Author Topic: Coronavirus  (Read 239747 times)

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32223
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4300 on: June 15, 2021, 09:55:32 AM »
It will be interesting to learn how much of the hospitality and similar industries will respond to this.
I think the extension is prudent in the circumstances, don't you?
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

Harrowby Hall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5037
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4301 on: June 15, 2021, 10:29:26 AM »
Yes, I do think it prudent, but I am also concerned about what appears to be a deliberate political decision to permit significant elements of the economy to bear the cost.
Does Magna Carta mean nothing to you? Did she die in vain?

Aruntraveller

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10958
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4302 on: June 15, 2021, 10:39:08 AM »
Quote
It will be interesting to learn how much of the hospitality and similar industries will respond to this.

Lloyd Webber has already spoken about this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57410819

It will be interesting to see if he follows through.
Before we work on Artificial Intelligence shouldn't we address the problem of natural stupidity.

Roses

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7970
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4303 on: June 15, 2021, 11:13:14 AM »
Lloyd Webber has already spoken about this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57410819

It will be interesting to see if he follows through.

What an idiot he is, the safety of the public is much more important than opening up a theatre. >:(
"At the going down of the sun and in the morning we will remember them."

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32223
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4304 on: June 15, 2021, 11:45:46 AM »
Yes, I do think it prudent, but I am also concerned about what appears to be a deliberate political decision to permit significant elements of the economy to bear the cost.
That's not the political decision. It's unfortunate but inevitable that the sector of the economy that relies on getting lots of people close together will get the worst of this.

The political decision is exempting some events from the restrictions.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32223
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4305 on: June 15, 2021, 11:46:54 AM »
Lloyd Webber has already spoken about this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57410819

It will be interesting to see if he follows through.

Seems a bit pointless. All the police need to do is station a few officers at the public entrances and the theatre won't have an audience.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32223
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4306 on: June 16, 2021, 05:18:24 PM »
Today's daily summary is cause for cautious optimism I think.

The infections rose by 32% (rolling seven day average) which is obviously not good, but the percentage is less than previous days. This means that the growth may not be exponential.

Deaths remained flat but hospital admissions are going up significantly. Hopefully that's just a symptom of the fact that they are starting from a low base.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63699
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4307 on: June 16, 2021, 07:02:50 PM »

That thing when you agree with Boris Johnson but realise that he employed someone he thought was totally fucking hopeless which shows him as totally fucking hopeless

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/16/cummings-texts-show-boris-johnson-calling-matt-hancock-totally-hopeless

SteveH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10177
  • God? She's black.
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4308 on: June 16, 2021, 11:03:10 PM »
What an idiot he is, the safety of the public is much more important than opening up a theatre. >:(
It's certainly more important than staging the sort of shite he composes!
When conspiracy nuts start spouting their bollocks, the best answer is "That's what they want you to think".

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32223
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4309 on: June 17, 2021, 07:41:09 AM »
What an idiot he is, the safety of the public is much more important than opening up a theatre. >:(

While this is true, please remember that there are people whose income is dependent on theatres being open. The situation is not totally black and white.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

Aruntraveller

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10958
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4310 on: June 21, 2021, 09:31:06 AM »
Before we work on Artificial Intelligence shouldn't we address the problem of natural stupidity.

Sriram

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8243
    • Spirituality & Science
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4311 on: June 21, 2021, 09:57:20 AM »

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32223
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4312 on: June 21, 2021, 11:07:00 AM »
People testing positive are rising by 33% and have been around this since my last post on the subject. This is exponential growth which is bad news. Hospital admissions are increasing at a scary rate (40%) but deaths are still more or less flat.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk

I think the explanation for this is that most of the increase in infections is in young people who have a better chance of surviving the virus than older people, but I am a bit puzzled by the high level of hospital admissions if this is the case.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

Spud

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7091
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4313 on: June 22, 2021, 05:30:40 PM »
If cases are increasing among 12-34 year-olds, admissions remain at a level where hospitals can cope, and severity is reduced, I'm wondering if that would that mean the need to vaccinate the young is less urgent? Indeed was it necessary to vaccinate those below, say, 50?

Aruntraveller

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10958
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4314 on: June 22, 2021, 06:08:04 PM »
If cases are increasing among 12-34 year-olds, admissions remain at a level where hospitals can cope, and severity is reduced, I'm wondering if that would that mean the need to vaccinate the young is less urgent? Indeed was it necessary to vaccinate those below, say, 50?

No. We still need to contain the spread to minimise the risk of variants.
Before we work on Artificial Intelligence shouldn't we address the problem of natural stupidity.

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32223
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4315 on: June 22, 2021, 07:07:12 PM »
If cases are increasing among 12-34 year-olds, admissions remain at a level where hospitals can cope, and severity is reduced, I'm wondering if that would that mean the need to vaccinate the young is less urgent? Indeed was it necessary to vaccinate those below, say, 50?
Everybody should be vaccinated who can be. Young people may not be so prone to dying, but they can still have serious long term symptoms. Furthermore, the more people you vaccinate, the harder it is for this virus to spread.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

Spud

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7091
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4316 on: June 23, 2021, 10:17:18 AM »
No. We still need to contain the spread to minimise the risk of variants.
The converse view is that you don't want to be challenging the immune system of an uninfected person unless you know he/she is going to be adversely affected by a pathogen. Doing so will take away from the body's ability to respond to future challenges. If I'm not mistaken, this is why the immune system is depleted as we get older.
My gut feeling is, if it isn't broken, don't fix it.

Aruntraveller

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10958
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4317 on: June 23, 2021, 10:24:27 AM »
You are wrong. One of the problems with this virus is that our immune system does not know what to do with it. It doesn't know it. Therefore as we have already seen there are a wide variety of reactions form the very mild to the deadly. Whilst younger people are less likely to die, you will still get some deaths and you will be visiting on others the "long covid" syndrome. That is before we get onto the possibility of new variants that could evade both the vaccines available and our immune system.

Giving people a vaccine for smallpox or polio hasn't affected the way our immune system responds to other threats so I'm really not sure what your point is.
Before we work on Artificial Intelligence shouldn't we address the problem of natural stupidity.

Roses

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7970
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4318 on: June 23, 2021, 10:26:19 AM »
The converse view is that you don't want to be challenging the immune system of an uninfected person unless you know he/she is going to be adversely affected by a pathogen. Doing so will take away from the body's ability to respond to future challenges. If I'm not mistaken, this is why the immune system is depleted as we get older.
My gut feeling is, if it isn't broken, don't fix it.

That sort of attitude is causing the virus to spread. >:(
"At the going down of the sun and in the morning we will remember them."

Aruntraveller

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10958
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4319 on: June 24, 2021, 12:58:27 PM »
This maybe belongs in the joke thread, but it's not quite a joke as I do relate to it so I'll leave it here:

"The thought of going back to life without a mask scares me.........I've been mouthing "fuck off" to people for months and I'm not sure I can stop"

Before we work on Artificial Intelligence shouldn't we address the problem of natural stupidity.

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32223
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4320 on: June 24, 2021, 06:50:06 PM »
The converse view is that you don't want to be challenging the immune system of an uninfected person unless you know he/she is going to be adversely affected by a pathogen. Doing so will take away from the body's ability to respond to future challenges. If I'm not mistaken, this is why the immune system is depleted as we get older.
My gut feeling is, if it isn't broken, don't fix it.

We've challenged the immune systems of 43 million people in the UK so far. The vast majority of them are perfectly fine and their vaccinations will help us beat this disease.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63699
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4321 on: June 24, 2021, 07:07:45 PM »
Two jags done

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32223
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4322 on: June 24, 2021, 07:11:22 PM »
Two jags done

He's 83: he'd have been done ages ago.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63699
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4323 on: June 24, 2021, 07:28:48 PM »
He's 83: he'd have been done ages ago.
This joke is brought to you by the jags side of the jags/jabs divide

SteveH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10177
  • God? She's black.
Re: Coronavirus
« Reply #4324 on: June 26, 2021, 07:52:39 PM »
Hand-on-cock has resigned.
When conspiracy nuts start spouting their bollocks, the best answer is "That's what they want you to think".