Blah Blah

You asked about suicide data TE44. You can find tables here (link below) but the first quarter of 2020 was in line with previous years. The second quarter (which is the spring/ early summer) shows a significant decrease on previous years. Figures for the third quarter are not available yet. Suicide is a complex issue and understanding a decrease is as valid as understanding any increase. It is quite possible that the decrease is the result of people being able to spend more time at home, without the stress of work life and other things. To assume the trend would only go the other way is a bit premature. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathscausedbysuicidebyquarterinengland

TE44, would you prefer if 40 million people died from covid over the next 18 months globally instead? Genuine question. How many deaths are too many? Epidemiology and exponential growth have been done to death on this forum.

Firstly, there is little chance of Boris's Bill getting through the Lords, so we might as well all ask what is the point of it. And yes, if the Democrats hold either house (or both), they have clearly stated they will block any trade deal if Boris's amendments go through.

I would argue that the rule of six does little to address where the rises in infection are occurring. Within families is one area, and that was always inevitable. The other is pubs. We all remember those pictures of a packed Soho with little or no social distancing when pubs reopened. Most pubs and restaurants are not taking customers details either. Government has decided it can not risk another full lockdown and is hedging on measures being taken now to prevent it. But perhaps if it had done something about enforcing the measures it had already introduced, we might be in a different place. Hospital admissions are starting to slowly move up but if we really want to get through the winter without lockdown, enforcement of things like masks on public transport and in shops becomes essential. One sneeze can infect 2 or 3 people at a time. Any idea of reopening theatres, clubs and stadiums has to be reconsidered too.

SAD lightboxes do not cost a lot of money these days and and as long as it is a medical standard one they do work for a lot of people. You should begin to feel the benefits within two weeks of using one for up to an hour daily. Daylight bulbs are not bright enough to do the same job. Most SAD lamps use very bright LEDs. The Light Pod by Lifemax is a reasonably priced one. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lifemax-Light-107a-Simulated-Daylight/product-reviews/B002MRS5OW

Seenbeen is quite right. Syphilis is not a good comparison. Even comparison to the common cold is a poor analogy because that is caused by a human rhinovirus (HRV) which is not a coronavirus. You are absolutely right about complacency leading to a rise in infection rates and there is no way of protecting older people simply by telling them not to mix with younger people. Firstly, many won't do that, but also, if infection rates rise enough, the virus will be transmitted on door handles, from the postman, delivery drivers, and a multitude of other ways that do not require close human contact. This is something we all have to do together, as a society. Making the world a no-go for older people, just so that younger people can do as they please is not the answer.

Fantastic post diable rouge.

ed26 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Roller disco LOL

Shrieker, stop being an ass. The park houses wildlife and gardens that a lot of work goes into. And you seriously want to turn it into a nightclub? Young people have plenty of bars they can go to, and pandemic aside, nightclubs too. Lordship Lane is full of them. Rye Lane too. On the other suggestion of tennis courts. Are they likely to be used fully either? There were tennis courts there before the skate park and outdoor gym replaced them. Not sure they were maintained or used at all?

I agree with the general sentiments above, that a bowling green can not cost that much to upkeep and that given footfall everywhere is down, because of the pandemic, that now is not the time to be trying to change the use. A bar in that part of the park is a terrible idea and parks are not commercial enterprises anyway, so why something has to be used to any capacity to justify it's existence is a mystery. There is also something quintessentially English about a bowling green. So if the space is to be used for other activities, let's keep it to other lawn games that people might like to try, like croquet, or tranquil oddities like giant chess etc. I agree with the points made above on noise.

Will be interesting to see if that number of 7 has risen after 14 days - the incubation period after catching the virus. That would be a useful measure of risk on flights that contain infected people.

France is beginning to see the start of an exponential increase in new cases and there is no reason to think that won't happen here or anywhere else. It matters who is getting infected also though. So hospital admissions and deaths have to be considered in assessing this.

This is why keeping an eye on local infection rates is the best way to manage risk. No-one wants to be the one that ends up in ICU or worse. But at the same time, it is a question of odds. We can do a lot to mitigate that risk in the behaviour we adopt, and I would say that on the whole, most people have done that.

Telling young people to throw caution to the wind when we still have no vaccine or effective treatment to prevent serious illness or death is dangerous. They are not the only people who have to go out, work, use public transport etc. There is evidence emerging that immunity drops significantly after five months. It could take two years to fully understand what this virus delivers in terms of immunity, and other impacts on the body, because it takes that long to monitor infection and reinfection rates properly. So again, claiming to know anything at this stage in absolute terms is dangerous. This is precisely why medical experts are making no such claims. Herd immunity in most cases requires use of a vaccine. Highly infectious diseases especially, require vaccine programmes to get there. We still have a winter to get through and a lot more will be learned from that. Covid mutates (just like influenza does) and we may well end up with a similar scenario where different versions of vaccines are needed to manage it. This is particularly problematic because this is not a seasonal virus in the way influenza is. And there is still a long way to go yet in finding vaccines that will work, and be safe for widespread use. Trials take as long as they take. People must not be lulled into a false security just because the infection rates are low. They are low precisely because of everything we have done and because they can be tracked. The fear is, that when seasonal coughs and colds emerge, covid will spread quicker than symptoms show themselves, leading to the fast exponential rise in infection that sent us into a global lockdown in the first place. So ultimately is is about balance and common sense. Finding that point at which life can be as normal as possible, but where infection rates remain manageable and containable. It might seem like there is no sense to the rules at present, but really there is. With every stage of easing, the infection data has to be closely monitored. The next big one will be the reopening of schools.

We are beholden to global markets just as the EU is. The sub-prime market crash was a US problem, but banks from every country were invested in it and its derivatives. That is why it was a global crash. The size of the city and financial sector as a percentage of our GDP alone, puts us at massive exposure. It accounts for 10 percent of it.

I am sorry TheCat, but leave voters (and yes it is a generalisation, but an accurate one) pretty much rejected every warning about the realities of trade deals and negotiations. No-one trades on WTO terms solely and there is a very good reason for that.

I think Uncle calling TheCat a lefty (and welcome to the club btw Cat lol) is a perfect example of how anyone who does not agree with Herr Uncle is a lefty. I'm not sure we'll see any election prematurely, because the Tory Party has such a healthy majority, that as long as they still have a reasonable amount of time in government, they will think they can get the party into a better electoral place. Change of leader however is always possible, although I would say there that the majority also makes Johnson rather untouchable, unless he majorly messes up. Cummings is the real PM anyway. He may well also be the fall guy in the end.

And just to add, self reflection isn't something narcissists do. Politics is dominated by narcissists at the moment, so I personally wouldn't hold out too much hope.

You are making a very good point TheCat, but the problem is that when a party is in the control of a more ideological faction, it becomes difficult to reign that in. You could argue the same about the Labour Party under Corbyn of course. There is a lack of practical realism with these kinds of leadership.

Sephiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Complaining about Barnier/EU being "nasty" is almost as if some people don't know what international trade negotiations are like. You think China, India or USA are not going to be > hardnosed in negotiations with UK? You only have to look at the history of trade negotiations, and especially between those of vast differences in market size to see that. Experts in trade did try to warn about all of this, but leave voters weren't listening, denouncing everything as project fear. And anyone who thinks the US will allow us to leave healthcare and pharmaceuticals off the table, is also deluded. In fact, there are so many supporters of privatisation in cabinet positions, that a betrayal is almost inevitable.

Exactly that Diable Rouge, which is why I suspect the UK will concede on fishing as soon as they work out a way to square that with Brexit voters who were promised something else.

The government backed themselves into this corner all on their own by promising things that could never be delivered. And with the chickens about to come home to roost you have Brexiteers swallowing the trash of the Express and blaming the EU for it. Tell me Seenbeen, when you cancel you subscription to anything, do you still expect to have access to the services offered by that subscription? No you don't. We chose to leave the EU. They don't have to give us anything. And FYI, the Withdrawal Agreement is not a trade deal. It is simply the terms for the withdrawal. And while you are at it, how much do you understand about road haulage? Because that is going to be the first headache in your no deal Brexit when 80 percent of haulage can't get hold of the permit they need to drive goods into and across the EU.

There is government advice, based on core science. Either businesses and customers follow it or they don't. Ok, so you are the one that takes the risk and goes to the packed restaurant. Only it is not only your risk is it? One person has covid in that restaurant and two people catch it. Only they don't know they've caught it for at least a week by which time they have infected four other people. Four other people who thought better of ever risking going to a packed restaurant. That is how epidemics spread, that is exponential growth.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > whilst that's true BB, a Labour government under > Corbyn with would have put massive strings > attached to any business supported eg workers on > boards, governemnt shareholding and nationalised > vast swathes of industry under the cloak of Covid. > What we have now is temporarily nationalisation, > thank god, and even this is going to be paid for > for years by us the taxpayer, and our kids. That's a huge stretch. While you might like to entertain the idea that a Corbyn government would have held business to ransom for the money bailed out, no government would ever have gotten away with that. Why? Because any legislation like that (and it WOULD need legislation) would have to have pass both the House and Lords. It is baseless nonsense.

You say that DF, but a Corbyn Government would also have been hit right away with this pandemic. Have you forgotten how much money Sunak has had to borrow over the past six months? Makes the Labour manifesto now look like chicken feed. No government would have had time for anything else but this pandemic and all its impacts.