Covid - coming out of Lockdown 3 - no politics, less opinion and more facts and information.

[Hobby]

8 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

I've never contended that we should have a referendum on it or the like, I'm generally one who believes that we elect MPs to act on our behalf. But what we do seem to differ on is whether it is beholden upon the PM to explain his thinking to us, and whether we would be capable of comprehending if he did.

 

I agree that is where we differ (I never suggested that we have a referendum on it!). I don't think he has to explain his thinking to the extent/depth that you do, I don't see as it will provide any useful purpose at this stage other than to fuel the flames of the Press and Social Media paranoia and those with a political agendas.

 

As I said, this is not the time or place for such in depth discussions.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Hobby

[Reorte]

26 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

i’m not rejecting it, I just quoted it,.
 

I cant help but note You don't seem to be offering much in the way of any facts though to counter your position ?

indeed that statement, sounds to me, that your pretty much dismissing the BBC, Government and ONS data feeds as meaningless, so what sources are you believing that your defending it so much ?

 

 

I'm sorry? I've been using the data from the government's Covid dashboard site. I've already given some hospitilisation : death rates and how they differ. I'd use cases too but you've been saying you don't believe them (without giving any hard evidence to back up a position that seems to be suggesting a case : admissions comparison between now and last Autumn is meaningless).

 

I've not said that any of the official figures are meaningless - the problem I've got is that you appear to be saying that the case numbers are!

 

Nethertheless, here are the numbers:

Last time the 7-day case average was at the current level, on the rising side: 20th December

Hospital admission rate on the 20th December: 2199 (compared with 462 for the most recent 7 day average)

Death rate on the 20th December: 517 (compared with 25 for the most recent 7 day average)

 

Whilst changing testing means that the cases rates between now and December are not exactly comparable I feel that that is sufficient data to show, with a high degree of confidence, that Covid is considerably less serious now than then (thanks to vaccination), and hence the rising hospital rates less of a concern (it would require cases to rise to orders of magnitude higher than have happened so far to become equally serious).

Edited July 14, 2021 by Reorte

[Neil]

49 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

 

I've never contended that we should have a referendum on it or the like, I'm generally one who believes that we elect MPs to act on our behalf. But what we do seem to differ on is whether it is beholden upon the PM to explain his thinking to us, and whether we would be capable of comprehending if he did.

 

If we're now being trusted to use our common sense to keep ourselves and others safe then surely we have the maturity and intellectual capacity to understand the reasons behind the governments decisions. Here in Wales we get regular briefings from the Welsh Assembly where the rationale behind the actions taken is laid out for us. It also gives opportunity for news organisations to probe and question the logic. The world hasn't yet fallen in on us and at the last count we have significantly lower infection rates here than in England.

[caradoc]

2 hours ago, boxbrownie said:

What happens if somebody refuses to obey the no smoking rule, who enforces that?

 

A different situation, in that smoking on a train is a clear breach of regulations with no exemptions, which is not the case with mask wearing. 

[boxbrownie]

2 hours ago, MJI said:

 

The people with the fire extinguisher.

 

My dad and a colleague did it to a smoker in their workshop.

In truth then you get charged with assault, nice idea though…..and one I heartedly recommend 

[boxbrownie]

39 minutes ago, caradoc said:

 

A different situation, in that smoking on a train is a clear breach of regulations with no exemptions, which is not the case with mask wearing. 

That’s fine if the non wearer pleads medical grounds, but what if they just say “bullocks I’m not wearing a mask”?

 

 

[Hobby]

You can't tell the difference.

[alastairq]

That mask/n mask thing has to be treated in the same way as wearing, or not wearing, a seatbelt.

It is not up to the person making the report for the offence to be required to pass any sort of judgment as to whether the person not wearing the seatbelt, is exempted or not.

That is for the Courts [or their agents] to decide....Exemption from wearing a seatbelt is pleaded as a mitigation in Court, or to the Issuing Authority [who collect the fine, where the  veracity of the exemption is tested & proved] and the fine s zilched. The same can be done via the paperwork that accompanies a mask infringement fine...or, to save time, done after the ticket is issued, and before the fine is due to be paid...proof of exemption nullifies the offence.

The problem will be , getting hold of a Warranted Officer who can demand proof of identity?

Maybe the transport companies should employ large bouncers on each train, to evict any no-mask wearers at a convenient [or, inconvenient] spot?

 

In fact, I suspect Hobby would need to simply call the Transport Police to attend? If things got sticky?

[MJI]

1 hour ago, boxbrownie said:

In truth then you get charged with assault, nice idea though…..and one I heartedly recommend 

But they were getting assaulted with a poison smoke

[Hobby]

2 hours ago, Neil said:

Here in Wales we get regular briefings from the Welsh Assembly where the rationale behind the actions taken is laid out for us. It also gives opportunity for news organisations to probe and question the logic.

 

Really? Everything, or what they used to confirm why they have decided to do what they have? I suspect the latter, all the information they used, including information that would suggest other avenues would take much longer than a simple press briefing, certainly to the depth Nearholmer and I are discussing. I suspect you are getting simply an overview, I'll have to try listening in to one of their press conferencing, when is the next one?

 

 

 

25 minutes ago, alastairq said:

In fact, I suspect Hobby would need to simply call the Transport Police to attend? If things got sticky?

 

Firstly I am not sure that it carries the same weight as not wearing a seatbelt, certainly the Police's attitude towards non wearing of masks wherever hasn't been on the same level as if they were dealing with a non seatbelt wearer. Secondly whilst I work IC trains, so often have some time between stations, most of my colleagues don't and with a station every couple of minutes it would be impossible to monitor, let alone police. Lastly the BTP are thin on the ground and don't even have a presence at most of the stations we call at (even though we only stop at major stations) so the chances are they wouldn't be there even if we did call them up! I feel you underestimate the scale of the problem and the logistics, A!

Edited July 14, 2021 by Hobby

[Neil]

Press briefings have often been on Friday mornings, covered by BBC Wales on the run up to the one o'clock news. While they don't go to the far end of a fart they do outline the rationale behind the choices made and often why some course of action hasn't been taken. Now as a bloke interested in politics, current affairs and keeping myself and those important to me safe, they provide a good enough level of info for me to feel confident that the decisions made here have been the correct ones. Comparative vaccination rates and levels of infection just back this up.

[bourneagain]

1 hour ago, Hobby said:

 

Firstly I am not sure that it carries the same weight as not wearing a seatbelt, certainly the Police's attitude towards non wearing of masks wherever hasn't been on the same level as if they were dealing with a non seatbelt wearer. Secondly whilst I work IC trains, so often have some time between stations, most of my colleagues don't and with a station every couple of minutes it would be impossible to monitor, let alone police. Lastly the BTP are thin on the ground and don't even have a presence at most of the stations we call at (even though we only stop at major stations) so the chances are they wouldn't be there even if we did call them up! I feel you underestimate the scale of the problem and the logistics, A!

Not wearing a seatbelt, without a reasonable excuse ie a medical exemption is against the law, hence why the Police will issue you with a fine etc. Since BJ said that it’s not longer a legal requirement to wear a mask, the Police have no powers to arrest and fine you for not wearing one. Yes, they can request you to leave the train / bus etc if that is one of the conditions of travel and may will probably arrest you for obstruction if you don`t comply.

I foresee a huge rise in people not wanting to wear a mask on trains and buses, wearing these sunflower exemption badges around their necks, which can be readily purchased from Amazon etc for less than £2. The Government have already stated that you don`t need to produce any written medical evidence, it’s just their word that they have a hidden disability and who will actually challenge these people to prove it that they don`t. It will be a case of leave well alone, as no doubt the one that gets challenged will be the one person would actually has an hidden disability and is entitled to be exempt and will go to the media with their complaint. Quite similar to the blue badge scheme, now that includes hidden disabilities, not many Traffic Wardens will challenge if a blue badge is being used illegally, just in case they are wrong, hence the huge increase in badge thefts with a very small chance of being caught using one illegally.

[Monkersson]

1 hour ago, bourneagain said:

I foresee a huge rise in people not wanting to wear a mask on trains and buses, wearing these sunflower exemption badges around their necks

Some of the people I've seen wearing the sunflower lanyards, catching covid would be the least of their worries, I base this on a woman I know.

 

She refuses to wear a mask, and bought one of the lanyards.  She is adamant that all the masks sold contain covid and will slowly kill you (despite also saying that its all a hoax).  She'll proudly tell you that as she stuffs her face with McDonalds and Greggs crap all day long.

 

 

[APOLLO]

Life is getting silly now

 

Brit15

['CHARD]

36 minutes ago, Monkersson said:

Some of the people I've seen wearing the sunflower lanyards, catching covid would be the least of their worries, I base this on a woman I know.

 

She refuses to wear a mask, and bought one of the lanyards.  She is adamant that all the masks sold contain covid and will slowly kill you (despite also saying that its all a hoax).  She'll proudly tell you that as she stuffs her face with McDonalds and Greggs crap all day long.

 

 

 

Could you please point me to her Tinder profile, cheers......

[John M Upton]

The sunflower lanyard scheme was such a good idea when it first started, my autistic five year old has one.  Sadly when masks became the requirement in shops and on public transport, this excellent scheme was suddenly heavily abused with millions of the things being sold across the country from Ebay profiteers who ran off big batches and made a fortune.

 

Makes me mad....

 

 

[hayfield]

18 hours ago, PenrithBeacon said:

I had occasion to drive to Bakewell yesterday and I was amazed at just how few commercial vehicles registered in the EU were on the motorway system. Also just how few British registered vehicles were carrying  GB sticker.

I know a Monday can be a quiet day but it's a concern. Trade seems to have collapsed. 

 

You should have been on the M20 and M25 yesterday, especially the return journey in the afternoon, foreign trade is alive and kicking 

[hayfield]

18 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

5 weeks, really, for most . My AZ required 10 weeks between jabs, plus two weeks to take. The ados (12-18 yo) are now eligible for vaccination. But they may only be given Pfizer jabs, and at the vaccination centres, not pharmacies etc., with between 22 and 47 days between doses. Then it is two weeks minimum for the effect to kick in. The J&J one is single-dose, but needs four weeks to be effective. Moderna "we'll let you know about your second jab" so uncertain timescales for becoming effective. In theory the centres commerciaux etc should be crying in their vin about loss of business from August. 

 

According to one report last week the longer the time between doses the more effective it is, over 12 weeks is better than 12 weeks or less. Had we be fortunate enough to have time on our side an even longer period than 12 weeks may have been more desirable, certainly shortening the period reduces its effectiveness, but the need for immediate protection outweighs the loss in effectiveness, if the potential consequences of catching the virus are great enough. 

[boxbrownie]

14 hours ago, Hobby said:

You can't tell the difference.

You can if that’s what they say to you, rather than it’s for medical reasons, same as if they tell you to off when they are smoking and refuse to stop.

Edited July 15, 2021 by boxbrownie

[boxbrownie]

14 hours ago, MJI said:

But they were getting assaulted with a poison smoke

I don’t disagree, but the law would.

[boxbrownie]

14 hours ago, alastairq said:

That mask/n mask thing has to be treated in the same way as wearing, or not wearing, a seatbelt.

It is not up to the person making the report for the offence to be required to pass any sort of judgment as to whether the person not wearing the seatbelt, is exempted or not.

That is for the Courts [or their agents] to decide....Exemption from wearing a seatbelt is pleaded as a mitigation in Court, or to the Issuing Authority [who collect the fine, where the  veracity of the exemption is tested & proved] and the fine s zilched. The same can be done via the paperwork that accompanies a mask infringement fine...or, to save time, done after the ticket is issued, and before the fine is due to be paid...proof of exemption nullifies the offence.

The problem will be , getting hold of a Warranted Officer who can demand proof of identity?

Maybe the transport companies should employ large bouncers on each train, to evict any no-mask wearers at a convenient [or, inconvenient] spot?

 

In fact, I suspect Hobby would need to simply call the Transport Police to attend? If things got sticky?

Exactly this I suspect, basically guards on trains have little or zero power to eject or demand of a passenger anything else be it stopping smoking, drinking or wear a mask……..what we need are “Train Marshalls” preferably armed with Tasers 

[Hobby]

27 minutes ago, boxbrownie said:

You can if that’s what they say to you, rather than it’s for medical reasons, same as if they tell you to off when they are smoking and refuse to stop.

 

If it were only that simple, BB, many of those who are genuine are just as likely to say it in that way as well, i.e. "why are you challenging me?!" sort of attitude.

Edited July 15, 2021 by Hobby

[alastairq]

When I drove buses [decades ago, now] If I was confronted by a passenger who obviously was not going to comply with the Conditions of CArriage, then, very early on in the confrontation I would get them to voluntarily give me their names & addresses....usually with the bribe that the company might have something to offer them?

Once one had some relevant details, one could then leave it up to the Company to literally, drop them in it. But I would not suggest that would be the outcome to the person themselves.....

The company employed individuals to deal with transgressions of this nature.  I would not put myself at the pointed end of the argument..not on my wages!

 

Things got better when we got radios that actually worked...and we could summon Company Inspectors etc, to join the bus further up the route. En masse, sometimes.

[Bernard Lamb]

14 minutes ago, boxbrownie said:

Exactly this I suspect, basically guards on trains have little or zero power to eject or demand of a passenger anything else be it stopping smoking, drinking or wear a mask……..what we need are “Train Marshalls” preferably armed with Tasers 

Good idea, but why stop there?

Bernard

[beast66606]

2 hours ago, alastairq said:

When I drove buses [decades ago, now] If I was confronted by a passenger who obviously was not going to comply with the Conditions of CArriage, then, very early on in the confrontation I would get them to voluntarily give me their names & addresses....usually with the bribe that the company might have something to offer them?

Once one had some relevant details, one could then leave it up to the Company to literally, drop them in it. But I would not suggest that would be the outcome to the person themselves.....

The company employed individuals to deal with transgressions of this nature.  I would not put myself at the pointed end of the argument..not on my wages!

 

Things got better when we got radios that actually worked...and we could summon Company Inspectors etc, to join the bus further up the route. En masse, sometimes.

 

Nowadays you could be prosecuted - or the company could - for DPDR violations, you can't obtain personal information without explaining exactly what it is for and to what purpose it will be used and you can't lie to obtain said information and then use it for other reasons*, especially as until they are found guilty of anything they are innocent and you aren't law enforcement. Do that to someone who has a genuine medical reason and you'll be in even deeper do do, you can add discrimination.  (Not saying I disagree with your sentiments or actions by the way)

 

* Can you guess who's just completed his annual training on GDPR

Edited July 15, 2021 by beast66606
despite editing GDPR I still managed to spell it wrong