Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Coronavirus: The Thread

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Coronavirus: The Thread

Old 21st May 2020, 08:02
  #7001 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 63
Posts: 66
For UK Folk I highly recommend to watch the 2 Part BBC TV Horizon programme on Coronavirus....Very informed
rog747 is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 08:17
  #7002 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wilts
Posts: 127
Zuckerberg: Facebook to 'take down' coronavirus misinformation https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52749066
DON T is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 08:17
  #7003 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Ilmington, Warwickshire
Posts: 131
Mrs BBE asked a good question over coffee this morning. As shop workers have effectively been in the front line and worked all through the lockdown, has there been higher infection rates in this group? After all, the Perspex screens werenít installed for some time and their exposure would have been very considerable and varied.
BehindBlueEyes is online now  
Old 21st May 2020, 08:49
  #7004 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 72
Posts: 796
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
I'm fairly close to Salisbury and we've had very few cases locally, but that's also true for the whole of the South West region. For some reason the disease just hasn't yet seemed to get a good foothold here, not sure why, as quite a lot of people commute to work in London from the local area, and London was a big hotspot.
17 deaths in Salisbury and surrounding area, including 1 in Porton. But that was only up to 17th April. Now, one month later, that figure may have changed.
KelvinD is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 08:57
  #7005 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 378
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
17 deaths in Salisbury and surrounding area, including 1 in Porton. But that was only up to 17th April. Now, one month later, that figure may have changed.
Those figures are a bit out of date. As of yesterday, 51 people had died from Covid-19 at Salisbury District Hospital, but there have been no new cases recorded here for nearly a week now. Wiltshire has one of the lowest infection rates for the whole of the UK, at just 102 cases per 100,000 people. It's been worse in the north of the county, in places like Swindon (~197 cases per 100,000), but much better down here in the south west corner of the county for some reason. To put those numbers into some sort of perspective, the average for England is 259 cases per 100,000 people, about 2 1/2 times greater than here.
VP959 is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 08:58
  #7006 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 17,197
Social distancing, Green tick for yes, red cross for no...... How difficult could that be to understand? lol


NutLoose is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 09:57
  #7007 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,487
You will recall the reason, as stated by the Chief Medical Officer, fir the UK delaying the introduction of a lockdown was that the advice of the behavioural scientists was that obedience amongst the public would start to fail. Thus it was important to delay introduction until it would have the maximum effect.

Now it can be argued, based on evidence from elsewhere, that that the optimum moment was chosen a week too late. One could also argue that the politicians should have overruled what was only advice (as the scientists are now insisting). But the question remaining is, were the behavioural scientists correct in their forecast?

The preliminary evidence would seem to suggest yes.

https://order-order.com/2020/05/21/l...ng-guidelines/

Less Than Half of Young People Complying with Guidelines

ORAC is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 10:04
  #7008 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Posts: 349
I'm now finding that when out walking on pavements, many younger people are totally ignoring distancing. They seem to think the epidemic is over.
Sallyann1234 is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 10:28
  #7009 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 844
Originally Posted by BehindBlueEyes View Post
Mrs BBE asked a good question over coffee this morning. As shop workers have effectively been in the front line and worked all through the lockdown, has there been higher infection rates in this group? After all, the Perspex screens weren’t installed for some time and their exposure would have been very considerable and varied.
I have been wondering this too. Certainly the shop workers in our local supermarket seem to have quite a relaxed attitude, none wearing masks and not really attempting to social distance from customers. Mind you many are under 30, so probably aren't that worried.

I did see some stats a week or two back which suggested that taxi drivers and security guards had been disproportionately affected.
dead_pan is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 10:28
  #7010 (permalink)  
Gnome de PPRuNe
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 56
Posts: 6,561
Not sure where you are Sally but that's been the case around this part of south London for several weeks now. Lot of socialising on the common and in parks as well, quite clearly not from the same household. Not all younger people are ignoring the rules but some older people are too.

Just seen dead_pan's intervening post, Tesco's staff collecting goods for online orders are ignoring the one way system as much as customers are! Well, I will if no one else is an aisle but when it's crowded round the veg bit, not really setting a good example!
treadigraph is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 10:32
  #7011 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 844
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
You will recall the reason, as stated by the Chief Medical Officer, fir the UK delaying the introduction of a lockdown was that the advice of the behavioural scientists was that obedience amongst the public would start to fail. Thus it was important to delay introduction until it would have the maximum effect.

Now it can be argued, based on evidence from elsewhere, that that the optimum moment was chosen a week too late. One could also argue that the politicians should have overruled what was only advice (as the scientists are now insisting). But the question remaining is, were the behavioural scientists correct in their forecast?

The preliminary evidence would seem to suggest yes.

https://order-order.com/2020/05/21/l...ng-guidelines/

Less Than Half of Young People Complying with Guidelines
I reckon they were pretty much spot-on. I suspect the lock-down was more successful (in terms of compliance) than even they ventured.
dead_pan is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 11:24
  #7012 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 54
Posts: 840
Originally Posted by NutLoose View Post
Social distancing, Green tick for yes, red cross for no...... How difficult could that be to understand? lol


Reflecting the dodgy placing of the ticks and crosses for the front bench. Putting a red tick opposite the dispatch box was bit silly!
Curious Pax is online now  
Old 21st May 2020, 11:38
  #7013 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,487
Or perhaps deliberate....
ORAC is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 11:57
  #7014 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 72
Posts: 796
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
Those figures are a bit out of date. As of yesterday, 51 people had died from Covid-19 at Salisbury District Hospital, but there have been no new cases recorded here for nearly a week now. Wiltshire has one of the lowest infection rates for the whole of the UK, at just 102 cases per 100,000 people. It's been worse in the north of the county, in places like Swindon (~197 cases per 100,000), but much better down here in the south west corner of the county for some reason. To put those numbers into some sort of perspective, the average for England is 259 cases per 100,000 people, about 2 1/2 times greater than here.
Well, I did say the figures were only up to 17th April"
Meanwhile, I wouldn't be too complacent; it looks as though, if you catch Covid in Wiltshire, you have a fifty-fifty chance of ending up dead!
According to ONS figures, quoted by the BBC, there are 510 confirmed cases in Wiltshire and there were 246 coronavirus related deaths up the 8th May.
You may be better off in Hampshire, with figures of 3,193 cases and 776 deaths. Better odds there, I would say!
KelvinD is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:19
  #7015 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 378
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
Well, I did say the figures were only up to 17th April"
Meanwhile, I wouldn't be too complacent; it looks as though, if you catch Covid in Wiltshire, you have a fifty-fifty chance of ending up dead!
According to ONS figures, quoted by the BBC, there are 510 confirmed cases in Wiltshire and there were 246 coronavirus related deaths up the 8th May.
You may be better off in Hampshire, with figures of 3,193 cases and 776 deaths. Better odds there, I would say!
The problem is the eternal one of trying to compare data, and assuming that correlation = causation. When comparing populations care needs to be taken to compare like with like. An example locally would be trying to compare Swindon with somewhere like Salisbury. The two places have very large differences in terms of average income, percentage of residents from different ethnic backgrounds, housing density, etc.

Another recent example of the danger of assuming that correlation = causation has been the assumption that being from the BAME section of our society makes you massively more likely to die from Covid-19, as ORAC highlighted above. It now looks as if it may well not be anywhere near as clear cut as this, as when corrections are applied to account for pre-existing health conditions etc, the numbers look broadly similar to those for the rest of the population, with a much smaller difference. What the raw data highlights isn't so much a Covid-19 issue, but that those from the BAME section of our society are more likely to have other conditions, and that those conditions then make them more susceptible to this disease. Hopefully the reasons for this can also be pinpointed, and efforts made to improve the health of this section of our society. Might be a sign of yet another failing in our social care system.
VP959 is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:33
  #7016 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,645
With all this spare time, I have "wasted/Invested" some of it looking at daily new infections for various areas. East Sussex is clearly the place to be. Only 1 new case, on average, per day over the last few days, and no admissions to the hospitals in Hastings/Eastbourne.
Even Slough has only 1 or 2 per day. And Slough was badly hit in the beginning.
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:38
  #7017 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Ilmington, Warwickshire
Posts: 131
We are seeing a dramatic collapse in new infections.

Just over two weeks ago the daily figure was 6111, we're now seeing it drop below 2500.

Some very encouraging reports coming from London too where a tiny number of new cases are being recorded.

Really good news.
BehindBlueEyes is online now  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:43
  #7018 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Stevenage
Posts: 19
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
Another recent example of the danger of assuming that correlation = causation has been the assumption that being from the BAME section of our society makes you massively more likely to die from Covid-19, as ORAC highlighted above. It now looks as if it may well not be anywhere near as clear cut as this, as when corrections are applied to account for pre-existing health conditions etc, the numbers look broadly similar to those for the rest of the population, with a much smaller difference.
The studies only compare outcomes given that you are affected badly enough to be hospitalised. Recent immigrant ancestry (which should imply worse adaptation to Britain) makes one more likely to be hospitalised, even after accounting for pre-existing health conditions.
Richard W is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:51
  #7019 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: There and here
Posts: 1,900
I can't help but notice throughout this whole saga that consistently there have been statements made by researchers/scientists that XXXX makes your risk much higher/lower and then within a short while other statements are put out that XXXX doe NOT make you more/less likely to succumb to Covid-19..... I appreciate newer/better data is coming in, but it just seems to be a running theme.

I think that the summery weather IS making a lot of people think that things are over, more or less, or at least much reduced. The young will want to mingle and be sociable, it's hard-wired into our brains, and when the sun is out the birds and the bees are moved to dance their dance. This might not be clever, or wise, but it seems unstoppable outside of a full hard lockdown.
SpringHeeledJack is online now  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:54
  #7020 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,645
But if you are African Black, Poor, Obese, and living in a multi-generation flat in Hackney, you are still buggared.
Ancient Observer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.