Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

[tjh290633]

I wonder if it is spread by dog walkers, or their animals? Many dogs come to you to be petted, albeit at lead's length from their owners. Could they get it on their coats and thus transfer it to humans?

There is something happening which nobody has yet pinned down. Bird droppings even?

TJH

[88V8]

I wonder if it is spread by dog walkers, or their animals? Many dogs come to you to be petted, albeit at lead's length from their owners. Could they get it on their coats and thus transfer it to humans?
There is something happening which nobody has yet pinned down. Bird droppings even?

It is spread as it has always been spread, by aerosol, and peeps not taking the basic precautions of distance.
Aggravated now by sitting in unventilated rooms.
Indoors, ventilation is key. We are smugly safe with the two working fireplaces and copious 'draughts' of our C17 cottage.

We hope to spend Xmas at a country house hotel - same one as last year - but only after we had an exchange about ventilation and agreed in which dining room we would sit (the draughty one with the fireplace) otherwise we would be staying home.

As regards fomite (surface) transmission, it is on the whole a non-event 'In my opinion the chance of transmission through inanimate surfaces is very small....' The Lancet
https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals ... 73-3099(20)30561-2.pdf This is not to say that all the wiping and sterilising is a total waste of time, it serves as a useful reminder to take care.

But as far as dogs or birds are concerned, just don't let them breathe on you.

V8

[XFool]

NEWS
23/09/2020 12:50 BST | Updated 26/09/2020 09:17 BST

No, 90% Of Coronavirus Tests Are Not 'False Positives' And This Is Why

Huffington Post

Experts explain why a theory doing the rounds about the number of people wrongly diagnosed with Covid-19 is simply not true.

[XFool]

Those who tell us what to do during the pandemic must earn our trust
David Spiegelhalter

The Guardian

Honesty, competence and a willingness to give us all the facts are essential for establishing who to trust

[jfgw]

NEWS
23/09/2020 12:50 BST | Updated 26/09/2020 09:17 BST

No, 90% Of Coronavirus Tests Are Not 'False Positives' And This Is Why

Huffington Post

Experts explain why a theory doing the rounds about the number of people wrongly diagnosed with Covid-19 is simply not true.

If it was true, the number of new cases would follow the total number of test results fairly closely, or would fall in comparison as only the first positive result is counted.

The graphs indicate that, currently, most of the positives are true.


Julian F. G. W.

[johnhemming]

What the article says is much the same as others which is that where there is a low probability that someone being tested has Covid then a higher proportion of positive tests will be false positives and vice versa.

Hence a lot depends upon who is being tested (as well as the number of tests).

[swill453]

Lib Dem landslide, SNP take Cornwall and the Isle of Wight. Tories wiped out.





Scott.

[AF62]

So Cornwall has a rolling rate of 62.4, the Isle of Wight a rate of 70.5 and they are tier 1.

Yet my District Council area has a rolling rate 65.7 (at the bottom of 'below average' on the chart) and cases falling 47% in the last week, and the town I live in itself far lower than that (the three districts in the town show 'supressed' / 27.7/ 44.5) and yet we are in tier 2 because the whole country has a rolling rate of 91.2.

And that is because two distant cities in the county have rates of 130.6 and 200.7; cities I have no intention of going anywhere near.

Hmm.

[Lootman]

So Cornwall has a rolling rate of 62.4, the Isle of Wight a rate of 70.5 and they are tier 1.

Yet my District Council area has a rolling rate 65.7 (at the bottom of 'below average' on the chart) and cases falling 47% in the last week, and the town I live in itself far lower than that (the three districts in the town show 'supressed' / 27.7/ 44.5) and yet we are in tier 2 because the whole country has a rolling rate of 91.2.

And that is because two distant cities in the county have rates of 130.6 and 200.7; cities I have no intention of going anywhere near.

I would guess it is because Cornwall and the Isle of Wight are more cut off from most other places, either by water or by distance.

No idea where you are but if you are surrounded by other areas with high infection rates then that could explain the anomaly. How "distant" are those two cities in your county with high rates? How many minutes drive from them to you is it? If your town was tier one then the residents of those cities might flock to your town to enjoy the pubs and restaurants.

[AF62]

So Cornwall has a rolling rate of 62.4, the Isle of Wight a rate of 70.5 and they are tier 1.

Yet my District Council area has a rolling rate 65.7 (at the bottom of 'below average' on the chart) and cases falling 47% in the last week, and the town I live in itself far lower than that (the three districts in the town show 'supressed' / 27.7/ 44.5) and yet we are in tier 2 because the whole country has a rolling rate of 91.2.

And that is because two distant cities in the county have rates of 130.6 and 200.7; cities I have no intention of going anywhere near.

I would guess it is because Cornwall and the Isle of Wight are more cut off from most other places, either by water or by distance.

No idea where you are but if you are surrounded by other areas with high infection rates then that could explain the anomaly. How "distant" are those two cities in your county with high rates? How many minutes drive from them to you is it? If your town was tier one then the residents of those cities might flock to your town to enjoy the pubs and restaurants.

The Isle of Wight I might agree with you, but I can see the Tamar bridge being busy with people from Plymouth popping over the border to have a drink in Saltash.

However why have three tiers if unless you are cut off from civilisation you will never get into tier 1?

[dealtn]

However why have three tiers if unless you are cut off from civilisation you will never get into tier 1?

How do you incentivise people in Tier 2 to moderate their behaviour if there is no Tier 1? Tiering is to be reviewed regularly so don't simply focus on the "current" tierings.

[tjh290633]

However why have three tiers if unless you are cut off from civilisation you will never get into tier 1?

How do you incentivise people in Tier 2 to moderate their behaviour if there is no Tier 1? Tiering is to be reviewed regularly so don't simply focus on the "current" tierings.

But there is a Tier 1 (and effectively a Tier 0). Take a trip to the Isle of Wight if you are so minded.

TJH

[XFool]

However why have three tiers if unless you are cut off from civilisation you will never get into tier 1?

How do you incentivise people in Tier 2 to moderate their behaviour if there is no Tier 1? Tiering is to be reviewed regularly so don't simply focus on the "current" tierings.

But there is a Tier 1 (and effectively a Tier 0). Take a trip to the Isle of Wight if you are so minded.

TJH

I was thinking of answering the original query with the one word: "Time"

Seeing subsequent replies, involving the IoW, I feel a joke coming on. Think I better leave it there, before it is judged "Off Topic" etc.

[GoSeigen]

NEWS
23/09/2020 12:50 BST | Updated 26/09/2020 09:17 BST

No, 90% Of Coronavirus Tests Are Not 'False Positives' And This Is Why

Huffington Post

Experts explain why a theory doing the rounds about the number of people wrongly diagnosed with Covid-19 is simply not true.

Poor article which doesn't debunk anything, let alone what was originally being said (e.g. Pillar 2 is not mentioned at all in the article).

But then XFool would not be able to judge this because he refuses to read arguments presented by the people being criticised...


GS

[XFool]

Poor article which doesn't debunk anything, let alone what was originally being said (e.g. Pillar 2 is not mentioned at all in the article).

If anyone can discover why the article should be expected to even mention "Pillar 2", perhaps they can let us know.

[AF62]

However why have three tiers if unless you are cut off from civilisation you will never get into tier 1?

How do you incentivise people in Tier 2 to moderate their behaviour if there is no Tier 1? Tiering is to be reviewed regularly so don't simply focus on the "current" tierings.

But the people in town I live in and all the surrounding area have modified their behaviour and infection rates in this area are on the bottom of the 'below average' scale. However it seems we are in tier 2 because the decision is being made on a county level, and there are people in cities 30 miles away who have not modified their behaviour and their infection rate is high.

However if the argument is that a tier 1 surrounded by tier 2 wouldn't work as people would travel to avoid the restrictions, then basing it on a county level is utterly stupid. Eight miles away there is a town across the county border which also has a high infection rate and those people are far more likely to visit my town than those from the cities in the county with the high infection rates. Thus if you are working on a wider area basis unless you do that on a cross county basis then there is no point.

So it would seem that until the whole of the south of England falls to a tier 1 infection level that nobody in the south of England will make it to tier 1.

[dealtn]

However why have three tiers if unless you are cut off from civilisation you will never get into tier 1?

How do you incentivise people in Tier 2 to moderate their behaviour if there is no Tier 1? Tiering is to be reviewed regularly so don't simply focus on the "current" tierings.

But the people in town I live in and all the surrounding area have modified their behaviour and infection rates in this area are on the bottom of the 'below average' scale. However it seems we are in tier 2 because the decision is being made on a county level, and there are people in cities 30 miles away who have not modified their behaviour and their infection rate is high.

However if the argument is that a tier 1 surrounded by tier 2 wouldn't work as people would travel to avoid the restrictions, then basing it on a county level is utterly stupid. Eight miles away there is a town across the county border which also has a high infection rate and those people are far more likely to visit my town than those from the cities in the county with the high infection rates. Thus if you are working on a wider area basis unless you do that on a cross county basis then there is no point.

So it would seem that until the whole of the south of England falls to a tier 1 infection level that nobody in the south of England will make it to tier 1.

I suspect "County" or similar is used for simplicity, not because of a notional argument about marginal travel. We have already seen many instances of how "complicated" doesn't work. So, some will feel they are in the wrong tier, and have a grievance about it. I suspect if you want perfection you will be waiting a very long time.

(I suspect the IOW considers itself part of the South of England, possibly Cornwall too, but even if not I don't agree that parts can't be tier 1, with others higher. Kent being tier 3 suggest otherwise unless you think going the other way is different somehow.)

[GrahamPlatt]

Meanwhile, not all is as it would seem with the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine

https://www.wired.com/story/the-astraze ... p-to-snuff

[XFool]

Meanwhile, not all is as it would seem with the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine

https://www.wired.com/story/the-astraze ... p-to-snuff

Could this be the source of the mistake?

"There are many different regimens in these trials—the UK study has more than two dozen arms, meaning the volunteers were divided into that many groups according to age and how much of the vaccine would be administered and when."

It does rather sound as if it all needs sorting out, or clarification.

[Lootman]

So Cornwall has a rolling rate of 62.4, the Isle of Wight a rate of 70.5 and they are tier 1.

Yet my District Council area has a rolling rate 65.7 (at the bottom of 'below average' on the chart) and cases falling 47% in the last week, and the town I live in itself far lower than that (the three districts in the town show 'supressed' / 27.7/ 44.5) and yet we are in tier 2 because the whole country has a rolling rate of 91.2.

And that is because two distant cities in the county have rates of 130.6 and 200.7; cities I have no intention of going anywhere near.

I would guess it is because Cornwall and the Isle of Wight are more cut off from most other places, either by water or by distance.

No idea where you are but if you are surrounded by other areas with high infection rates then that could explain the anomaly. How "distant" are those two cities in your county with high rates? How many minutes drive from them to you is it? If your town was tier one then the residents of those cities might flock to your town to enjoy the pubs and restaurants.

The Isle of Wight I might agree with you, but I can see the Tamar bridge being busy with people from Plymouth popping over the border to have a drink in Saltash.

Arbitrage opportunities like that will inevitably exist where two different tiers have a boundary. So that is an argument to minimise the boundaries, meaning large contiguous zones like the one you are in! That means some people will be unlucky (you) and some will be lucky (residents of those two cities in your county). But overall it is better than having hundreds of micro-zones all over the country at the council or county level.