NWR new zero tolerance covid thread

Your "netting off" argument seems fishy to me, but I must admit I can't find the flaw.

However, I think excess deaths will be a good measure of how well we have managed the crisis over a period of (say) couple of years, and that is the best way to regard it IMO. So the so excess death reduction during lockdowns will be balanced against its probable increase this winter due to reduced immunuty, for all infectious diseases. It will also take into account some deaths in that period due to pressures on the NHS.

That is how the "netting off" should be done - by averaging over a longer period - but it is of little use for week-to-week policy-making.

(It is very different issue, but don't think there has been a big increase in non-Covid deaths from pressures on the NHS. In crises, preventing immediate death is given a high priority, but other services take the hit.)
 
Last edited:
As we hear daily about the pressures on the NHS, all non urgent surgeries are cancelled including some cancer ones in some trusts. We can expect more non Covid-19 deaths over the next few years. You’re right it is only then we can see a clear picture.
Generally it shows firstly there is no slack in the NHS, and second, that more mitigation of COVID infection are and will be needed.
 
there is no slack in the NHS
There's no slack in some parts of the NHS; in other parts there is. Or other part are at least working normally.

I may have mentioned it before, but I unfortunately have needed (and received!) a pretty broad range of NHS services throughout the pandemic. And the degree of slack/overwork varied considerably in the different places. Some staff were noticably relaxed, while others are run ragged.

No criticism of the "relaxed" staff at all - it was just the part of the system where they were working. Ironically, at a time when ambulance response times were awful (1 hr when the target was under 10 mins), ambulance crews were NOT run ragged, but hanging around in a corridor because there was a bottle neck in another part of the system, and were unable to hand over their charges to A&E.

The analysis of the cause of the lousy response time is my own. I spent a scary hour at home with chest pain waiting for an ambulance, and later saw the increasing queue of ambulance trolleys in A&E, and the sytem backing up.

In the same period someone in my area died from stroke in the hour he had to wait. It was reported as the result of an overloaded ambulance service, which IMO was only half true.
 
Last edited:
Strange there is no comment on the report by cross party MPs on the pandemic. Could it be difficult to comment without being political. It’s quite critical.
 
Last edited:
At the ROH I know some of the orchestra sitting near the front rows are rather grumpy that their inhabitants aren't masked (understatement).

From what I've read it took about 5 years for the 1890 pandemic to reach relative stability/endemicity (I've previously linked to an excellent article by Mark Honigsbaum about it and its precedents in terms of long disease). We have the huge advantage of vaccination to help us towards this, and yes we'll probably eventually all get it, but you want it to be hitting immune systems that are as well primed as possible (not least in countries with healthcare systems that aren't advanced). I'm genuinely curious if mutation ends up being towards something less nasty or if it just becomes less dangerous as more people are exposed - I've read articles claiming both quite strongly.
In the US, we think of unions in the UK as having much more power than in the US, but I suppose it depends on sectors of the economy. Musicians' unions still seem to have a fair amount of power in the US, and I'm confident that if this were the situation in NYC or SF or LA, etc. the musicians' unions would shut the house down until management enforced masking. Of course, NYC, SF, LA all have strong governmental enforcement of masking indoors, so the situation won't arise there. Not to mention that opera patrons in the US belong to the socio-economic class that has the highest compliance rate.
 
In the US, we think of unions in the UK as having much more power than in the US, but I suppose it depends on sectors of the economy. Musicians' unions still seem to have a fair amount of power in the US, and I'm confident that if this were the situation in NYC or SF or LA, etc. the musicians' unions would shut the house down until management enforced masking. Of course, NYC, SF, LA all have strong governmental enforcement of masking indoors, so the situation won't arise there. Not to mention that opera patrons in the US belong to the socio-economic class that has the highest compliance rate.
It is almost certainly true that the US musician's unions are in much stronger positions than the UK one - certainly the salaries and employment conditions of the US orchestras would suggest that... Whether those will be maintained post-pandemic (the salary cost of some of the fully tenured orchestras were certainly already an issue for many of them) is another question.

I don't envy the management of the ROH etc, they really do need to get people back in the hall after 18 months with more or less no revenue. Likewise, very justifiable existential dread probably causes the people who work there to accept things they wouldn't have otherwise.
 
I don't envy the management of the ROH etc, they really do need to get people back in the hall after 18 months with more or less no revenue. Likewise, very justifiable existential dread probably causes the people who work there to accept things they wouldn't have otherwise.
Based on my attendance at a number of performances over the years at both the ROH and the Met, I would say that the socio-economic aspects of the audiences are similar, but the political aspects might delve significantly. The lack of mask-wearing at the ROH further supports the latter supposition.
 
How should we understand some people's willingness to threaten scientists with death for commenting on C19?

Is it a tiny minority who have always been there, may be quite disturbed, C19 is just their current bugbear, we'd never have heard from them pre-internet and we can simply allow the law to take its course?

Is it orchestrated and if so by whom?

Are the death-threateners just the tip of a growing anti-science iceberg and civilisation is the Titanic?
 
How should we understand some people's willingness to threaten scientists with death for commenting on C19?

Is it a tiny minority who have always been there, may be quite disturbed, C19 is just their current bugbear, we'd never have heard from them pre-internet and we can simply allow the law to take its course?

Is it orchestrated and if so by whom?

Are the death-threateners just the tip of a growing anti-science iceberg and civilisation is the Titanic?
Jeremy,
This may not be a direct response to your post but...

I suspect that Social Media and its very direct outcomes represent a far greater immediate danger to the future of mankind than global warming.

That may be "political" but perhaps may be considered as it has no intended "party" bias.
 
Jeremy,
This may not be a direct response to your post but...

I suspect that Social Media and its very direct outcomes represent a far greater immediate danger to the future of mankind than global warming.

That may be "political" but perhaps may be considered as it has no intended "party" bias.
The problem isn't people speaking, it's people listening.
 
The problem isn't people speaking, it's people listening.

I’d say the problem is that many people have become intolerant of other people’s opinions. Social media has made this much worse because people tend to follow others who share the same viewpoints. They then end up in an echo chamber which makes them presume to know best & they end up shocked/outraged when they hear a different argument.

Somehow we need to get back to a place where people can accept each others’ opposing views without demonising each other. Open debate and willingness to disagree yet still respect each other & be civil is essential for a cohesive society.
 
My sister (based in Bristol) has recently had positive LFT and negative PCR. According to my other sister (who works for NHS and also lives in Bristol) this is actually a widely observed phenomenon - as mentioned here Why some PCR results are negative after a positive lateral flow test | The Week UK

She does have cold-like symptoms. Might this be some other virus (cold or mild flu) lighting up LFT or even a new variant of Covid that PCR misses?

Update - a second PCR came back positive.

 
Last edited:
But I think this is what the government want, right?

Very different in France and Spain.
I suppose HMG might have made the judgement that anyone unvaccinated by now isn't going to get vaccinated and that by allowing Covid unhindered access to the population we could bring some hospitalisations forward before the flu season, reducing pressure on the NHS over Winter. I'd rather they mandated masks on public transport - which would probably also reduce flu transmission.
 
Our neighbours 8 year old twins have covid. One positive LF then both negative PCR, Next day the other twin positive LF and PCR confirmed. No symptoms. Luckily parents not affected at the moment. The local school is full of it. The timing of the test seems important especially with no symptoms.

Today there a report that Lateral flow tests are much better than thought. I’m certainly going to start taking them. My daughter has too for work twice a week. I wonder how many other are?
 
Our neighbours 8 year old twins have covid. One positive LF then both negative PCR, Next day the other twin positive LF and PCR confirmed. No symptoms. Luckily parents not affected at the moment. The local school is full of it. The timing of the test seems important especially with no symptoms.

Today there a report that Lateral flow tests are much better than thought. I’m certainly going to start taking them. My daughter has too for work twice a week. I wonder how many other are?
I am taking a test before each time I go out and meet people. It's starting to get to the point where that is more than 3 times in some weeks - which feels wonderful
 
But I think this [little mask wearing on puplic transport] is what the government want, right?
Officially, "no". Unofficially, apparently "yes".

This ambivalence has been a feature since the first lockdown when, in written advice from the government, we were told to go to work if we could - I checked on the website at the time to be sure. But the simple message everyone remembers was "Stay at home".
 
Unless it’s changed gov.uk still says to wear masks in crowded indoor areas including busy public transport. This is neither mentioned anymore nor undertaken by ministers etc.
There’s double messages.
On the street next to nobody bothers. I’m sure this is what is intended.
Meanwhile cases are rising and the winters coming. I know the vaccine brilliant but it still doesn’t negate basic public health.
 
Unless it’s changed gov.uk still says to wear masks in crowded indoor areas including busy public transport. This is neither mentioned anymore nor undertaken by ministers etc.
There’s double messages.
On the street next to nobody bothers. I’m sure this is what is intended.
Meanwhile cases are rising and the winters coming. I know the vaccine brilliant but it still doesn’t negate basic public health.
I happily sat through the new Bond film in a largely empty cinema wearing an FFP3 mask this week. It's a compromise but that's OK.
 
Top