COVID-19: Your Thoughts and it's effects on you.

[IATthenRIAT]

Talking of statistics!

Look East had a report this evening, which I half listened to, that Herts CC had completed a survey as to where people where catching the virus; I don't know the timescale but these figures (give or take) came out of it.

30% while shopping
10% in hospital
10% socialising
5% gyms and exercise.
(happy to be corrected if anybody can find the actual figures)
It was very clear that shopping was the worst spreader, people not wearing masks, spreading through touch and so on.

The Sky News website quotes the following Public Health England data today. I’m not sure what dates it refers to but presumably it’s pre-lockdown in England as pubs, restaurants and gyms are included and they’re all shut now.

Supermarket - 18.3%

​
Secondary school - 12.7%

​
Primary school - 10.1%

​
Hospital - 3.6%

​
Care home - 2.8%

​
College - 2.4%

​
Warehouse - 2.2%

​
Nursery preschool - 1.8%

​
Pub or bar - 1.6%

​
Hospitality - 1.5%

​
University - 1.4%

​
Manufacture engineering - 1.4%

​
Household fewer than five - 1.2%

​
General practice - 1.1%

​
Gym - 1.1%

​
Restaurant or cafe - 1.0%


To me it looks like if we follow the science and shut Tesco, Sainsbury and all the schools and start getting pi**** down the pub again, we’ve got this thing cracked. And if you want to stay completely safe, buy yourself a bus pass and ride round on the bus all day.

And birding - spotting - fishing - golf - surfing - canoeing - fellwalking (including on Snowdon) or anything except maybe contact team sports anywhere else outside: big fat zero...... no reason to limit travel for leisure activities.

Dont know how they found the stats - street polls stopping and asking people in the street?

[Ken Shabby]

Talking of statistics!

Look East had a report this evening, which I half listened to, that Herts CC had completed a survey as to where people where catching the virus; I don't know the timescale but these figures (give or take) came out of it.

30% while shopping
10% in hospital
10% socialising
5% gyms and exercise.
(happy to be corrected if anybody can find the actual figures)
It was very clear that shopping was the worst spreader, people not wearing masks, spreading through touch and so on.

The Sky News website quotes the following Public Health England data today. I’m not sure what dates it refers to but presumably it’s pre-lockdown in England as pubs, restaurants and gyms are included and they’re all shut now.

Supermarket - 18.3%

​
Secondary school - 12.7%

​
Primary school - 10.1%

​
Hospital - 3.6%

​
Care home - 2.8%

​
College - 2.4%

​
Warehouse - 2.2%

​
Nursery preschool - 1.8%

​
Pub or bar - 1.6%

​
Hospitality - 1.5%

​
University - 1.4%

​
Manufacture engineering - 1.4%

​
Household fewer than five - 1.2%

​
General practice - 1.1%

​
Gym - 1.1%

​
Restaurant or cafe - 1.0%


To me it looks like if we follow the science and shut Tesco, Sainsbury and all the schools and start getting pi**** down the pub again, we’ve got this thing cracked. And if you want to stay completely safe, buy yourself a bus pass and ride round on the bus all day.

And birding - spotting - fishing - golf - surfing - canoeing - fellwalking (including on Snowdon) or anything except maybe contact team sports anywhere else outside: big fat zero...... no reason to limit travel for leisure activities.

Dont know how they found the stats - street polls stopping and asking people in the street?

I believe it said it was compiled from a variety of sources, although I can’t imagine they have hundreds of people wandering the streets asking people if they’ve had COVID and, if they have, do they know where they caught it.

PHE now seem to be backtracking on the supermarkets being the main cause of the spread. I guess someone has had a word in their shell-like saying it doesn’t fit with the current ‘thinking’ and that they should keep their mouth shut.

I’m sure we’ll have a new set of stats appear soon showing that hardly anyone catches COVID at school or in Tesco and that the real causes of the spread are popping next door to have a chat with your lonely next door neighbour, visiting a museum and having a game of golf.

Stay Safe, Stay Alert, Stay At Home, Stay Miserable, Save the NHS, Wreck the Economy.

Food for thought ... what would the last six months have been like without the internet?

[MiG_Eater]

Food for thought ... what would the last six months have been like without the internet?

Much, much better - because none of us would have had access to statistics from the ONS, CDC or PHE; which means we'd actually believe all this pain was worth it.

If excess deaths were above average, if 'cases' actually did measure up to positive tests and if this disease was ripping through hospitals in the way that the BBC imply, or directly state I would *gladly* stay at home and hunker down for the next year or so, just as I did at the start of the pandemic.

Unfortunately, investigating the claims of the government and their appointed scientists using un-spun independently sourced data has led me to the conclusion that everything our government has done since the Summer has been a dreadful act of self harm, and vandalism to our country and the lives of those that live here.

[Tommy]

Food for thought ... what would the last six months have been like without the internet?

Quite simply catastrophic; mentally, economically, and from a public health point of view.

[Ken Shabby]

So no great difference then!

I was thinking it would have been interesting what any lockdown would have been like. Working from home wouldn’t have been the widespread option it has been, so office-based workers would have had to carry on with the daily commute. No on-line ordering, no Zoom or social media to make up for other social or business contact. Would lockdown have even been considered as an option?

[RAF4EVER]

Glad I do not live in the UK anymore.

[CJS]

So no great difference then!

I was thinking it would have been interesting what any lockdown would have been like. Working from home wouldn’t have been the widespread option it has been, so office-based workers would have had to carry on with the daily commute. No on-line ordering, no Zoom or social media to make up for other social or business contact. Would lockdown have even been considered as an option?

I imagine it would have been, and without the internet it would have been just fine. You're right about all those things above, and Tommy's right too, but you're coming at the question as if "what would it have been like to have the internet taken away from us?" rather than "what would it have been like without it?" which are two quite different things.

Those of us who are old enough - and I just about am! - to remember adult life without the internet will recall that life ticked along ok before it came along.

But, it's a part of life now, so yeah, of course, if you removed it now it would be extremely tough. But if we'd never had it? If Covid had struck in 1990? I would have thought the response would have been along similar lines.

My guess would be that more people would have stuck to the rules too, because you'd have been told what to do via a leaflet through the door, watching the 9 o'clock news (remember that?) and listening to the radio - the daft conspiracy guff wouldn't have permeated into our living rooms, onto our smart phones and so on, so it never would have got a hold anywhere.

Maybe in the Newspapers to a certain extent, but certainly not in the same way.

It's great for sure, the internet, but it's also a hideous, hideous thing.

[AndyXH558]

Next couple of weeks its looking like all health service staff will have to be tested for covid twice a week, all from the comfort of our own homes.

[IATthenRIAT]

I heard someone say the other day - "If you had no TV or Radio, no internet - had no neighbours or family and didn't go out - you would be no wiser to covid and would know nothng about it"

[vandal]

I heard someone say the other day - "If you had no TV or Radio, no internet - had no neighbours or family and didn't go out - you would be no wiser to covid and would know nothng about it"

Nor would you be likely to catch it.

[Tommy]

I heard someone say the other day - "If you had no TV or Radio, no internet - had no neighbours or family and didn't go out - you would be no wiser to covid and would know nothng about it"

On the face of it that sounds erudite, but thinking about it, it seems a bit silly to me.

Of course, if you did nothing, consumed nothing, read nothing, saw no-one and went nowhere, of course you’d know nothing about it.

It’s like saying “if you lived in a box, you wouldn’t know about it”.

Seems a bit of an odd hypothetical. I guess what they’re trying to say is the absolute saturation of “COVID” talk this year has come from everywhere, and I get it, but the analogy sounds a bit stupid to me.

Sure, if you were sealed in a box, consumed absolutely no current information, and knew nobody, you wouldn’t know about COVID. You wouldn’t know about anything else, either.

[iainpeden]

I heard someone say the other day - "If you had no TV or Radio, no internet - had no neighbours or family and didn't go out - you would be no wiser to covid and would know nothng about it"

I don't know about erudite - just stating the bl***ing obvious; initially I was put in mind of the Japanese soldiers on the Pacific islands who didn't know the war had ended or the peasants at the time of the Wars of the Roses who were totally unaware of the civil war raging in parts of the country.

But I do wonder how many people actually take notice of what is being said on a day to day basis and is it that this total information age has so overwhelmed some people's ability, or willingness, to assimilate facts or maybe it's a defence mechanism.

[IATthenRIAT]

I think it was ment in the context that the media - news - public service announcements Gov briefings have saturated the media, every day on the news - another x number of people tested positive - people in hospital with it - then same the next day rinse and repeat.

[iainpeden]

ItR, you’re right. Many are suggesting that the constant bad news has led to damaged mental health and therefore the need for self-rationing of what you watch or listen to.

[Ken Shabby]

ItR, you’re right. Many are suggesting that the constant bad news has led to damaged mental health and therefore the need for self-rationing of what you watch or listen to.

That’s a bit where I am at the moment. I also treat anything and everything I hear from the so-called experts with a large dose of salt (not that I’ve never tended to do that in any case). Best one for me was last week when some Government advisor said that for every day of ‘freedom’ we might have have over Christmas we would need two days of lockdown in January to deal with the consequences.

Within 24 hours, Public Health England (who presumably also advise the Government) said that was wrong and that it was five days.

I mean, what sort of ‘science’ is all this based on or are they just making it up as they go along?

And then there was the the SAGE professor who said if we had the family round for Christmas we would be burying our grannies in January and February. Is that the sort of thing he writes in his reports to the Government or is he looking for a new career as a journalist at the Daily Star? What sort of professional person are you if you feel the only way you can get your point across is to resort to puerile scare tactics and then expect people to take you seriously?

[Teaboy]

These stats that show only x% of cases were picked up in such and such a location are pretty meaningless when you consider the places with low case instances have largely been shut for most of the year (gyms etc) while the ones with high instances have been open (supermarkets).... I mean... surely that is obvious?

How many cases have been picked up at brothels? None? They must be safe then.

[RAF4EVER]

These stats that show only x% of cases were picked up in such and such a location are pretty meaningless when you consider the places with low case instances have largely been shut for most of the year (gyms etc) while the ones with high instances have been open (supermarkets).... I mean... surely that is obvious?

How many cases have been picked up at brothels? None? They must be safe then.

How many brothels do you know of in the UK, as I believe they are illegal,unlike here.

[roger]

These stats that show only x% of cases were picked up in such and such a location are pretty meaningless when you consider the places with low case instances have largely been shut for most of the year (gyms etc) while the ones with high instances have been open (supermarkets).... I mean... surely that is obvious?

How many cases have been picked up at brothels? None? They must be safe then.

The PHE report did not say these were the locations where people got infected, although this is what our geniuses in the press reported. PHE said these were places they had visited in the few days prior to developing symptoms. Their exposure took place sometime in the two weeks prior to symptoms and therefore they could have been exposed almost anywhere.

[roger]

These stats that show only x% of cases were picked up in such and such a location are pretty meaningless when you consider the places with low case instances have largely been shut for most of the year (gyms etc) while the ones with high instances have been open (supermarkets).... I mean... surely that is obvious?

How many cases have been picked up at brothels? None? They must be safe then.

How many brothels do you know of in the UK, as I believe they are illegal,unlike here.

Just because they are illegal doesn't mean they don't exist!

[Teaboy]

These stats that show only x% of cases were picked up in such and such a location are pretty meaningless when you consider the places with low case instances have largely been shut for most of the year (gyms etc) while the ones with high instances have been open (supermarkets).... I mean... surely that is obvious?

How many cases have been picked up at brothels? None? They must be safe then.

The PHE report did not say these were the locations where people got infected, although this is what our geniuses in the press reported. PHE said these were places they had visited in the few days prior to developing symptoms. Their exposure took place sometime in the two weeks prior to symptoms and therefore they could have been exposed almost anywhere.

Yeah that's sort of my point.

Of all the survey subjects, it could be that 100% of the people who had been to the gym had been infected, however as a total percentage of those asked it could be really low because barely anyone is going to the gym.
I.e. Not everyone who is infected went to the gym, but everyone who went to the gym is infected.

It's a dodgy statistic, I mean presumably aviation fatalities are way down on last year... does that mean aviation is now safer compared to driving? No, just less people flying.

It looks like the majority of transmission is occurring in supermarkets because it's the only place everyone is going, and barely any transmission is occurring at music festivals because there aren't any.

[jasonT1981]

How many brothels do you know of in the UK, as I believe they are illegal,unlike here.

Didn't stop one from operating (and getting shut down) in my small town recently.

[iainpeden]

Shut down because the social distancing wasn't being adhered to or ..........?

[RAF4EVER]

Not paying tax ,mind you if they pay tax,does that the Inland Revenue is a pimp?,living off immoral earnings.which is illegal.

[IATthenRIAT]

I see one of my fave Pizza places has now stopped doing a half and half pizza reason yep Covid19.

[rockfordstone]

I see one of my fave Pizza places has now stopped doing a half and half pizza reason yep Covid19.

crazy! hope you are ok?! sending thoughts and prayers!