Up to the 2nd December.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202011/medium-688299-covid-1nov.png https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202011/medium-133409-covid-hospital.png

Can you really not see a second wave?

I thought the usual rhetoric and flowery language was missing from Boris's bulletin yesterday. There was no 'a stitch in time saves nine' or 'invisible mugger' or ' we're going to wrestle Covid to the ground'. It was all very straight to the point and less optimistic than usual. Perhaps he's had a change of tack to get people to realise how serious this is. It's possible of course that the lockdown could be extended but we'll have to wait and see what happens.

Growstuff, there's a big problem with the 'new infections' comparisons - simply because the number of people tested is not comparable with the first wave. It's likely that infection rates back then were far higher than thought (or measured).

I think the only fairly accurate numbers we have to compare are the excess deaths figures.

Still, there's a problem, though, because many deaths are not due to Coronavirus. (That is, not directly, although other causes, such as heart attacks and strokes have increased due to people not accessing healthcare.)

Hetty I didn't compare infections because I know people in the first wave weren't tested. That's why I didn't post a chart with them in. However, they did go to hospital and they did die.

Can you honestly not see the rise in new infections over the last few weeks? Or see the rise in hospital admissions and deaths?

You believe what you want to Hetty. Personally, I prefer to believe scientists and statisticians and I'll act accordingly.

grannyrebel7

I thought the usual rhetoric and flowery language was missing from Boris's bulletin yesterday. There was no 'a stitch in time saves nine' or 'invisible mugger' or ' we're going to wrestle Covid to the ground'. It was all very straight to the point and less optimistic than usual. Perhaps he's had a change of tack to get people to realise how serious this is. It's possible of course that the lockdown could be extended but we'll have to wait and see what happens.

It depends on compliance and what happens over the next two weeks or so. The people who will be hospitalised and/or die, have probably already been infected.

If anybody dangles Christmas as some kind of reward, I think I'll scream. There will be about two million students returning home from all over the place, bringing their infections with them. Then there will be groups getting together - with alcohol - followed by New Year - with alcohol. If lock-down doesn't extend to Christmas, I hope all NHS leave has been cancelled for January.

MaggieMay69
Spot on.
I can't comprehend how wishywashy women can be feeling sorry for the philandering bafoon who put himself up for the job. So arrogant he ignores all expert advice, then blames everyone else. The man who withdrew pandemic planning to push through his Brexit agenda.
I know one woman who won't be feeling sorry for him. One who probably says to her husband evety night, "lets get brexit done!" Teresa May - i wonder what she really thinks about BoJo right now.
I would also like to know how much it costs the taxpayer for his current bit of stuff and sprog number - who even knows - to reside at no10. This Government have just all got their heads in the trough.

twitter.com/timspector/status/1322833146669371392?s=20 For interest, from the Zoe Covid Symptom Study App, with over a million users each day. The best evidence by a country mile!

Just as I expected, as soon as the lockdown was mentioned many people have gone into ‘let’s party while we can’ mode. Rules have been broken even more than previously. Police have closed down illegal raves.
How many people will have picked up the infection because of their own stupidity before Thursday? Sadly, they are also the ones who will continue to break the rules, and share their bugs, after Thursday.

The excess death level is the only true measure of the impact of Covid. Yes it does include, say, increased suicides, heart attacks etc. But these increases are a consequence of the pandemic so reflect the management..... Sorry mismanagement, of the pandemic in this country.

Panic, followed by closed eyes and ears are not a sound way of managing in a crisis, nor is bumbling and telling baldfaced lies but these are the tools choose by our government and the body count, using excess deaths measure, is heading towards 80,000 but who cares, certainly not the government's backbenchers who are demanding more. Shades of Mengeles perhaps.

Who would be a leader of any country at the moment? They are between a rock and a hard place, except a President Trump who is in denial.

Agree. Shield vulnerable people. Let the rest use common sense and get on with life

Honestly in the midst of all this illness and looming economic disaster if I hear another moan about pigs in bloody blankets or Christmas decorations.......
Get over it ! It’s so easy for parents to make a Christmas Day fun for small children and one year without the ritual visit of relatives is no big deal.
Oops, rant over.

I am with you Lucca - I am facing the very real possibility of Christmas on my own for the first time ever in my life. But we will all make contact as best we can and simply make the best of it all - what else can we do?

I agree with you Lucca, it is one day of the year by Jan 2nd you have forgotten Christmas and are planning summer holidays. Is the price of more infections and death worth paying for a celebration at Christmas
ClarasOrr, the trouble is their is a vast number of people who don't use their common sense and I don't see why I as a vulnerable person should have to shield for goodness how long to allow others to go out drinking, partying etc.

I spoke to a Head Teacher today who told me universities and secondary schools are the "Superspreaders" If they studied at home it would make a huge difference.

Barmeyoldbat

I agree with you Lucca, it is one day of the year by Jan 2nd you have forgotten Christmas and are planning summer holidays. Is the price of more infections and death worth paying for a celebration at Christmas
ClarasOrr, the trouble is their is a vast number of people who don't use their common sense and I don't see why I as a vulnerable person should have to shield for goodness how long to allow others to go out drinking, partying etc.

I agree Barmeyoldbat. It's totally selfish. It would appear vulnerable people don't matter. I mean, what's another death of somebody with underlying conditions? They were being kept alive beyond their time anyway!

NemosMum

twitter.com/timspector/status/1322833146669371392?s=20 For interest, from the Zoe Covid Symptom Study App, with over a million users each day. The best evidence by a country mile!

The Zoe App doesn't include anybody under 20 or people in care homes.

Tim Spector's study on Long Covid is interesting.

Long COVID affects around 10% of 18-49 year olds who become unwell with COVID-19.

covid.joinzoe.com/post/long-covid

As a vulnerable, disabled person who lives alone, I have been so dammed sick of not seeing my loved ones for almost 11 months in one case and 16 months in another, i decided to find a way to get out of the house and signed myself up to a college course. One day a week I sit in a classroom with another 20 people, all sitting approx 60cm (2ft) apart for 7 hours.
If this government is going to insist on keeping me apart from the two people in this world that I love for any longer, I'd rather be in that classroom and hopefully I'll get this stupid virus and with a bit of luck it will take me out of the equation because of rather not live in a world where we're treated like a bunch of toddlers who have no common sense - allow us to decide the level of risk we're prepared to accept for ourselves!
As far as the 'young people' who are attending raves are concerned, surely they have parents who can tell them that they're being irresponsible and that if they are going to persist with this behaviour they'll not be allowed to come back into the family home because there are family members
who need to be protected

20 to 30 million considered vulnerable. What nonsense. If you are going to argue your case at least use credible statistics.

Totally agree granny rose.

I'm struggling to understand how the broad term BAME puts all these people into the 20 - 30 million weak category. Many of them are as strong as an ox and can run marathons. Giving them the label "vulnerable" just distorts all the figures.

Isn’t it fun being awake at 03.43 with the wind howling and the rain lashing.....

GrannyRose15

20 to 30 million considered vulnerable. What nonsense. If you are going to argue your case at least use credible statistics.

For a start, there are 15 million over 60s in the UK. It's known that people over 60 are more likely to be affected badly. It's not known exactly how many diabetics, asthmatics and people with heart conditions there are, but it's certainly millions. There are also people with compromised immune systems for a variety of reasons. All these people would be considered to have "underlying conditions" if they were to die. It's also known that people from some ethnic backgrounds are up to one and a half more likely to die, if they catch Covid.

So GrannyRose, maybe you'd like to take back what you wrote. My statistics are very credible. Maybe you'd like to think carefully next time you dismiss a post with "What nonsense"!

24·4% of the UK population were at high risk due to a record of at least one underlying health condition, including 8·3% of school-aged children, 19·6% of working-aged adults, and 66·2%
of individuals aged 70 years or more.

www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.24.20179192v1.full.pdf