R>1

[northernladuk]

I'm not being complacent, and that is a question that should have a somewhat concrete answer IMO. In the most recent reporting period, about 1% of deaths were Covid: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...ding25june2021

Is that a lot, or insignificant, or neither? What should we be comparing it to?

My question is what of that 1% could be avoided by people wearing masks and taking care. Reaching that by people trying to make a living and keeping their business/income afloat is completely different to arriving at that figure because people won't wear a mask and respect social distancing when going about whatever they do. One is a balance, the other is inexcusable. For example, that picture of everyone coming out of wemble in the semi finals. Huge crowd, shoulder to shoulder and hardly a mask in sight. If that added to the 1% then that's unacceptable. Just no need.

[d000hg]

My question is what of that 1% could be avoided by people wearing masks and taking care. Reaching that by people trying to make a living and keeping their business/income afloat is completely different to arriving at that figure because people won't wear a mask and respect social distancing when going about whatever they do. One is a balance, the other is inexcusable.

So at what point will it become excusable? There will always be, and has always been, a statistical reduction in disease transmission if everyone wore masks and kept distance in crowded areas. Are you saying 60 million should wear masks to save 20 lives a day? What about 10? 5? 1?

[mattster]

I'm not being complacent, and that is a question that should have a somewhat concrete answer IMO. In the most recent reporting period, about 1% of deaths were Covid: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...ding25june2021

Is that a lot, or insignificant, or neither? What should we be comparing it to?

What about long covid? Looks like an interesting Panorama on it tonight, which I'll try and watch if I remember.
Quote from one of the docs, from an article in the Guardian here:

“It’s hard to escape a prediction that 100,000 new infections a day equates to 10,000 to 20,000 long Covid cases a day, especially in young people. That’s a lot of damage to a lot of lives. And it’s hard to see that we’d have the healthcare provision to deal with it on that scale,” said Danny Altmann, a professor of immunology at Imperial. “All of us working on this could not be more alarmed.”

10k people a day avoidably succumbing to a long term debilitating condition. Let's hope they work out how to treat it.

[AtW]

Long Covid won't be Tory Govt problem because they'll be out of power for a long time, hopefully forever

[mattster]

Long Covid won't be Tory Govt problem because they'll be out of power for a long time, hopefully forever

How so? They're ahead in the polls now, by quite some margin, as hard as that is to believe. Until we get a real opposition, we're stuck with them.

[d000hg]

10k people a day avoidably succumbing to a long term debilitating condition. Let's hope they work out how to treat it.

They're really suggesting up to 1 in 5 could have serious long-term effects?

On NLUK's question, I suppose the government is quite clearly saying that 20+ deaths a day IS an acceptable cost to ending restrictions. Extrapolating suggests 100 a day is quite plausible for a period. They seem to be using the argument "we told you opening up would mean more deaths" as justification to go ahead, which is quite strange, but ultimately government DOES have to decide how many lives justify shutting down the country for. Someone must have to address that question head-on even though the politicians are going to skirt around it, and report on it.

[SueEllen]

How so? They're ahead in the polls now, by quite some margin, as hard as that is to believe. Until we get a real opposition, we're stuck with them.

That's not how people vote in this country.

Only when the majority are fed up of the government does it change colour.

[SueEllen]

They're really suggesting up to 1 in 5 could have serious long-term effects?

It depends what the long term effects are.

If 25% of them have immune system or major organ issues like heart problems like Dr Xand* then it's a problem.

However of 90% just can't smell it isn't.

*Dr Xand children's tv presenter who is an identical twin doctor. He has heart issues from Covid. Did a documentary on his Covid issues where his heart had to jumped back into normal rhythm.

[AtW]

"Boris Johnson urges Covid caution amid warnings of 1,000 hospitalisations a day

PM recommends mask use and gradual return to workplaces as Sage models highlight potential pressures on NHS"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...isations-a-day

1000 per day will be within a week and this is virus still going through young age groups.

[d000hg]

One of the press questions in this evening's briefing mentioned "government models predicting 100-200 daily deaths at the peak" and I don't think this was challenged. So that's a level that is deemed acceptable, we can infer.