Remote Learning ?

[Bill]

Con. You’ve got to have great respect for those that model such things because it can’t be easy. In my over simplified version, I classed anyone as asymptomatic from the point where they became infected although they would officially be classed as pre-symptomatic until tested, then added a further 14 days while they didn’t isolate. This will have made things worse but the overall effects of this variable were far more dramatic than say adjusting the probability of trips out or whether or not someone was commuting to work.

Asp Take a look at the latest graphs for infections and tell me they’re not rocketing up faster here than anywhere else. The newer stain of the virus has spread to other countries but it’s far and away the most prevalent here. And because this unprecedented spike has only occurred in the last couple of weeks, any resultant deaths will still be several weeks away.

 

Bill 😊

[asperity]

Bill, I'm not disputing that the cases are going up. What I was disputing your assertion that the UK is the most infected country in the world when it isn't. And no number of tables or graphs will be able to make that assertion true because the number of cases reported will vary wildly from country to country depending on their ability, or willingness, to test and collate. All we know is that the numbers in this country on such and such a day are what the government tell us they are, and they must be subject to some amount of error +/-. And again, THIS IS NOT A COMPETITION TO SEE WHO HAS THE MOST VIRUS CARRIERS!!!

As for the "new variant", or is it the other "new variant", causing more deaths - well we will have to wait and see before making a judgement on how malignant it may be.

[Bill]

This was the list I looked at. Ok I accept that this shows us as being only the 5th most infected country on absolute numbers but all those above us are significantly bigger and if we did the sums we'd no doubt come out higher. Whether you believe the figures or not, I think my assumption that we are much nearer the top than 27th is not that far off the mark.  

 

Bill

[Observer II]

How did the S/African variant get here ?    Thought we now had control of our borders ?    😷

[Observer II]

3 hours ago, Confused52 said:

Stop blaming the government for everything - it is an obsession, albeit shared by many. They will not have lost money because they will bill the schools under their contract. They will they spend less in the coming few weeks it isn't a big problem unless you just want to moan.

 

Pray tell us who else is to blame, HMG supposed to be in charge and clearly clueless. 😠   😷

[Bill]

According to the BBC, there’s only been two reported cases in the UK and they said  .

Quote

The UK has imposed a ban on direct flights from South Africa and restrictions on flights to the country. Anyone who has travelled there recently, and anyone they have been in contact with, are being told to quarantine immediately.

From what I’ve read, it’s not that much different than the Kent mutation and there’s not enough info to say if it’s any more potent than the normal version.

Just started snowing here in Paddington BTW.  Damn this government, can't get anything right.

 

Bill

 

[asperity]

Looking at the table you posted Bill, it looks like the Worldometer one I used. If you look at the column marked cases per 1M population the UK is 27th. This gives a better idea of where we are than just raw numbers regardless of population size. But again statistics and damned lies. There's nothing you or I can do about the situation, not even calling people Covidiots for catching it seems to work 🙄.

Occasional snowflakes in Penketh.

[Confused52]

3 hours ago, Observer II said:

Pray tell us who else is to blame, HMG supposed to be in charge and clearly clueless. 😠   😷

The public - look at the evidence they don't care. No government can deal with carelessness on the current scale.

[Bill]

Yes Asp, if you sort things that way, then the UK may well show as 27^th but equally, San Remo, one of the smallest countries then shows more deaths than the USA and that’s why I said, if Latchford was on a list sorted that way then that would be the worst.

Sort it by new deaths to get the most recent absolute figure and the UK becomes third on the list, beaten only by the USA and Mexico who both have considerably higher populations. Do the sums and the UK, as I said originally, now has the worst death rate on the planet. Sort it by new infections and we are second to the USA which again adjusted for population size gives us the highest new infection rate.

I know it’s not a game, but all I was trying to point out was that people entering our country from lessor infected areas shouldn’t be our highest priority.  

I think I’m getting Déjà Vu  

 

Bill 😊

[Observer II]

Some of the public -  but we've now had three lockdowns, which were prematurely relaxed by the PM, only to discover, as some of us predicted, a new surge in cases.  We had the nonsense of a 5 day respite at Xmas, schools to be reopened in Jan - all from BoJo.  With every relaxation, there's been a corresponding rise in cases.  Perhaps third time lucky, he's now decided that this lockdown will be "gradually" relaxed, "brick by brick".    Which imo, should have happened from the beginning.   Meanwhile, folk have been flying round the world, entering the UK; if you recall, we had the evacuation of Brits from Wuhan in the very early stages,  one lot were taken to the Wirral to quarantine, then it all ended with folk being at the Airports told to go home and self isolate, so they then travelled throughout the UK spreading the virus on their route home (joke).  😷

3 hours ago, Confused52 said:

The public - look at the evidence they don't care. No government can deal with carelessness on the current scale.

Seems the Chinese Gov has, they locked down 5 million folk initially, and I believe life is now back to almost normal.     😷

[Confused52]

59 minutes ago, Observer II said:

Some of the public -  but we've now had three lockdowns, which were prematurely relaxed by the PM, only to discover, as some of us predicted, a new surge in cases.  We had the nonsense of a 5 day respite at Xmas, schools to be reopened in Jan - all from BoJo.  With every relaxation, there's been a corresponding rise in cases.  Perhaps third time lucky, he's now decided that this lockdown will be "gradually" relaxed, "brick by brick".    Which imo, should have happened from the beginning.   Meanwhile, folk have been flying round the world, entering the UK; if you recall, we had the evacuation of Brits from Wuhan in the very early stages,  one lot were taken to the Wirral to quarantine, then it all ended with folk being at the Airports told to go home and self isolate, so they then travelled throughout the UK spreading the virus on their route home (joke).  😷

Seems the Chinese Gov has, they locked down 5 million folk initially, and I believe life is now back to almost normal.     😷

you do remember that the tiers system was exactly what you now say you want. As cases fall then it opens up more - the reason that national lockdown dropped down to tiers. I wish you would understand that it isn't an exact science and that relaxation is the only way of learning. The biggest problem I have seen is the BBC. Right up to lockdown they were asking why it hadn't already started and hours afterwards they started asking when it would end. I am utterly fed up of the biased lot of them.

[Observer II]

The tier system was a joke;  with folk travelling between tiers -  they haven't got the resources or the skills required to micro-manage a localised system, unless perhaps they localise it; then they can blame local Councils for the mess.     😷  

[Bill]

The tiered system did make some sense but it’s impossible to stop people moving across boundaries with so many working or needing to cross a boundary for their everyday lives. Those that travelled just to get a beer or something might have been very small minority, but if they couldn’t resect one rule, then they probably broke every other rule and rightly be classed as super spreaders.

If I was making the rules, I’d have used our so called wardens to randomly check places they think super spreaders would most likely go to and issue deterrent fines, Sounds a bit draconian but less so than Chinese style road blocks.

As for the media constantly asking politicians to give guarantees on things that they have no control over, yes that makes me angry as well but to be fair, a lot of them sidestep the question and then prattle on endlessly rather than simply admit they can’t answer the question, so I don’t feel quite that sorry for them.

 

Bill 😊

[Confused52]

14 hours ago, Observer II said:

The tier system was a joke;  with folk travelling between tiers -  they haven't got the resources or the skills required to micro-manage a localised system, unless perhaps they localise it; then they can blame local Councils for the mess.     😷  

In a populous country it will always be necessary to let people cross from one tier to another, that is the way boundaries are. People just complain that the areas are too small and it confuses them or too large and it confuses them because it isn't fair. When we have national lockdowns they complain because the can't cross the border. The only common denominator is people complain that they cant do just what they like and if they do others complain because they did do what they like and felt cheated. I have no sympathy if they are too thick to know where they are, where they are going and what the rules are at both ends. If you don't know it is both permitted and safe then don't do it.

[Bill]

On a positive note Con, just think of all the new clichés these people have gained. I’m not quite sure which is my favourite but it’s a close call between “I’m confused” and “I’m devastated”, For a while, “rug pulled from under me” and “need a clear roadmap” were front runners that faded towards the finish.

I don’t suppose I should really joke about this because at the end of the day (Whoops) it all comes down to a lack of understanding of the facts. The odd thing though is that people who say these sorts of things see no embarrassment about taking to social media to publicly admit it.    Takes all sorts doesn’t it or is that yet another cliché? 😊

 

Bill 😊

[Observer II]

2 hours ago, Confused52 said:

In a populous country it will always be necessary to let people cross from one tier to another, that is the way boundaries are. People just complain that the areas are too small and it confuses them or too large and it confuses them because it isn't fair. When we have national lockdowns they complain because the can't cross the border. The only common denominator is people complain that they cant do just what they like and if they do others complain because they did do what they like and felt cheated. I have no sympathy if they are too thick to know where they are, where they are going and what the rules are at both ends. If you don't know it is both permitted and safe then don't do it.

Any localised system is designed to seperate and protect those areas from contagion, any movement between such areas compromises any suppressive effect on the virus.   So unless enforced with rigour, it's becomes a nonsense and a complete waste of time, just adding to the confusion.  I could equally take issue with the fact that in the UK, we have four major health authorities, again a nonsense in meeting this challenge as a united nation.  Just imagine if this was the position in 1940, when we could have had four different strategies for defeating the Germans !    Still with the war analogy, this is a war; a war against the virus; and in war, it's wise to respect and not underestimate your enemy;  so the whole authority and services of the State have to be mobilised and utilised to defend it's people. I'm afraid attempts at sophisticated track and trace have proved a failure, so we're left with the rather blunt and draconian option of "national" lockdowns and controls; with a gradual, "brick by brick" release back to normality.   😷

[Davy51]

Track & trace depends on the willingness of individuals to take part in it & observe the results that are given to them of any potential threat. Once again it comes down to the "I'm alright Jack" attitude of most of the population. Such measures are great when they don't affect YOU ,when they are readily kicked into the long grass.

[Confused52]

44 minutes ago, Observer II said:

Any localised system is designed to seperate and protect those areas from contagion, any movement between such areas compromises any suppressive effect on the virus.   So unless enforced with rigour, it's becomes a nonsense and a complete waste of time, just adding to the confusion.  I could equally take issue with the fact that in the UK, we have four major health authorities, again a nonsense in meeting this challenge as a united nation.  Just imagine if this was the position in 1940, when we could have had four different strategies for defeating the Germans !    Still with the war analogy, this is a war; a war against the virus; and in war, it's wise to respect and not underestimate your enemy;  so the whole authority and services of the State have to be mobilised and utilised to defend it's people. I'm afraid attempts at sophisticated track and trace have proved a failure, so we're left with the rather blunt and draconian option of "national" lockdowns and controls; with a gradual, "brick by brick" release back to normality.   😷

No. Localised rules are to limit the number of people who have their freedom curtailed. It is not to protect one council's area against another, for goodness sake it is opposite sides of the street in Greater Manchester. The public want to be treated as responsible adults and that doesn't mean you can't go to the nearest shop if it happens to be in another council area. That is why they went to counties to reduce the contradictions and have less arbitrary boundaries. You need to be pragmatic about it, the need is to treat places according to their need to reduce spread and not just in an arbitrary way based on boundaries. Local authorities send kids to certain schools in adjacent authorities. The hard rules you want just cause trouble, One rule for all just means the worst conditions possible for everyone, it is folly.

[Observer II]

It's no wonder the public are confused.   If we have a national lockdown, same rule for all, then it doesn't matter where the nearest shop is, if your allowed, you use it.   

[Observer II]

50 minutes ago, Davy51 said:

Track & trace depends on the willingness of individuals to take part in it & observe the results that are given to them of any potential threat. Once again it comes down to the "I'm alright Jack" attitude of most of the population. Such measures are great when they don't affect YOU ,when they are readily kicked into the long grass.

Track and trace is designed for exactly that, to finely tune the identification of a source of spread; fine in the initial stages or when the virus has been subdued, but less so when the Hospitals are packed or folk don't have the required technology.   😷

[Confused52]

1 minute ago, Observer II said:

It's no wonder the public are confused.   If we have a national lockdown, same rule for all, then it doesn't matter where the nearest shop is, if your allowed, you use it.   

If they can only cope with one set of rules it may be more serious than them being confused. How do they cope with getting their recycling bins emptied with a different set of rules in every local authority? It is just an excuse like all the others for why they just want to do what they jolly well like.

[Observer II]

Sheep require shepherding !     😉    😷

[Bill]

But not if the big bad wolf gets there first.

Having rules that have so many caveats doesn’t help matters and some will use every permitted exception to push things to the limits while claiming they’re not actually breaking any laws. I have friends that for the last six months have been out for most of the day, every day claiming it’s just permitted exercise. And each day, there’s a photo on Facebook of the meal they’re eating in the local pub that they’ve come across, and again not breaking any rules.

What can you say though? I sit here boring the pants off you lot while trying to do my best to minimise the risk to myself and others while others are doing everything they can get away with.

 

Bill 😊

[asperity]

But surely all the "covidiots" will catch the virus, while those of us that follow the rules will be safe? Or doesn't it work like that? Is someone telling us porkies?

[Observer II]

As with many traffic accidents, the idiots can get away with it, while the innocent bystander gets hit.    💀