Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Good news I suppose unless we need to stop the infections growing exponentially and the way to do that is to restrict connections outside of our households
Coronavirus Thread (Off Topic, Politics) (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter BackRoomRummermill
- Start date
Good news I suppose unless we need to stop the infections growing exponentially and the way to do that is to restrict connections outside of our households
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
Sandwell is tier 2 with 123 cases per 100k and we are tier 1 with 130 cases per 100k?
What are they actually basing this on?
What are they actually basing this on?
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Did he give anymore information as that seems at odds with most things I've read recently.
How are they even tracking it in schools? We know most infected kids aren't symptomatic and if you don't have symptoms you don't get a test. Add in that track and trace have been told not to follow up cases from educational environments makes me wonder what data they have.
Coronavirus (COVID-19) Overview
COVID-19 is a new type of coronavirus that causes mild to severe cases. Here’s a quick guide on how to spot symptoms, risk factors, prevent spread of the disease, and find out what to do if you think you have it.www.webmd.com
Doesn't it also make a pretty strong case for closing 6th forms and universities? There was some data on this thread before the weekend showing that cases linked to educational establishments dwarfed places like pubs. If they're saying those aren't linked to U16s then surely you have to be looking at shut downs in over 16s education.
It sounds like complete BS to me for the simple reason that most children won’t have symptoms. Which again begs the question as to why I have to teach in farcical circumstances
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Where I live we have 3 conservative councillors as well as Street and they are all constantly claiming to be against things that are unpopular locally that are the policy of the Conservative government. Makes you wonder if they're in the right party.
Going to go out on a limb and guess that they will never say what numbers get you in or out of each tier and eventually the system will just be replaced with another arbitrary set of rules in a few months designed to deflect whatever criticism they are facing at the time.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
tbf it's more what government should be, general support, but willing to hold your own party / government to account if you differ too much. Always used to work that way...
In fairness could also be based on rate of change. Any idea what that is for those two areas? Of course it’s just as likely to be guesswork so don’t put yourself out.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Newcastle is over 500 per 100,000 but not in Tier 3?
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
Sandwell
Coventry
So the trend for cov looks worse than Sandwell
Coventry
So the trend for cov looks worse than Sandwell
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
I think that’s quite likely because these restrictions won’t stop increasing infections
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Let’s get crowds back
Brilliant. Just multiply cases per 1000 by rate of change and define a limit for each tier. This should have been worked out and put in place during the first lockdown, it’s fucking basic stuff.
Saddlebrains
Well-Known Member
Never gonna end is it this shit?
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Yeah, what happened to the alert levels of a few months ago? Why have we got such a pathetic client media who just amplify this nonsense?
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
FFS Boris
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
They hinted that rate of change was part of the consideration in designating tiers but it clearly isn't. Cases alone is a retrospective measure
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Yeah it will. Just not for a long while yet and we've probably got a dark, cold and miserable winter ahead.
Even if it still carries on it'll blow itself out eventually. I mean, if it killed everyone it can't infect anyone else can it.
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
Tories hate Scousers
Exactly.
They always use rate of change as a get out if a journalist asks why one area has certain restrictions but as pointed out it clearly isn’t.
Jamesimus
Well-Known Member
I mean, I'm not denying the truth in this...
I have just looked and Liverpool has a slightly higher number of cases per 100,000 people and a higher increase in the past week, so maybe that's why.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Didn't they quickly break their own system and start removing restrictions when we were still in a level where they should remain in place? Seem to remember they got quietly dropped and never mentioned again after that.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
There is probably some sort of bell curve related to economic impact underpinning the whole thing or something
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
To be serious for a minute, Boris did seem to say in the HoC that he wanted more areas to be Tier 3 but the local leaders were putting their foot down
That’s true but part of the reason they are putting their foot down is because there isn’t enough support available for the businesses closing.
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
robbiekeane
Well-Known Member
So they are claiming they own the factories..? Ffs
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Piss up in a brewery.
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
I do like the one were they seemingly didn't know Wigan was in Greater Manchester
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Which is where leadership comes in and having a clear, definable equation that sets the levels based on the scientific data matched to clear restrictions at each tier.
We've got cases per 100k, R rate, positive test %, hospitalisations and percentage of capacity etc - all of which could be used to set an automatic tier level. Doesn't then need govt or local authorities arguing over what should or shouldn't be done. It's all there already.
You could try and add them all into one equation if you wanted although that makes it complicated and puts people off. So instead you could take each criteria and set a tier to a figure for it.
i.e.
R rate
Tier 1 - 1 or below
Tier 2 - 1.1 - 1.4
Tier 3 - 1.5 and above
Cases per 100k
Tier 1 - under 250
Tier 2 - 250-500
Tier 3 - above 500
Hospital capacity
Tier 1 - under a third
Tier 2 - under two-thirds
Tier 3 - above two-thirds
*these are examples - proper figures would be agreed with the relevant scientists and experts to prevent transmission.
Then the tier for each area is set based on the highest tier from all these, so if you're tier 1 on all criteria but tier 3 in another, you're in tier 3.
It's clear, indisputable and sets out what will happen at defined points. Of course people would be annoyed by it but I reckon we're far more likely to be accepting of it if the criteria is plainly set out and what each tier means in terms of restrictions.
It's the constant arbitrary decisions with exemptions for some things and not others not seemingly based on any evidence whatsoever that riles most people. Have the balls to say "these are the criteria for each tier, these are the restrictions that will be imposed for each tier, no exceptions"
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
How about inviting only one Sunderland MP, and being surprised there were actually three?
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
amazing