Coronavirus

Jockiescott

Well-known member
Messages
9,149
Reaction score
2,283
Indeed, the benefit of hindsight is a wonderful thing. However, at the end of the day one of the Govt’s primary functions is to protect its citizens. The decision to release patients back to carehomes without testing was unforgivable. As little as a 2 minute safety review shouldve highlighted the need to test first. It absolutely boggles the mind why it wasnt done. Unfortunately by the time any public enquiry is complete, nobody will care...harsh but true. And we’ll be facing Indyref 99 by then.
It was a travesty that it happened.

A friend of mine has both parents in two separate care homes. There ended up with 10 deaths in his mother's home and thankfully none in his father's.

I couldn't believe that residents and staff were not being tested. It is only quite recently that this has begun to happen. Definitely lessons to be learnt.

Whether they learn from them or not is another matter.
 
Last edited:

MikeCC

Well-known member
Messages
2,438
Reaction score
259
There is a flip side that now if not sooner needs to be considered,
On the virus side of things you could argue that Sturgeon and her government have done a reasonable job?.
But it was made easier for her by handouts from the uk gov, and the uk gov realise that this hand outs were becoming as big a burden to the economy there for the jobs and mental health and general well being of the population were suffering,so they began to come out of lockdown sooner than the devolved gov's who just expect the handouts to continue.
I have heard that the oil and gas jobs in Aberdeen are likely to be cut by 30% not only by the effects of the virus but also by the price of oil being so low,and that 30% would probably extend to the rest of the local economy,so there are going to be bad times ahead.
So right now she might look good and smug but the longer we have restrictions the worse things will be in the future.
If the uk gov stops the handouts she will blame them,if they give more money she will take the credit.
The job situation and mental health of the population and the kids might now be as big of a problem than the virus.
The most significant problem facing any ‘new’ country is access to funds. I fear a newly formed Scotland(post Indy Ref 2014...or whenever it was) would be in a very precarious situation money wise just now. Westminster borrows vast sums of easily accessible money. With an established repayment history, money comes cheap as chips....borrow as much as you like type thing. Scotland wouldve been no different to a 16 year old taking out his first bank loan....its gonna cost! And that cost has to be passed on to someone....yup, the Scottish tax payer.
Or....why not protect all the borrowing against our North Sea Oil?....thats what the Indy Ref White Paper was based on(for those who read it).....unfortunately the North Sea is dead, unlikely to ever recover. Even if it does, the next time the great oil Cartel - OPEC decide to open the taps again and price everyone out the market, another nail falls on the North Seas coffin. In any case, the world doesnt want oil now, the world craves renewable green energy....the Greta Thunderbrats of the world leading the charge! What about Scotlands wind energy, that must be worth a bob?.....nope, all privatised, and the Scottish Tax payer even pays these companies millions every year to keep the windfarms switched off....thats right - ‘OFF!’. Worth reading about for those who think wind energy go’s back into the local public purse.
 

ozzyian

Well-known member
Messages
4,796
Reaction score
308
Location
East Lothian
No, health policy is devolved. That ongoing disaster is Sturgeon`s.
e were further behind on the covid curve to start with, so it stands to reason we are behind in easing out of lock down. This has become "being much more considered and careful than England". I am really surprised some of you have fallen for the wee disaster`s spin.
I don't really fall for spin, that much should be pretty obvious by now. I am prepared to look at facts and especially conclusions where comparative situations are valid.. Compared with Westminster (who had a tougher overall job admittedly) the Scot Gov has communicated better and not bullied and overruled the medical experts to the same degree. Whether this is down to politics/good fortune/weak leadership/whatever? it looks clear to me that comparatively they've done a pretty good job. Even the most intransigent anti nationalist runs out of steam arguing against that since for whatever reason the facts speak.
 

Roag Fisher

Well-known member
Messages
1,957
Reaction score
301
Location
Isle of Lewis
I don't really fall for spin, that much should be pretty obvious by now. I am prepared to look at facts and especially conclusions where comparative situations are valid.. Compared with Westminster (who had a tougher overall job admittedly) the Scot Gov has communicated better and not bullied and overruled the medical experts to the same degree. Whether this is down to politics/good fortune/weak leadership/whatever? it looks clear to me that comparatively they've done a pretty good job. Even the most intransigent anti nationalist runs out of steam arguing against that since for whatever reason the facts speak.
Look at the figures for similar areas of population density in England and Scotland. They are much the same. As is just about everything else except it has been fitted with a tartan skirt.


eg, Wiltshire has had few cases per 100K of the population than Highland. Yet the perception of the people living in the Highlands would be that anyone visiting from Wiltshire would pose a danger, when in fact they are more likely to catch the virus from a neighbour. The SG has made a very good job of spinning figures.....the abuses anyone that points that out.
 
Last edited:

carrowmore

Well-known member
Messages
804
Reaction score
337
Location
Lancashire
What a load of nonsense. Just the incompetent praising themselves and their dear leader.
I am surprised you posted that, as I know you have more sense.
Prof Sridhar argues convincingly that cycles of local lockdowns , or the “ Whack a Mole “ strategy of Johnson , are not sustainable. She has been a proponent of the Scottish Government’s “ Zero Covid “ objective that allows a return to something approaching normality and gets the economy going again.

In England we still don’t have an effective test trace and isolate system in place as we farmed it out to Serco ( rather than involve the experts in local Public Heath ) and they have made a b*lls of it . For reasons best known to Matt Hancock we wasted many weeks when he opted for a go alone app that was abandoned after costing £11 million . Rather than the app option for contact tracing the Scotland government preferred to put their faith in local public health teams and build up their capacity. All the evidence suggests this has worked well.

The result is that Scotland had 8 new cases and one death yesterday whilst here in England we have thousands of new cases and hundreds of deaths each day. The COVID infection fatality rate is 1.1% overall and 17% in the over 75s. Meanwhile the pubs are opening tomorrow.....





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Roag Fisher

Well-known member
Messages
1,957
Reaction score
301
Location
Isle of Lewis
Did you know, for instance different weeks were used to put together that map?
Compare the level of testing in Scotland to the rest of the world....
Our economy has been wrecked, and despite the low level of covid here now (a guess due to the woeful lack of testing), the SG continues to put people out of work. There was a post on here recently where someone pointed out that Scottish test and trace people are practically unemployed. I have not idea where you get the idea that Scotland is doing well from. All is far from well.
 

carrowmore

Well-known member
Messages
804
Reaction score
337
Location
Lancashire
Did you know, for instance different weeks were used to put together that map?
Compare the level of testing in Scotland to the rest of the world....
Our economy has been wrecked, and despite the low level of covid here now (a guess due to the woeful lack of testing), the SG continues to put people out of work. There was a post on here recently where someone pointed out that Scottish test and trace people are practically unemployed. I have not idea where you get the idea that Scotland is doing well from. All is far from well.
They will be practically unemployed when there were only 8 new cases yesterday .Your government's policies have supressed the virus to a stage where the test and trace teams can do the work of keeping the virus at a low level whereas here in England we still have thousands of new cases reported , the equivalent of a plane load of people dying every day and we still don't have an effective test and trace system in place.
 

MikeCC

Well-known member
Messages
2,438
Reaction score
259
They will be practically unemployed when there were only 8 new cases yesterday .Your government's policies have supressed the virus to a stage where the test and trace teams can do the work of keeping the virus at a low level whereas here in England we still have thousands of new cases reported , the equivalent of a plane load of people dying every day and we still don't have an effective test and trace system in place.
You actually dont have thousands of new cases being reported, certainly not on a daily basis, as was the situation a month or two ago. Yesterdays figures(confirmed new positive cases) was around 600 for the ‘entire’ UK. It was about 800 for the whole of the UK on the previous day.

Just checked - 576 yesterday, 749 day before.
 
Last edited:

ozzyian

Well-known member
Messages
4,796
Reaction score
308
Location
East Lothian
Look at the figures for similar areas of population density in England and Scotland. They are much the same. As is just about everything else except it has been fitted with a tartan skirt.


eg, Wiltshire has had few cases per 100K of the population than Highland. Yet the perception of the people living in the Highlands would be that anyone visiting from Wiltshire would pose a danger, when in fact they are more likely to catch the virus from a neighbour. The SG has made a very good job of spinning figures.....the abuses anyone that points that out.
Fair enough and I'm not here to get to the ins and outs of a ducks **** on Swindon vs Inverness. I don't rate any of our current political parties/personalities I'm afraid, I am actually of the opinion that UK politics is at its lowest ever ebb in terms of general competency and still receding.

Having said that, would you rather Jackson Carlaw making the decisions on this after a text from No 10?
 
Last edited:

carrowmore

Well-known member
Messages
804
Reaction score
337
Location
Lancashire
You actually dont have thousands of new cases being reported, certainly not on a daily basis, as was the situation a month or two ago. Yesterdays figures(confirmed new positive cases) was around 600 for the ‘entire’ UK. It was about 800 for the whole of the UK on the previous day.

Just checked - 576 yesterday, 749 day before.
You are right that the testing figures are in the hundreds now but the ONS infection pilot survey points to a much larger number in the general population

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey pilot: 2 July 2020

Main points
  • In this bulletin, we refer to the number of coronavirus (COVID-19) infections within the community population; community in this instance refers to private residential households, and it excludes those in hospitals, care homes or other institutional settings.
  • We estimate that an average of 1 in 2,200 individuals within the community population in England had COVID-19 at any given time between 14 June and 27 June 2020.
  • That equates to an estimated average of 25,000 people (95% confidence interval: 12,000 to 44,000) within the community in England having COVID-19 between 14 June and 27 June 2020.
  • Modelling of the trend over time suggests that the decline in the number of people in England testing positive has levelled off in recent weeks.
  • Modelling of the incidence rate trend over time suggests that incidence appears to have decreased between mid-May and early June 2020, but it has also since levelled off.
  • During the 14-day period from 14 June to 27 June 2020, there were an estimated five new COVID-19 infections for every 10,000 individuals per week in the community population in England, equating to an estimated 25,000 new cases per week (95% confidence interval: 13,000 to 46,000).
  • Regional analysis showed a reduction in people testing positive for COVID-19 in previous weeks; these trends appear to be levelling off
  • During the 14-day period from 14 June to 27 June 2020, there were an estimated five new COVID-19 infections for every 10,000 individuals per week in the community population in England, equating to an estimated 25,000 new cases per week (95% confidence interval: 13,000 to 46,000).
  • Regional analysis showed a reduction in people testing positive for COVID-19 in previous weeks; these trends appear to be levelling off.
  • Of those individuals providing blood samples, 6.3% tested positive for antibodies to COVID-19 (95% confidence interval: 4.7% to 8.1%); this equates to 1 in 16 people or 2.8 million people in England.
 

MikeCC

Well-known member
Messages
2,438
Reaction score
259
You are right that the testing figures are in the hundreds now but the ONS infection pilot survey points to a much larger number in the general population

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey pilot: 2 July 2020

Main points
  • In this bulletin, we refer to the number of coronavirus (COVID-19) infections within the community population; community in this instance refers to private residential households, and it excludes those in hospitals, care homes or other institutional settings.
  • We estimate that an average of 1 in 2,200 individuals within the community population in England had COVID-19 at any given time between 14 June and 27 June 2020.
  • That equates to an estimated average of 25,000 people (95% confidence interval: 12,000 to 44,000) within the community in England having COVID-19 between 14 June and 27 June 2020.
  • Modelling of the trend over time suggests that the decline in the number of people in England testing positive has levelled off in recent weeks.
  • Modelling of the incidence rate trend over time suggests that incidence appears to have decreased between mid-May and early June 2020, but it has also since levelled off.
  • During the 14-day period from 14 June to 27 June 2020, there were an estimated five new COVID-19 infections for every 10,000 individuals per week in the community population in England, equating to an estimated 25,000 new cases per week (95% confidence interval: 13,000 to 46,000).
  • Regional analysis showed a reduction in people testing positive for COVID-19 in previous weeks; these trends appear to be levelling off
  • During the 14-day period from 14 June to 27 June 2020, there were an estimated five new COVID-19 infections for every 10,000 individuals per week in the community population in England, equating to an estimated 25,000 new cases per week (95% confidence interval: 13,000 to 46,000).
  • Regional analysis showed a reduction in people testing positive for COVID-19 in previous weeks; these trends appear to be levelling off.
  • Of those individuals providing blood samples, 6.3% tested positive for antibodies to COVID-19 (95% confidence interval: 4.7% to 8.1%); this equates to 1 in 16 people or 2.8 million people in England.
Correct, which also means the figures you mentioned for Scotland are also likely to be higher too......and things not perhaps as rosey as some would have us believe.

The actual ONS figures suggested multiplying things by about 8 several weeks back.
 

carrowmore

Well-known member
Messages
804
Reaction score
337
Location
Lancashire
Correct, which also means the figures you mentioned for Scotland are also likely to be higher too......and things not perhaps as rosey as some would have us believe.

The actual ONS figures suggested multiplying things by about 8 several weeks back.
Though multiplying yesterday's figures by 8 would give only 64 cases in Scotland and 4,608 in England
 

MikeCC

Well-known member
Messages
2,438
Reaction score
259
Though multiplying yesterday's figures by 8 would give only 64 cases in Scotland and 4,608 in England
by total head of population thats probably about right. With track and trace however we can only deal with positive cases, and this is where the system falls down. The 576 yesterday, and the 759 day before are only masking the wider problem. We actually have no idea how many cases there currently are in Scotland unless we test everyone. There could be any number of asymptomatic cases out there. How much of a problem has just been let loose from Dumfries and Galloway??.
 

carrowmore

Well-known member
Messages
804
Reaction score
337
Location
Lancashire
by total head of population thats probably about right. With track and trace however we can only deal with positive cases, and this is where the system falls down. The 576 yesterday, and the 759 day before are only masking the wider problem. We actually have no idea how many cases there currently are in Scotland unless we test everyone. There could be any number of asymptomatic cases out there. How much of a problem has just been let loose from Dumfries and Galloway??.
Whatever way you care to look at it Scotland now finds itself in a much better position than England in regard to the chances of maintaining the suppression of the virus and avoiding the worst of all worlds in having recurrent local lockdowns and releases. Of course one of the biggest risks is letting in hordes of Sassenachs on their jollies .......
 

MikeCC

Well-known member
Messages
2,438
Reaction score
259
Whatever way you care to look at it Scotland now finds itself in a much better position than England in regard to the chances of maintaining the suppression of the virus and avoiding the worst of all worlds in having recurrent local lockdowns and releases. Of course one of the biggest risks is letting in hordes of Sassenachs on their jollies .......
If Sturgy has her way she’ll quarantine anyone travelling North. She would love us to believe none of her moves are politically motivated of course, but given the fact she chose to publish that map of the UK(further up the thread) unfortunately rather ironically proves political intent is very much alive and well! Why else publish the map?? I’ve already seen it on the SNP Facepuke feed as well.....the ‘masses’ love it, and the anti Westminster campaign have bought into it hook, line, and sinker. Propaganda at its finest. Never let a global epidemic get in the way of some good old political points scoring.
 
Last edited:

carrowmore

Well-known member
Messages
804
Reaction score
337
Location
Lancashire
If Sturgy has her way she’ll quarantine anyone travelling North. She would love us to believe none of her moves are politically motivated of course, but given the fact she chose to publish that map of the UK(further up the thread) unfortunately rather ironically proves political intent is very much alive and well! Why else publish the map?? I’ve already seen it on the SNP Facepuke feed as well.....the ‘masses’ love it, and the anti Westminster campaign have bought into it hook, line, and sinker. Propaganda at finest.
I'd give her credit for having listened to the scientists on the Scottish COVID 19 advisory group
 

MikeCC

Well-known member
Messages
2,438
Reaction score
259
Is the daily/weekly number of deaths from Coronavirus not the best indication of the number of Covid 19 cases at any given time ?
Depends what your political motive is......sorry I couldnt help that one!

If your simply asking - where is the best data?, then Worldmeters has everything you need to know. UK figures usually upload late afternoon.

 

Occasional salmon fisher

Well-known member
Messages
3,457
Reaction score
345
Depends what your political motive is......sorry I couldnt help that one!

If your simply asking - where is the best data?, then Worldmeters has everything you need to know. UK figures usually upload late afternoon.

No motive or angle, it just seems that it must be the best indicator in the absence of mass testing.
 

MikeCC

Well-known member
Messages
2,438
Reaction score
259
I'd give her credit for having listened to the scientists on the Scottish COVID 19 advisory group
She’s also deliberately waited for south of the border to play their hand first at pretty much every step. Easy to make decisions once you’ve seen the aftermath of Bojo(sorry I mean Cummings) making his.
 

carrowmore

Well-known member
Messages
804
Reaction score
337
Location
Lancashire
She’s also deliberately waited for south of the border to play their hand first at pretty much every step. Easy to make decisions once you’ve seen the aftermath of Bojo(sorry I mean Cummings) making his.
Many of us down here wish our government had followed Scotland's lead in giving test and trace responsibility to the experts in Public Health boards rather than a private company with a poor track record. If Johnson and co would take heed of their scientific advisors then we'd be also be following Scotland's lead and making the wearing of face coverings in shops mandatory.
 

ozzyian

Well-known member
Messages
4,796
Reaction score
308
Location
East Lothian
Whatever way you care to look at it Scotland now finds itself in a much better position than England in regard to the chances of maintaining the suppression of the virus and avoiding the worst of all worlds in having recurrent local lockdowns and releases. Of course one of the biggest risks is letting in hordes of Sassenachs on their jollies .......

As a matter of fact Scotland already possesses existing infrastructure and human capability to mitigate against this mode of spread , something many of us are looking forward to assisting with.













dip.jpg





:giggle:
 

MikeCC

Well-known member
Messages
2,438
Reaction score
259
Many of us down here wish our government had followed Scotland's lead in giving test and trace responsibility to the experts in Public Health boards rather than a private company with a poor track record. If Johnson and co would take heed of their scientific advisors then we'd be also be following Scotland's lead and making the wearing of face coverings in shops mandatory.
She changed her tune on face masks....or ‘coverings’ as she prefers to call them. ‘Coverings’ lessens the impact of zombie apocalyptic scenes on the High Street I suspect🙄. It wasnt however that long ago she was quite vocal in saying there was no scientific evidence that wearing them was of any benefit. Her stance had to change however when she realised that in order to get people back to work via public transport then the only way to ‘motivate’ them safety wise was to tell them to wear a mask....sorry i mean a ‘covering’!
 

carrowmore

Well-known member
Messages
804
Reaction score
337
Location
Lancashire
She changed her tune on face masks....or ‘coverings’ as she prefers to call them. ‘Coverings’ lessens the impact of zombie apocalyptic scenes on the High Street I suspect🙄. It wasnt however that long ago she was quite vocal in saying there was no scientific evidence that wearing them was of any benefit. Her stance had to change however when she realised that in order to get people back to work via public transport then the only way to ‘motivate’ them safety wise was to tell them to wear a mask....sorry i mean a ‘covering’!


She was right , there are no randomised controlled trials but she's been persuaded by the scientists , foremost of which has been Prof Greenhalgh

"How would you test the hypothesis that my mask protects you? This is problematic because, instead of just following up with one individual who is already signed up to the study (me), you’d somehow need to identify a fraction of all the people I came into contact with as I went about my life, and test each of them to see if they developed the disease. But none of those other people (random street-dwellers or bus passengers or square-crossers) agreed to be in the trial in the first place. You simply can’t study them like laboratory animals (though someone has done a randomised controlled trial to show that face coverings are highly effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission in hamsters).

In order to “do science” on the effectiveness of face coverings in the real world, you would either have to define some kind of closed system to be your sampling frame, say a school or home environment, or compromise and study the effect of mask-wearing on the wearer rather than on other people. And that’s what scientists have done.

I’ve reviewed all the published randomised trials on masks and face coverings for the general public in a peer-reviewed scientific paper. The trials consist of studies of mask-wearing in closed systems and of masks to protect the wearer, usually at specific mass events (notably, pilgrimages to the Hajj). Furthermore, all these studies were done some time ago when the prevailing diseases were colds and flu. None looked at prevention of Covid-19."



And this is one of the best essays on mask protection

 
Last edited:

MikeCC

Well-known member
Messages
2,438
Reaction score
259
She was right , there are no randomised controlled trials but ...

"How would you test the hypothesis that my mask protects you? This is problematic because, instead of just following up with one individual who is already signed up to the study (me), you’d somehow need to identify a fraction of all the people I came into contact with as I went about my life, and test each of them to see if they developed the disease. But none of those other people (random street-dwellers or bus passengers or square-crossers) agreed to be in the trial in the first place. You simply can’t study them like laboratory animals (though someone has done a randomised controlled trial to show that face coverings are highly effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission in hamsters).

In order to “do science” on the effectiveness of face coverings in the real world, you would either have to define some kind of closed system to be your sampling frame, say a school or home environment, or compromise and study the effect of mask-wearing on the wearer rather than on other people. And that’s what scientists have done.

I’ve reviewed all the published randomised trials on masks and face coverings for the general public in a peer-reviewed scientific paper. The trials consist of studies of mask-wearing in closed systems and of masks to protect the wearer, usually at specific mass events (notably, pilgrimages to the Hajj). Furthermore, all these studies were done some time ago when the prevailing diseases were colds and flu. None looked at prevention of Covid-19."



And this is one of the best essays on mask protection

I buy into the ‘placebo’ effect personally. If people feel safer with a mask then jolly good for them. But as someone said to me the other day - ‘pretending a mask is effective is a bit like pretending your underpants will stop a fart from escaping’. I thought he summed it up rather well...😀
 
Top