I’m sorry, I thought I was replying to Soundwave with the biscuit analogy. Apologies for that, I was mistaken.when WHO gave out R=2.2-2.5 in January, the period was 5 days.
It took an average 5 days for one person to infect 2.2-2.5 new persons.
How come that now the period is extended to 8 to 10 weeks?
You have scientists like those who work or WHO and government scientists like those recruited by Dominic Cummings.
You know when some of them cannot give a straight answer.
He only said 'R is an indicator'. It does indicate what will happen in 1 day, and in 8-10 weeks (raise R to the power 8 weeks/5 days), and in 1000 years. It has been set so the maths to see what it indicates is simplest for the 5 day period (I'm not sure why)when WHO gave out R=2.2-2.5 in January, the period was 5 days.
It took an average 5 days for one person to infect 2.2-2.5 new persons.
How come that now the period is extended to 8 to 10 weeks?
You have scientists like those who work or WHO and government scientists like those recruited by Dominic Cummings.
You know when some of them cannot give a straight answer.
I think the point is that the increase in five days, even if R has gone up, will be modest. It is the fact that the numbers will continue rising and that what we will see in 8 to 10 weeks would be a large rise. Also, with extended recovery times, we could end up with a very large increase in numbers of people at various points in their recoveries.How come that now the period is extended to 8 to 10 weeks?
At least in a thousand years they won't have Johnson, Gove, Jenrick, Patel, et al.He only said 'R is an indicator'. It does indicate what will happen in 1 day, and in 8-10 weeks (raise R to the power 8 weeks/5 days), and in 1000 years. It has been set so the maths to see what it indicates is simplest for the 5 day period (I'm not sure why)
And of course R is only an indication. It is confusing; the mathematical model for R is straightforward, but as already said the way it is derived from raw data is problematic. Also, the model has fairly limited applicability;
the indication for 1000 years is likely to be a very poor indication; other factors will have to be taken into account.
I think you are right, I know that if I eat a lot of biscuits over a period of time my own Rs gets bigger.R is not confusing. Think of R as biscuits and your weight as hospital admissions. If you are fat and reduce R (your biscuit intake), after a few weeks your weight (hospital admissions) will reduce. If you then start eating lots of biscuits again (easing lockdown) and so more Rs, after a few weeks your weight ( hospital admissions) will rise.
R is an indicator of what is coming down the tracks in 8 to 10 weeks time. If R is greater than 1, you will first see a rise in the number of positive tests, then hospital admissions will rise, then ICU capacity will start to fill up and finally, the daily death toll will rise.
Everyone is getting a hard on and backslapping due to the falling death rate and hospital admissions, but R is creeping up and if that continues, it will undo the death and hospitalisation rate.
There we are then, what more proof do we need.I think you are right, I know that if I eat a lot of biscuits over a period of time my own Rs gets bigger.
Better let them eat Cake, then eh?There we are then, what more proof do we need.
So long as they are diabetes-inducing cup cakes.Better let them eat Cake, then eh?
if UK government were to be accurate, too many people can spot their faulty logic, defeating their objective to confuse the public and justify their new slogan.I think the point is that the increase in five days, even if R has gone up, will be modest. It is the fact that the numbers will continue rising and that what we will see in 8 to 10 weeks would be a large rise. Also, with extended recovery times, we could end up with a very large increase in numbers of people at various points in their recoveries.
he's quite wrong.
I've given up watching, there doesn't seem be any point any moreGavin Williamson on The Coronavirus Show is hilarious. What a twat. It’s like a cross between The Dead Poets Society and Blazing Saddles, but delivered as a sermon.
It has a morbid fascination for me, I know I shouldn't look, but I somehow can't help looking at the cringeworthy horror show before me. Today's performance was particularly terrible.I've given up watching, there doesn't seem be any point any more
I don't think they can. Otherwise, how do they get out of bed in the morning?It has a morbid fascination for me, I know I shouldn't look, but I somehow can't help looking at the cringeworthy horror show before me. Today's performance was particularly terrible.
I wonder if they realise how little respect people have for them, or with how much contempt they are regarded.
I don't know why but I always think of this geezer when I see Williamson..I've given up watching, there doesn't seem be any point any more
Yes Dr Err Ahem tried to bat the pencil case / lunch box debacle, but didn’t really give a convincing answer. It was fun to watch her try though.I don't think they can. Otherwise, how do they get out of bed in the morning?
One bit reported in Guardian: Children can take their own lunchboxes, but not pencil cases.
The full explanation was not available but something like the lunchboxes are very personal. Hence need to be individual.
My memory of schools include saliva-coated and much chewed pencils and pens. How personal can you get? Or has it all completed changed over the years?
Have also been wondering about school meals provisions. Have they sorted that ready for the first of June?