Brexit, for once some facts.

RossG

Esteemed Pedelecer
Feb 12, 2019
1,628
1,646
I don't give a stuff what a mask looks like. (Mine is currently black with white polka dots).

I agree that it is very largely for the sake of everyone else. I hope (but don't expect) my wearing one will encourage others to do so - or at least help any who are feeling embarrassed or feeling silly to appreciate that there is no issue.
I've got some of those "cyclist" type masks that are very soft and don't mark your face, you can slide fresh carbon filters inside so I'll use them riding in and out of town on busy roads.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,263
30,652
If you say 20% of Londoners has been infected, I may believe you.
It has not attained the 80% herd immunity. Still a long way from it.
I don't think the British people will ever accept the herd immunity strategy.
I don't know why you keep bringing this up, I've made no claim for herd immunity and I've posted that I don't think it a realistic strategy. But with each increase in the number infected and dying, the infection and death number rates reduce since opportunities reduce. You've even accepted that in a reply.

Of course we are nowhere near 80% infected and almost certainly never will be, but I do believe a very far higher proportion of Londoners have been infected than anywhere else in the country. The fact of early infection and death rates of up to double that of the rest of the country support that and means we are less vulnerable for the the moment through reduced availability of the vulnerable.

Hence the lower "r".
.
 

Barry Shittpeas

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 1, 2020
2,325
3,210
Announcing the new easements to the lockdown measures today was unnecessary and a roll of the dice with lives. The weather is set to be glorious up to and including Monday, so people are going to adopt them from now onwards. The T&T which is supposed to be a key safeguarding element isn’t up and running. It’s a fuckup and the App, which was supposed to be the key element of the key to safeguarding isn’t even on the horizon. It’s dangerous to lift the measures when the safety net isn’t there, but we know there’s been a rush to announce it this week in order to displace Cummings out of the news. Risking lives to save Cummings’s job? I believe so.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,263
30,652
Announcing the new easements to the lockdown measures today was unnecessary and a roll of the dice with lives. The weather is set to be glorious up to and including Monday, so people are going to adopt them from now onwards.
I was listening to the measures with amusement, since it's what we've being doing all the time in London.

Meeting in gardens in pairs! Given all the flats with communal gardens in London we neighbours unavoidably meet in numbers! The same goes for all those whose garden is the park across the road.

Read this post to see how different we are.
.
 

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,453
16,917
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
Hence the lower "r".
that would be a miracle.
There was that eminent professor Devi Sridhar of Edinburgh University on Channel 4 News tonight. She put the rate of infected population in the UK at between 5% and 7%.
There are some studies showing two out of 3 infections are asymptomatic, that puts the number of infections to 3 times the confirmed cases.
The UK has 269,127 confirmed cases, so the number of infected / immune in the UK to about 1 million, under 2%. That leaves at least 63 million Britons still susceptible to Covid.
That's the number/percentage everyone must pay attention to because it quantifies the exposure risk to Covid.

If the suggestion that there are only 24 new cases for a large city like London were true, one would not risk catching Covid more than getting stabbed because 99.999% of Londoners don't have Covid or not any more.
The risk of catching Covid is reduced but far from gone, it is still proportional to the number of new confirmed cases to around 2,000 a day. Still roughly 60% from the peak in early April.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: oldgroaner

sjpt

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 8, 2018
3,853
2,763
Winchester
There are some studies showing two out of 3 infections are asymptomatic, that puts the number of infections to 3 times the confirmed cases.
Basically I agree. But many people with symptoms aren't being tested so the number of infections will be quite a bit more than 3 times the confirmed cases.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: oldgroaner

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,263
30,652
The risk of catching Covid is reduced but far from gone, it is still proportional to the number of new confirmed cases to around 2,000 a day. Still roughly 60% from the peak in early April.
NO, NO, NO. I will never let you get away with your repeated translations of national rates into London's. The 2000 is a national figure which does not necessarily reflect the London daily infection number. There are too many differences between London and the rest of the country to translate in that way by assumption.

Every time you make this sort of assumption, stating it as fact, you demean your scientific credentials, as well as insulting me in believing I'll fall for it.

AND ONCE AGAIN, I've never mentioned or supported the 24 so please take note this time and stop arguing at me about it. It takes two to make an argument.
.
 
Last edited:

oyster

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 7, 2017
10,422
14,609
West West Wales
Announcing the new easements to the lockdown measures today was unnecessary and a roll of the dice with lives. The weather is set to be glorious up to and including Monday, so people are going to adopt them from now onwards. The T&T which is supposed to be a key safeguarding element isn’t up and running. It’s a fuckup and the App, which was supposed to be the key element of the key to safeguarding isn’t even on the horizon. It’s dangerous to lift the measures when the safety net isn’t there, but we know there’s been a rush to announce it this week in order to displace Cummings out of the news. Risking lives to save Cummings’s job? I believe so.
Bizarrely, in England you are supposed to be careful when handing out the barbecued food. In Scotland you are encouraged to each (household) bring your own food, crockery, cutlery.

If based on "the science", why such a difference?

And what I am really looking forward to - McD opening everywhere for drive through between Tuesday and Thursday. I sincerely hope that we don't see multi-hour queues as we have no other way to drive out except that road.
 

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,453
16,917
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
NO, NO, NO. I will never let you get away with your repeated translations of national rates into London's. The 2000 is a national figure which does not necessarily reflect the London daily infection number. There are too many differences between London and the rest of the country to translate in that way by assumption.

Every time you make this sort of assumption, stating it as fact, you demean your scientific credentials, as well as insulting me in believing I'll fall for it.

AND ONCE AGAIN, I've never mentioned or supported the 24 so please take note this time and stop arguing at me about it. It takes two to make an argument.
.
The ONS haved released their statistics based on antibodies testing.
54,000 are still catching Covid every week.
6% of the population has been infected.
London will probably continue to have a higher than average new infection rate, not less.
I believe in formulae. I can see you don't.
The basic formula is this: the current Re is proportional to the susceptible population.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oldgroaner

RossG

Esteemed Pedelecer
Feb 12, 2019
1,628
1,646
I was listening to the measures with amusement, since it's what we've being doing all the time in London.

Meeting in gardens in pairs! Given all the flats with communal gardens in London we neighbours unavoidably meet in numbers! The same goes for all those whose garden is the park across the road.

Read this post to see how different we are.
.
flecc..you really should get out more ! People have been doing that all over the UK since day one as I myself posted on here I believe. Communal gardens helped spread a communal disease, nothing different about London only it copped it harder like the in the war. What is different it didn't ask for that, this time it didn't care hence packed tube trains. Selfishness paid great dividends in the Capital, let's hope they learned a lesson for next time...and there will be one.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,263
30,652
The ONS haved released their statistics based on antibodies testing.
54,000 are still catching Covid every week.
6% of the population has been infected.
London will probably continue to have a higher than average new infection rate, not less.
I believe in formulae. I can see you don't.
The basic formula is this: the current Re is proportional to the susceptible population.
 

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,453
16,917
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
AND ONCE AGAIN, I've never mentioned or supported the 24 so please take note this time and stop arguing at me about it. It takes two to make an argument.
you should re-read your post #76489
Possibly not, but we've once again turned in very low figures in London with the graph at the bottom. And as you know, we didn't do that through strict lockdown but with taking the hit early.

Fewer than 24 people are now catching coronavirus on a daily basis in London, according to new research suggesting the capital could soon be virus-free.

The research by Public Health England and Cambridge University suggests London could be coronavirus-free as soon as June, based on new modelling statistics.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,263
30,652
The ONS haved released their statistics based on antibodies testing.
54,000 are still catching Covid every week.
6% of the population has been infected.
Again irrelevant national figures in a London discussion! You just don't learn.

London will probably continue to have a higher than average new infection rate, not less.
"Probably"! Yet again an assumption, you just don't learn.

I believe in formulae. I can see you don't.
The basic formula is this: the current Re is proportional to the susceptible population.
You see nothing of the sort, my argument showing my belief in formulae. My argument is precisely that the current Re is proportional to the susceptible population.

That susceptible London population has been lowered by the very high early rates of infection and deaths reducing it. Ergo the lower "r". You've even posted your admission of that in a reply, so why are you arguing against yourself?
.
 
Last edited:

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,263
30,652
you should re-read your post #76489
Distortion again by shooting the messenger. I don't need to re-read it, that was a quote from an article that I reported with a link supplied, not my statement or support. I've never supported it, I have supported that our "r" is recently lower since that is widely supported.
.
 

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,453
16,917
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
I am pleased that you do not support that article.
So why should you get angry when I said the article may be fake news?
 

Advertisers