Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 minutes ago, N Lincs Jambo said:

 

https://off-guardian.org/2020/10/08/who-accidentally-confirms-covid-is-no-more-dangerous-than-flu/?fbclid=IwAR08QJ9-kCFX4oSSZNXygRKuB625H2XueWRemZQKFX5ynS3TlRMlXDAXRY4

Interesting article . Thanks for posting . 

[Taffin]

32 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 

Rubbish. They are two sets of figures one is for cases per 100k over 1day and the other relates to a seven day period. It is thus reasonable to assume that current figures in Lothian are 7 times higher than the quarantine standard. A factor of 7 is not trying to split the atom.

 

 I'm sure if Manchester had a rate 25 times higher than the Lothians then this thread and you in particular would be posting gushing praise for our FM and her handling of it. It's not true though the rate is around twice as much. Governments produce figures every day but the best way to stay informed IMO is with Travelling Tabby.  https://www.travellingtabby.com/uk-coronavirus-tracker/

 

 

Isn't 'x' per 100,000 = to 'x' per 100,000 regardless of how many days it's over?

 

Genuine question, not being a pedant (for a change 😂)

 

 

Edited October 11, 2020 by Taffin

[coconut doug]

3 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

 

Isn't 'x' per 100,000 = to 'x' per 100,000 regardless of how many days it's over?

 

Genuine question, not being a pedant (for a change 😂)

 

 

 

It is obviously but in this case they used cumulative totals over 7 days presumably to avoid any daily spikes.

[Governor Tarkin]

How Enzo has spent his Sunday morning.

 

[Victorian]

There seems to be a fixation on the measures introduced on hospitality and the statistics attributing infections acquired in various settings.   It's pretty obvious that there's more to it than naively believing that only a small percentage of infections can be prevented from happening by removing that setting from social interaction.   I've seen it opined that all of the household or workplace acquired infections can be attributed to a source of infection acquired elsewhere.   So to prevent a lot of household or workplace infections,  it follows that one must prevent as much virus as possible entering those settings.

 

I think hospitality is being singled out for the basic reason that it is easy to control.   When you also factor in the renewed advice to only use public transport if absolutely necessary,  it seems to me that they're trying to reduce transmission in areas easier to control.   There is very little they can do to control or to police other settings such as households,  workplaces,  supermarkets,  etc.   It's probably a bit experimental to an extent and no doubt the scientists will be conducting all the detective work necessary to determine if these measures have had the desired benefit of suppression in all these other settings.   

[Taffin]

24 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 

It is obviously but in this case they used cumulative totals over 7 days presumably to avoid any daily spikes.

 

Wouldn't you need to make that 'x' per 700,000 then?

 

Or get a cumulative figure and divide it by 7?

 

If you had 100,000 people and tested them 7 days in a row, the value of 'x' wouldn't fluctuate greatly from day to day.

 

Or you'd need a sample of 700,000 and test a different 100,000 per day and then get the average and divide it by 7.

 

I'm awful at maths though 😂

[luckydug]

1 hour ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Another bold Enzo prediction based on imagination and little else. Much like your fizzing out theory.

 

He's an angry man😡 

Now that CL is away from Hearts he needs something to fizz about. 

[Taffin]

6 minutes ago, jonesy said:

Stop touting for jobs as a pandemic modeller.

😂😂

 

 

[The Real Maroonblood]

6 minutes ago, luckydug said:

He's an angry man😡 

Now that CL is away from Hearts he needs something to fizz about. 

[Shanks said no]

Scotland's hospitality minister has said there is "no guarantee" that pubs and restaurants across the central belt will reopen in two weeks' time.

The Scottish government ordered their closure on Friday night as part of new Covid-19 restrictions.

Fergus Ewing said he was "acutely aware" of the "very serious, adverse impacts" on the hospitality sector.

But he said the restrictions were "absolutely necessary" and could continue past 25 October.

Mr Ewing told BBC Scotland's Sunday Politics programme: "Were they not in place, the worry is that we may have had to go to something even more stringent.

"The first minister had made it clear that she really wishes to avoid a further lockdown - as does, I believe, the leadership in the other parts of the United Kingdom.

[Victorian]

25 minutes ago, jonesy said:

The two highlighted sentences alone are enough to highlight the disregard that the governments have for their people.

 

At least the feeling is mutual on my part.

 

I don't think it's disregard for a minute.   It's more likely cold,  calculated realisation that they :

 

1.   Have to keep trying speculative measures.

2.   Probably can't do much for the hospitality sector going forward.

 

It's way beyond the point of being very obvious that the governments are not going to change course away from suppression measures.   They aren't going to move to the fabled,  solve everything utopia of shield & open up.   If they're dead set on continuing with the current plan then they'll need to make unpalatable decisions.   Doesn't make it fair of course.

[Governor Tarkin]

11 minutes ago, jonesy said:

I'd be more surprised if they did open in a fortnight.

 

Maybe restaurants, but not a chance of the pubs opening in a fortnight.

We'll be lucky to see them again this year.

[The Real Maroonblood]

1 minute ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Maybe restaurants, but not a chance of the pubs opening in a fortnight.

We'll be lucky to see them again this year.

[Whatever]

8 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Maybe restaurants, but not a chance of the pubs opening in a fortnight.

We'll be lucky to see them again this year.

[Enzo Chiefo]

2 hours ago, coconut doug said:

 

Rubbish. They are two sets of figures one is for cases per 100k over 1day and the other relates to a seven day period. It is thus reasonable to assume that current figures in Lothian are 7 times higher than the quarantine standard. A factor of 7 is not trying to split the atom.

 

 I'm sure if Manchester had a rate 25 times higher than the Lothians then this thread and you in particular would be posting gushing praise for our FM and her handling of it. It's not true though the rate is around twice as much. Governments produce figures every day but the best way to stay informed IMO is with Travelling Tabby.  https://www.travellingtabby.com/uk-coronavirus-tracker/

You are completely missing the point. Over 7 or 14 days, these figures are expressed as an average, not a cumulative total. The rate can be daily,, weekly,  whatever. It's a rate not a total figure. Manchester are averaging 500+ per 100k. Lothian appears to be 18 per 100k.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

11 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Maybe restaurants, but not a chance of the pubs opening in a fortnight.

We'll be lucky to see them again this year.

 

Was speaking to a mate who is a publican, and whilst the pubs are still open here in the Borders, he thinks it's only a matter of time before they'll have to shut down as well and it'll be the whole of Scotland's pubs are closed. 

 

He reckoned if that was to happen then the pub industry will never recover from it, times were hard enough before covid came along, but now nigh near impossible to stay in business.

Edited October 11, 2020 by Jambo-Jimbo

[The Real Maroonblood]

3 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Was speaking to a mate who is a publican, and whilst the pubs are still open here in the Borders, he thinks it's only a matter of time before they'll have to shut down as well and it'll be the whole of Scotland's pubs are closed. 

 

He reckoned if that was to happen then the pub industry will never recover from it, times were hard enough before covid came along, but now nigh near impossible to stay in business.

Generally pubs have spent a lot of money to keep their customers safe.

Tragic times.

[Victorian]

11 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

Suspect if resteraunts open, they will not be permitted to sell alcohol at least initially, Like other don’t think there’s a snowballs chance in hell that they open after the initial closure. 
 

Can’t think of a restriction that’s been as short of 2 weeks during this whole thing. 
 

I think we see further tightening in 2 weeks due to a combination of data and the schools going back will means that interactions will increase, which will need to be countered with something else. 
 

I would not be surprised to see a ban on households meeting in any setting for a period. In reality they don’t have many more places could go. 
 

Unpopular and unenforceable rules will never be successful.

 

This will be high on the list.   I wouldn't be surprised if they looked at limiting off-sales of alcohol.   There would be severe push back from the supermarkets of course.   

Edited October 11, 2020 by Victorian

[JudyJudyJudy]

11 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

Suspect if resteraunts open, they will not be permitted to sell alcohol at least initially, Like other don’t think there’s a snowballs chance in hell that they open after the initial closure. 
 

Can’t think of a restriction that’s been as short of 2 weeks during this whole thing. 
 

I think we see further tightening in 2 weeks due to a combination of data and the schools going back will means that interactions will increase, which will need to be countered with something else. 
 

I would not be surprised to see a ban on households meeting in any setting for a period. In reality they don’t have many more places could go. 
 

Unpopular and unenforceable rules will never be successful.

To be honest i think people have just given up on the household rules, either out of rebellion or just not understanding the myriad of rules about them. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Victorian said:

 

This will be high on the list.   I wouldn't be surprised if they looked at limiting off-sales of alcohol.   There would be severe push back from the supermarkets of course.   

Oh yes banning alcohol is possibly on the cards. 

[Victorian]

Just now, JamesM48 said:

Oh yes banning alcohol is possibly on the cards. 

 

Could be in the thoughts.   Limitations of purchases would be side-stepped very easily.   Instead of a ban,  maybe very limited hours of purchasing or something.   

[Enzo Chiefo]

1 minute ago, JamesM48 said:

Oh yes banning alcohol is possibly on the cards. 

I expect couriers would be busier in that case. I, for example, already order by the cellar load from a London brewery. Wee Burney can stick that in her bunnet!

[Governor Tarkin]

7 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Oh yes banning alcohol is possibly on the cards. 

 

Sturgeon will be positively foaming at the gash like a malfunctioning soda-stream with the prospect of rolling out an alcohol ban. 

 

Edited October 11, 2020 by Governor Tarkin

[Enzo Chiefo]

Just now, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Sturgeon will be positively foaming at the gash like a malfunctioning soda-strram with the prospect of rolling out an alcohol ban. 

 

What an image Guvnor. Stand well clear

[JudyJudyJudy]

5 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Could be in the thoughts.   Limitations of purchases would be side-stepped very easily.   Instead of a ban,  maybe very limited hours of purchasing or something.   

Yes that may be an option too. But they should remember prohibition in the USA didn't exactly work out that well ! 

[JudyJudyJudy]

6 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

I expect couriers would be busier in that case. I, for example, already order by the cellar load from a London brewery. Wee Burney can stick that in her bunnet!

😃 aye forget about loo rolls ! ill be stocking up on some booze soon...

[Unknown user]

Alcohol isn't getting banned ffs

[Enzo Chiefo]

Just now, JamesM48 said:

😃 aye forget about loo rolls ! ill be stocking up on some booze soon...

👍🍺

 

 

[ri Alban]

Well, just found out that's a few of my old Pub/Golf Pals fecked with covid. Thank feck the pubs are shutting. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

5 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Alcohol isn't getting banned ffs

Don't bank on that.  The narrative about rising infections has always had alcohol as an underlying reason for much of it, whether it be in pubs, restaurants or in houses. 

[Bull's-eye]

2 minutes ago, jonesy said:

Was about to make a fruit smoothie on my break, but think I'll pass now.

 

What part of malfunctioning soda stream like gash put you off a fruit smoothie?

 

Opposite for me. 

[The Real Maroonblood]

1 minute ago, ri Alban said:

Well, just found out that's a few of my old Pub/Golf Pals fecked with covid. Thank feck the pubs are shutting. 

Must be a right dive that they frequent with no protocol.

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Well, just found out that's a few of my old Pub/Golf Pals fecked with covid. Thank feck the pubs are shutting. 

I'm sure you will give them your deepest sympathies as your so compassionate and empathic . 

[Governor Tarkin]

4 minutes ago, Bull's-eye said:

 

What part of malfunctioning soda stream like gash put you off a fruit smoothie?

 

Opposite for me. 

 

Correct. Don't forget the Havana Club.

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, jonesy said:

I believe that's both his pals and the publicans who should be manning up now.

LOL  

[Mikey1874]

It would really, really, really have helped the Government in England just now with the problems in selling restrictions if they had sacked Dominic Cummings.

 

[Governor Tarkin]

10 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Well, just found out that's a few of my old Pub/Golf Pals fecked with covid. Thank feck the pubs are shutting. 

 

It's coming to a roof near you soon, ri.

Better dust off those man-up pills.

[vegas-voss]

5 hours ago, Victorian said:

The BCG (TB) vaccine to be trialled as a treatment for covid.   That's a bit leftfield.

It was first mentioned way back in March as India were using it.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

15 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Must be a right dive that they frequent with no protocol.

 

If it's in Paisley, I'd imagine it'll be like something out of the Old Wild West with sawdust on the floors and spitoons dotted around the bar, and that's just in the Ladies Lounge, as for the men's bar....................

 

Edited October 11, 2020 by Jambo-Jimbo

[ri Alban]

14 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Must be a right dive that they frequent with no protocol.

Everything in place bud. Pubs just should not have been opened. One boy in a real bad way. He's out of hospital tho, which is good. 

[ri Alban]

7 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

It's coming to a roof near you soon, ri.

Better dust off those man-up pills.

I'm usually isolated up their sites, but now the site is getting smaller, it may become a problem, GT. (2 sites becoming 1)

Edited October 11, 2020 by ri Alban

[coconut doug]

1 hour ago, Taffin said:

 

Wouldn't you need to make that 'x' per 700,000 then?

No, because it's a ratio.

1 hour ago, Taffin said:

 

Or get a cumulative figure and divide it by 7?

You could do that and then you would be comparing like with like. Similarly you could multiply the daily figure by 7 to get a notional weekly figure but doing that means you are missing trends. 

1 hour ago, Taffin said:

 

If you had 100,000 people and tested them 7 days in a row, the value of 'x' wouldn't fluctuate greatly from day to day.

It would if there was an outbreak and that is why they are testing i.e to identify what is changing.

1 hour ago, Taffin said:

 

Or you'd need a sample of 700,000 and test a different 100,000 per day and then get the average and divide it by 7.

The larger the sample the more representative it should be but that's not the issue here.

1 hour ago, Taffin said:

 

I'm awful at maths though 😂

No comment.

[The Internet]

 

New zealanders seem to be recovering well from the loss of all those civil liberties. 

[Taffin]

7 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

No, because it's a ratio.

You could do that and then you would be comparing like with like. Similarly you could multiply the daily figure by 7 to get a notional weekly figure but doing that means you are missing trends. 

It would if there was an outbreak and that is why they are testing i.e to identify what is changing.

The larger the sample the more representative it should be but that's not the issue here.

No comment.

 

Appreciate the breakdown, I just find it hard to compute 😂

 

So if you have 100,000 people and you test them every day for 7 days, you'll have 7 times as many positive tests on day 7 as day 1? As that's effectively what your displaying if you multiply one days worth of tests by 7 but leave the sample the same.

 

As I say, I don't really understand the maths, it just seems mind boggling to me.

 

Also, as an aside, are they testing 100,000 people per day to get this number or are they doing random population testing?

 

Edit: just to demonstrate my level of thinking. I'm thinking along the basic lines of:

 

If I have 10 apples and I eat 2. Apples eaten = 2 per 10

If I times the amount eaten by 7,

14 apples per 10 gets eaten which isn't possible.

 

On a long enough time continuum, if you kept just multiplying the positive results, would you not eventually have more positive results than the sample?

 

Apologies for needing it spelled out for me 😂 and thanks for doing so

Edited October 11, 2020 by Taffin

[Morgan]

5 hours ago, jonesy said:

What's with folk wearing face masks while walking down the street now? Have seen it more and more over the last few months, even living in a reasonably quiet residential area.

 

Gives me the heebie-jeebies, and wish people would refrain.

 

5 hours ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Encountering the same experience.

Weird.

We don’t have a choice at the moment.

 

It’s compulsory to wear a mask in every part of our town, failure to do so (if you get caught) results in a 135€ fine.

 

It is a really weird experience though.

 

 

[Seymour M Hersh]

1 hour ago, jonesy said:

I'd be more surprised if they did open in a fortnight.

 

I wonder who they'll blame if the infection rates continue to rise even with the "evil" hospitality industry shut down? 

[redjambo]

Sorry if this has been posted already. Was following the GP.

 

Scottish numbers: 11 October 2020

Summary

• 956 new cases of COVID-19 reported; this is 14.9%* of newly tested individuals [-53]
• 0 new reported death(s) of people who have tested positive (noting that Register Offices are now generally closed at weekends) [-6]
• 35 people were in intensive care yesterday with recently confirmed COVID-19 [+1]
• 449 people were in hospital yesterday with recently confirmed COVID-19 [+17]
• 18,022 new tests for COVID-19 that reported results

[redjambo]

Per-board daily new infections stats per 100,000:

 

Lanarkshire: 34, Greater Glasgow: 25, Dumfries & Galloway: 25, Ayrshire & Arran: 19, Lothian: 17, Forth Valley: 15.

 

Everyone else: under 10.

[Seymour M Hersh]

43 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

It would really, really, really have helped the Government in England just now with the problems in selling restrictions if they had sacked Dominic Cummings.

 

 

Absolute rubbish. 

[coconut doug]

1 hour ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

You are completely missing the point. Over 7 or 14 days, these figures are expressed as an average, not a cumulative total. The rate can be daily,, weekly,  whatever. It's a rate not a total figure. Manchester are averaging 500+ per 100k. Lothian appears to be 18 per 100k.

 

Taking the first bit, first. They are cumulative figures and i am linking a site that shows just that.There are obviously other sites but this one clearly uses the term and shows the relevant figures for several countries.  https://www.total-croatia-news.com/travel/45818-uk-threshold

I trust you will now accept that it is a cumulative total or explain exactly where i am missing the point.

 

On the second claim. It is difficult to make a direct comparison between Lothian and Manchester however Edinburgh is imo representative enough. Yesterdays TT shows Man with 234 cases and 42.3 per 100K. Edin has 124 cases for 23.6 (comparable to your18 figure) per 100k. That is approximately half the rate of Man. The weekly cumulative figures for Man show 3,629 cases with a cumulative rate of 656.4 per 100k. Edin has had 802 cases for 152.8 per 100k. That shows that the weekly figure in Man is more than 4 times that of Edinburgh. That disparity has not been maintained throughout the pandemic though.

 

If you really believe this stuff why are you not supporting the Scottish strategy which you are claiming is so much better than in England.