Zero deaths!

The costs of holidays at seasides in Uk has risen tremendously

I can understand the prices rising by a certain percentage this year as those providing accommodation etc have to somehow make up for the disastrous time they have had or go out out of business.

However, £3,000 per week for a caravan (as shown on West tv) does seem extortionate and tourists may have long memories if they think they are being ripped off.

Unless it is their exam year, I think most of the children in this country would benefit far more from a normal family holiday than a week in school during these difficult times. The affordability of a holiday though is a problem for many as British providers have hiked their prices enormously and are profiteering unreasonably both last year and this year.

The costs of holidays at seasides in Uk has risen tremendously. And, of course, as usual -so much higher costs during school holidays. So, many parents will just have to be taken some advantage, when and where they can, and can afford to get themselves and their young children away for a few days.

Until some sort of regulations are brought about to stop prices inreasing, often doubling or more, as schools break up, it is not going to be possible to prevent many children being take out of schools for a few days. Even when schools were told to fine parents doing this, the cost of the fines were very much less than trying to book same places in holiday times.

I'm on team celebrate. By that I mean let's recognise how far we have come and how much has been achieved. I am not suggesting it is time to party and let down our guard yet, just enjoy the good news. You don't have to be either a scientist or a mathematician to understand that the figures are going in the right direction. It is a significant milestone.

Regarding children in families on holiday at the coast, many will be snapping up a week in June/early July and taking their kids out of school. If all the places in the school summer holiday are booked, (often year on year), then it could be their only chance to get away as a family.

MayBee70

Personally I think the best scientists are the ones that can speak to someone like me in non scientific terms so that I can understand what they’re talking about.

Exponential has a scientific meaning, like it or not.
It also has another, far more widely used and understood, meaning.

Maybee I think that is why Van Tam is popular.

maddyone

I do care about children and young people growstuff and the incidence of Long Covid is indeed worrying in all age groups, but you would prefer to deny children their right to go to school and other activities, thereby increasing the huge number of children who are already suffering from impaired mental health caused by the lockdown. The mental health services have already said that they cannot treat all the children who desperately need treatment. These children, just like sufferers of Long Covid, are likely to suffer mental health difficulties for years without treatment. I understand that only sufferers of Long Covid concerns you, but both conditions concern me. Especially where children are concerned.

I live in a seaside town in the south west (typical bucket and spade resort) and what amazes me after all the talk about how terrible it is that children have missed so much time at school and how desperate parents are to get them back is that as soon as people could stay overnight the places was full of families and school age children. Maybe they decided a holiday was more important for their mental health than school was but it just seemed odd.

Obviously half term has seen even more families but I wonder what next week will be like?

Don't celebrate too soon.

See this is what I mean. Why ever not? Nobody thinks its done with, we know there are still hurdles to get over. But there's always somebody out to be a Private Fraser.

Churchill on VE Day: He said "we may allow ourselves a brief period of rejoicing, but let us not forget for a moment the toils and efforts that lie ahead".

Personally I think the best scientists are the ones that can speak to someone like me in non scientific terms so that I can understand what they’re talking about.

Don't celebrate too soon. 3 weeks to go since rampant social mixing at half term and the Delta variant on the rise when we will see the effects of them.
I was advised to get a haircut last week as soon it will be awkward again, wish I'd managed the Dentist and opticians as well.
We all need to tread carefully and keep on practising what we have been doing.
A big thank you to all who have got us this far.

Have you ever heard a physicist and a mathematician discussing zero?

I have. In my house. I took part.

There are different ways of interpreting data that can lead to different hypotheses, but the data is the same. Of course there could be issues with the way the data is collected and presented.

maddyone

It’s impossible to take an alternative view of facts and figures though surely?

I don't think that is true. Have you ever heard a physicist and a mathmatician discussing zero?

It’s impossible to take an alternative view of facts and figures though surely?

Whatever background we have, scientific or otherwise, we can still be biased. It is apparent just now that some scientists tend to emphasise positive data, and some take a more negative view of it. Human nature?

Yes, I knew I was being patronising. That was the point. Exponential has a scientific meaning, like it or not. People aren't allowed "alternative meanings" any more than they are allowed "alternative facts".

Perhaps if people were careful about what was said and what was meant, we'd have a more scientifically literate population able to judge things for themselves.

Here's an interesting scientific take on things. Does Prof Spector meet the Gransnet Standards of Acceptable Scientists?

www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=3WFckBrljsk&mc_cid=d6e53d1b55&mc_eid=baaceef155

Or would he have to be like Prof Pagel, who told eveyone on Twitter that she was sick of people who disagreed with her interpretation? Or Dr Gurdasani, who proudly admitted to having lost it on the BBC News? Wonderful examples of disinterested scientists.

And WWM2 -Not embarrassed at all, why should I be? Did I say something that wasn't correct? I've told people before what my specialism is and my qualification and then I get accused of showing off and being patronising all over again. I guess some people don't like others with brains. Not falling for that again.

Alegrias1

For PippaZ:

The thing about scientists, whether they are favoured by anonymous internet forum posters or not, is that they tend to use language accurately. So “exponentially” means something specific for a scientist, it means “of or expressed by a mathematical exponent.” TV presenters and newspaper feature writers tend to use it to mean “really quick”, but that is incorrect. So if Prof Gupta used the term “exponential” he was probably using it in the scientific sense.

I didn’t hear him, but it would appear that he is talking about cases. Cases in Bolton etc are probably growing exponentially. But when posters on internet forums say that deaths are growing exponentially, when they are actually currently flat, there’s no way of spinning that, it’s just wrong. If that’s the first sentence of a post, and its wrong, it does make you wonder what else in wrong in the post. Deaths may start to grow exponentially, but any scientist worth their salt wouldn’t say something that was so scientifically inaccurate.

Now then, the 76% growth in people with COVID-19. Can you spot that on the graph attached? It’s the little blip at the end. I wonder if the source of your statistic is the SKY news report or the actual ONS Report? Obviously a big increase is concerning, but as SKY themselves say: In many areas positivity rates are very low, meaning trends are difficult to identify since they are affected by small changes in the number of people testing positive from week to week.

Science is quite complicated, isn’t it?

Wow!!

I bet you are embarrassed in retrospect!

You claim to have a scientific background.

Which area did you specialise in?

Alegrias1

growstuff

Well, goodness me. How patronising Alegrias! Shame you don't get it right all the time either and seem to want to ignore some facts.

Patronising maybe; trying to tell people they're not good scientists? There's a whole other word for that.

Quit it with the "ignoring facts" nonsense.

I think even you must be aware you were patronising Alegrais.

When I want to know about physics I will look for a physicist, when I want to know about psychology I will look for a psychologist. I don't think even you can say you can cover all the different areas of knowledge for covid so it's good to look at what others are saying - and not to decide how they are using words with different meanings when talking to other scientists or the public. Some sensible people adapt to their audience.

I f we even had a tenth of the number of cases you have in the UK we would not be allowed out over here. Everything would be shut and no way would anyone be going on holidays or travelling to the next town. Think yourselves lucky. We currently have less than a dozen cases and we are only allowed to travel 10 km from our homes ( it was 5 until Thursday night), shops all shut except chemists and food shops. No visiting others, only allowed to exercise with one other person for 2 hours tops- it goes on.

I do care about children and young people growstuff and the incidence of Long Covid is indeed worrying in all age groups, but you would prefer to deny children their right to go to school and other activities, thereby increasing the huge number of children who are already suffering from impaired mental health caused by the lockdown. The mental health services have already said that they cannot treat all the children who desperately need treatment. These children, just like sufferers of Long Covid, are likely to suffer mental health difficulties for years without treatment. I understand that only sufferers of Long Covid concerns you, but both conditions concern me. Especially where children are concerned.

….when posters on Internet forums say that deaths are growing exponentially, when they are currently flat, there’s no way of spinning that, it’s just wrong.

Quite right Alegrias. Cases of the Indian variant are growing extremely fast, but deaths are not!

growstuff

Well, goodness me. How patronising Alegrias! Shame you don't get it right all the time either and seem to want to ignore some facts.

Patronising maybe; trying to tell people they're not good scientists? There's a whole other word for that.

Quit it with the "ignoring facts" nonsense.

Thanks growstuff, that was very interesting reading - and quite terrifying if the Huffington Post study percentage of people who suffer are correct.

Well, goodness me. How patronising Alegrias! Shame you don't get it right all the time either and seem to want to ignore some facts.

Here you are:
Long COVID has a lower incidence rate for young people than it does for older age groups, but it's still a significant number.

For PippaZ:

The thing about scientists, whether they are favoured by anonymous internet forum posters or not, is that they tend to use language accurately. So “exponentially” means something specific for a scientist, it means “of or expressed by a mathematical exponent.” TV presenters and newspaper feature writers tend to use it to mean “really quick”, but that is incorrect. So if Prof Gupta used the term “exponential” he was probably using it in the scientific sense.

I didn’t hear him, but it would appear that he is talking about cases. Cases in Bolton etc are probably growing exponentially. But when posters on internet forums say that deaths are growing exponentially, when they are actually currently flat, there’s no way of spinning that, it’s just wrong. If that’s the first sentence of a post, and its wrong, it does make you wonder what else in wrong in the post. Deaths may start to grow exponentially, but any scientist worth their salt wouldn’t say something that was so scientifically inaccurate.

Now then, the 76% growth in people with COVID-19. Can you spot that on the graph attached? It’s the little blip at the end. I wonder if the source of your statistic is the SKY news report or the actual ONS Report? Obviously a big increase is concerning, but as SKY themselves say: In many areas positivity rates are very low, meaning trends are difficult to identify since they are affected by small changes in the number of people testing positive from week to week.

Science is quite complicated, isn’t it?

I can't find a definitive figure, so here's some reading material:

www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4470

www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(21)00123-5/fulltext

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) has published data from the UK Coronavirus Infection Survey which looked at how many people showed symptoms five weeks after infection. The ONS described these as ‘experimental estimates’. The estimates suggested that almost 13 per cent of children in the survey aged between two and 11 and 14.5 per cent of children aged 12 to 16 reported certain symptoms including fatigue, cough, headache, muscle aches or loss of taste or smell five weeks after falling ill with Covid-19. It is important to bear in mind that ‘experimental estimates’ means the data are still being tested. The data was based on 9,063 respondents of all ages but it is unclear what proportion of these were children. However, it is clear that some children are affected by lingering symptoms following initial infection.

www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/heart-matters-magazine/news/coronavirus-and-your-health/long-covid#children

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/long-covid-in-younger-adults-study_uk_60a5119de4b063dcceb13ab8

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7927578/