!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Surfer said:

If they get infected now they wouldn't still be infectious by Christmas... it should be a hurry up catch it and recover strategy? If you test positive you can go home after a mandatory 2 week quarantine... 

Yes there is the half term first but given the current trajectory of infections you could see it being serious at Xmas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Sunak.

He's been given a lot of credit for his furlough scheme to-date but it was alway going to make you popular giving away lots of public money with few caveats - many enjoying a 6 month staycation in good weather. No losers.

However, with the new scheme I think the wheels will (indeed are) are starting to come off. Making employers question whether a job is long term viable - and more so if if they will support it through is going to bring economic realities crashing in.

I suspect Sunak will rapidly lose his 'shine'  as many find they are 'unviable' rightly or wrongly.

Its obviously a measure designed to provide a transition and little more, supported by the unions and CBI, to try and tide employers over the winter. He has been clear too that he expects more redundancies and unemployment. Its a difficult balance to achieve any kind of perfect solution - the government clearly doesn't want to support 'non' jobs. Like your view of Johnson and his decision making on health measures, you do wonder also if this announcement has been made a couple of weeks too late. Businesses often look forward and plan a good few months ahead. Labour's Dodds has been pushing for a transition arrangement for quite a while. Yet, you would imagine Sunak will have had to do all his modelling, so its not an easy criticism to make.

He will face a challenge ahead, any chancellor would. Add to this the fall out from Brexit.  

Edited by sonyc
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Van wink said:

London now on watch list.

Latest ONS survey data, very large increase in numbers and of course this data is behind the curve.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/englandwalesandnorthernireland25september2020

Yes  ONS 10,000 a day by the 19th - already a week old!

Really gives the 'lie' to the daily test figures as misleading and under-reporting. Zoe is more on the ball currently.

Then I guess Whitty & Valence (and Hancock and thye govt.) knew well these numbers before their little duet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes  ONS 10,000 a day by the 19th - already a week old!

Really gives the 'lie' to the daily test figures as misleading and under-reporting. Zoe is more on the ball currently.

Then I guess Whitty & Valence (and Hancock and thye govt.) knew well these numbers before their little duet.

I'm far more trusting of the Zoe app figures. They are reporting in real time after all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...