Coronavirus

[TheHowieLama]

14 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

What do you mean?

 

The R Rate in the rest of the world has little relevance to the R Rate in the UK. That's a fact.

 

10 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I don’t get the point you’re making here, Howie. The global R rate, where different measures are in place, is not relevant to here in the UK. That’s not making any sort of statement on the importance, just the impact that somewhere like SK or Germany has on the Uk. It will impact the global economy, etc. Jut not our rate of infection, etc. If I’m missing something, I’m open to it. 

The R rate has fallen due to measures put in place that are not going to continue.

 

The virus will continue to grow - in spite of any rate stat that makes you more comfortable (which of course is why it is in the news now) - and unless Britain closes up shop entirely, seeing as they cannot manage a lockdown within their own borders that seems very unlikely, the UK will obviously be affected.

[Pureblood]

204 deaths and 1,557 new cases in the UK today.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

What do you mean?

 

The R Rate in the rest of the world has little relevance to the R Rate in the UK. That's a fact.

Aren't the majority of countries operating a similar system of lockdown/lockdown easing? If this is the case, surely there is relevance.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

Just 75 infections across Norn Iron, Scotland and Wales yesterday.

 

5 minutes ago, TK421 said:

204 deaths and 1,557 new cases in the UK today.

Does that mean nearly 1500 of the infections are in England?

[TheHowieLama]

1 minute ago, S.i.t.M aka The Boring One™ said:

 

Does that mean nearly 1500 of the infections are in England?

It means Spy Bee uses a different set of numbers.

[Numero Veinticinco]

11 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

The R rate has fallen due to measures put in place that are not going to continue.

 

The virus will continue to grow - in spite of any rate stat that makes you more comfortable (which of course is why it is in the news now) - and unless Britain closes up shop entirely, seeing as they cannot manage a lockdown within their own borders that seems very unlikely, the UK will obviously be affected.

It’s nothing to do with comfort, it’s to do with impact upon what we do. You can’t make a global point and apply it to one country. 

[Spy Bee]

15 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

The R rate has fallen due to measures put in place that are not going to continue.

 

The virus will continue to grow - in spite of any rate stat that makes you more comfortable (which of course is why it is in the news now) - and unless Britain closes up shop entirely, seeing as they cannot manage a lockdown within their own borders that seems very unlikely, the UK will obviously be affected.

But where lockdowns have been lifted, the infection rates have not gone up. Even in the UK, the VE Day celebrations and other relaxing of restrictions haven't lead to spikes. As I said, if there is going to be growth, it will surely come in the next week.

[TheHowieLama]

1 minute ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

It’s nothing to do with comfort, it’s to do with impact upon what we do. You can’t make a global point and apply it to one country. 

Fair enough. 

Seems reasonable to suggest two things:

 

If current measures are changed, the rate will be affected. How that goes neither of us has a clue.

 

All countries are affected by each others handling of a communicable disease. We will all share the same risks of re-infection. It doesn't "go away" in one place and not in others. That is a global point

[Guest]

According coronavstats:

 

England : 452 new infections

Scotland : 21

Wales : 42

N. Ireland : 14

 

United Kingdom : 1557

 

Am I missing something here?

[Pureblood]

2 minutes ago, S.i.t.M aka The Boring One™ said:

According coronavstats:

 

England : 452 new infections

Scotland : 21

Wales : 42

N. Ireland : 14

 

United Kingdom : 1557

 

Am I missing something here?

They're probably the hospital cases. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 minute ago, TheHowieLama said:

Fair enough. 

Seems reasonable to suggest two things:

 

If current measures are changed, the rate will be affected. How that goes neither of us has a clue.

 

All countries are affected by each others handling of a communicable disease. We will all share the same risks of re-infection. It doesn't "go away" in one place and not in others. That is a global point

Sure, totally accept that; it’s relevant to a lot of things. Like, we need to look at how they deal with things, as it’s relevant to how we act etc. What I’m saying is, the global rate of infection doesn’t really have a relevance to how we use our own rate. So, for example, if the rest of the world has zero cases but we are all collapsing, the low rate doesn’t matter. Same if the opposite is true. I can’t speak for Spybee, but I’m talking specifically about that. 

[TheHowieLama]

6 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

But where lockdowns have been lifted, the infection rates have not gone up. Even in the UK, the VE Day celebrations and other relaxing of restrictions haven't lead to spikes. As I said, if there is going to be growth, it will surely come in the next week.

There is a much larger point you are missing in your desire to focus on England.

So. This is from yesterday:

Coronavirus could be growing exponentially in the northwest of England, according to data revealing the regional reproduction rate for the first time.

R is thought to be 1.01 in the northwest and 1 in the southwest, in results shown by a tool created by Public Health England (PHE) and Cambridge University.

In only one region — the northeast and Yorkshire — was it below 0.9, the data suggested.

 

Health secretary Matt Hancock said the government’s Sage committee had suggested R was below 1 in all regions — but he admitted there was a “challenge” in the northwest and southwest areas.

 

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, TK421 said:

They're probably the hospital cases. 

They're yesterdays figures anyway, still a bit confusing. Maybe it's not the best site for overall stats.

[TheHowieLama]

1 minute ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Sure, totally accept that; it’s relevant to a lot of things. Like, we need to look at how they deal with things, as it’s relevant to how we act etc. What I’m saying is, the global rate of infection doesn’t really have a relevance to how we use our own rate. So, for example, if the rest of the world has zero cases but we are all collapsing, the low rate doesn’t matter. Same if the opposite is true. I can’t speak for Spybee, but I’m talking specifically about that. 

Yep.

 

What seems to be lost in the conversation on r Rate is even at the goal of one, the virus is still spreading.

 

[3 Stacks]

10 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

But where lockdowns have been lifted, the infection rates have not gone up. Even in the UK, the VE Day celebrations and other relaxing of restrictions haven't lead to spikes. As I said, if there is going to be growth, it will surely come in the next week.

If you look at drawings of curves of prior pandemics, they never just shoot back up right away after the initial shape nears the x axis. It takes a while for curves to restart ascending. It's foolish to say this is going away just because the growth of cases hasn't been absolutely immediate.  

[TheHowieLama]

12 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

But where lockdowns have been lifted, 

Which country has gone back to pre-lockdown conditions? There is still substantial mitigation in place to keep this number down.

 

Do you think that in one year people in the UK will be wearing masks in public and there will be distancing requirements in place?

[Spy Bee]

4 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Coronavirus could be growing exponentially

It never has spread exponentially. This kind of hyperbole gets clicks, so the media keep going with it. Germany had a spike to somewhere like 1.3 the other day, but then it dipped to 0.57. 

 

I'd love to understand how the R Rate is calculated, because hospital admissions are falling, infections are falling, but the R Rate is rising. Is this when they are block testing care homes, and care staff? I genuinely don't understand.

[TheHowieLama]

7 minutes ago, S.i.t.M aka The Boring One™ said:

They're yesterdays figures anyway, still a bit confusing. Maybe it's not the best site for overall stats.

1557 is right -- https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/

[TheHowieLama]

2 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

It never has spread exponentially. This kind of hyperbole gets clicks, so the media keep going with it. Germany had a spike to somewhere like 1.3 the other day, but then it dipped to 0.57. 

 

I'd love to understand how the R Rate is calculated, because hospital admissions are falling, infections are falling, but the R Rate is rising. Is this when they are block testing care homes, and care staff? I genuinely don't understand.

Never? Are you sure?

 

No idea how it is either -  but it's "positive" trend is definitely now being used by the government to push re-opening.

[Barrington Womble]

51 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

So not only are you pulling out of the EU but leaving the rest of the world as well.

 

That may be the most blinkered statement on this I have heard yet.

The rest of the world rather spoil the idea it's burning out rather than lockdown doing its job. 

20 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

But where lockdowns have been lifted, the infection rates have not gone up. Even in the UK, the VE Day celebrations and other relaxing of restrictions haven't lead to spikes. As I said, if there is going to be growth, it will surely come in the next week.

The numbers won't spike, you know this -while the R rate is below one, we'll get less cases. But maybe more cases than if we hadn't relaxed lockdown. Either way, while the R rate is under 1, new cases will go down. As I mentioned you know this, so I don't know why you'd suggest we should see cases rising. 

[Spy Bee]

3 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Which country has gone back to pre-lockdown conditions? There is still substantial mitigation in place to keep this number down.

 

Do you think that in one year people in the UK will be wearing masks in public and there will be distancing requirements in place?

The first point is fair, even in Australia and New Zealand there are some restrictions and that's sensible.

 

I don't think people will be habitually wearing masks and socially distancing by September. Some might, but I think thing will soon return to normality.

 

My theory is that somehow, and not through good government, we have reached a level of herd immunity*. This has slowed the R Rate and will continue to do so, but we will see regional spikes where the herd immunity has not been achieved, but the virus spread will continue to slow on the whole.

 

*Not by 80% infection, by some innate immunity that we perhaps don't understand, although maybe it's T Cell responses.

[Pureblood]

3 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

It never has spread exponentially. 

Lol!

[Spy Bee]

2 minutes ago, Barry Wom said:

Either way, while the R rate is under 1, new cases will go down. As I mentioned you know this, so I don't know why you'd suggest we should see cases rising. 

But these kind of events should have a direct impact on the R Rate, taking it over 1.

[TheHowieLama]

@Spy Bee

"My theory is that somehow, and not through good government, we have reached a level of herd immunity*. This has slowed the R Rate and will continue to do so, but we will see regional spikes where the herd immunity has not been achieved, but the virus spread will continue to slow on the whole.

 

*Not by 80% infection, by some innate immunity that we perhaps don't understand, although maybe it's T Cell responses."

 

 

Even in the Season of the Asterisk I think that is going to be a tough sell to Joe Q.

[Pureblood]

No exponential growth but it went from 1 case to 7 million in five months.  Just batshit honey nut loopy.  Even Chris Whitty admitted there had been exponential growth, and he's a Tory arselicker.