Penguin68

Also there was never any mention about the masts spreading or causing Covid so you are arguing against yourself I was merely referencing one of the quite widely publicised set of (incorrect) suggestions associated with 5G and 'health'. For that matter there was no mention of the detailed level of possible interactions with skin that you decided to reference. I am not 'arguing against myself'. And the study you linked to is one of rat and mice studies - one may reasonably assume these rats and mice were not 10s of metres from the radiation source when tested. As people (the general public) would be in respect of the masts. In so far as they are at all relevant, their relevance is probably most significant for those actually working on the masts, if in operation (which is, certainly, an issue, but not one for the general public living around the masts). There may be perfectly good aesthetic reasons to object to the mast - and aesthetics may be a factor in mental health, particularly where people become fixated on an object they dislike - but I very much doubt that the physical health of he general public will be impacted.

There is no evidence that microwaves from comms towers pose any physical health risk (and there have been a lot of studies in this area)- the possible health impact of microwave radiation is sufficiently attenuated only a very short distance from the aerial. The (completely mad) suggestion that it is in any way related to Covid-19 is promulgated by the same people who believe we are ruled by lizards (although a good analysis of their ravings does suggest that for 'lizards' read 'Jews' as there is a very strong thread of antisemitism in their ravings).

Renata, I suggest you take this up with Ofcom whose role it is to supervise telcos. To have left a key transmitter unrepaired or replaced for such a time must be in breach of some commitment made.

Companies save on corporate rental - they didn't think about the support industries like hospitality. I think that you'll find, over time, that this sorts itself out (there will certainly be casualties and hardship before it does) - hospitality will realign to where workers now are - that may mean more distributed sites (and more distribution, come to that) - but e.g. in ED lunchtime trade may move (grow) from yummie mummies to home-office workers. And rather than grabbing a drink in town before coming home, now it'll be drinks locally. And possibly starting earlier/ going on later as commuting time becomes drinking time. As I said, there will be casualties, but the model will eventually just be seen as flexing. You may even get more inner city living, and not just working, as office blocks get changed to high(er)-end apartments. Short-term it won't be nice - long(er) term it could get better.

its clear usually almost all of those who die had significant pre-existing health conditions But you must note that many of those 're-existing conditions' were not in themselves imminently, or at all, life threatening. People can live many years with diabetes, or high blood pressure, or with asthma; and many other conditions, even where eventually fatal, could still have been 'lived with' for many years. Indeed there are few people over 70 (I'm one) who do not have 'pre-existing conditions' - and still will happily live (fingers crossed!) for a further 10 or 15 years. Some are using the pre-existing conditions mantra as a get out of jail free card - but it's not. The trick is to look at excess deaths over 'average' - and these are a clear and positive number. Current stats for excess death https://fingertips.phe.org.uk/static-reports/mortality-surveillance/excess-mortality-in-england-latest.html

You seem to envisage some kind of step function relating time spent talking together and infection risk. As do 'the scientists'. The longer you are in contact with someone who is infected, the higher the chance that they will pass the infection to you - talking with someone means that you and they are breathing at each other - and probably not maintaining a 2 metre gap. If you are inside the risk is increased, if you are both wearing masks decreased. The rule of thumb is that conversations of under 10 minutes duration have an acceptable risk, over, less so. If your contact is outside then the risk is much reduced, as the virus intensity will be dissipated - that is why we are encouraged to keep windows open if meeting people inside, to mimic external conditions (air conditioning actually makes things worse, however). In the summer, sunlight also acts to attenuate the viral effect.

If this is outside, and if you do not yourself spend time talking to these people, then your risk level is comparatively low (theirs will be higher if they are talking together for longer than 10 minutes or so, without masks). The number of infected in Southwark now is estimated to be around 1600-1700 (by the Zoe Covid app) - out of a population of 300k. Many of those will be symptomatic and isolating, I would hope. So the chances of these being carriers are probably quite slim (but less than vanishingly so).

For the life of me I cannot figure out why the latter should be so. As I understand it, it's a health and safety issue - although the paths are fine, many of the old monuments are unstable (with e.g. trees growing through them) so people going off the (unfenced) paths would be at risk of injury (or becoming trapped under masonry). Adults I'm sure could take the risk, but children maybe not. Hence a general 'avoid'. 'Avoid the wooded areas' can be interpreted as 'but the paths are fine' - an interpretation I tend to follow.

It's not a binary pro/anti car issue nor is it hypocritical to own a vehicle but be in favour of less traffic. 'Less traffic on my street - hang yours' - yes I do think that's hypocritical.

It appears everyone is pro reducing cars and pollution. Around them. But if cars and pollution are offset elsewhere (even closely elsewhere)...? Actually, can I say I am not in favour of 'reducing cars'. I am in favour of reducing polluting cars (which the ULEZ takes a first crack at) - but cars (particularly electric cars) offer conveniences and freedoms which I absolutely relish. Most traffic disruption is caused by authorities closing and narrowing roads, making them exclusive for some class of user or other - we probably have enough roads (if they could be used) for the cars we have. Proper provision of useful public transport might encourage less car use (as it does in the north of the borough where there are tubes and buses and trains aplenty) - but the council's way of working is like discouraging obesity by closing all shops selling food and all restaurants. Obesity will fall, certainly. The 'moral' (self-righteous) stance taken by people who live in areas well served by public transport against car ownership frankly sickens me. And I wonder if all the people now living in their gated communities would be keen on giving up their cars completely - as a requisite for getting other people's cars off their roads. I do know that some aren't car drivers, or owners, but how many I wonder (and having off street parking doesn't count). If you 'vote' against private cars you should be obliged yourself not to have or use one. Amended to add - oh, and that means ever - you can't be a young fit mid-twenties cyclist now and vote against cars if you find you need one once you're an unfit pensioner. Because you're stopping unfit pensioners now from benefitting.

I'd guess that confirmation from the surgery If you are attending the relocated drop-in blood test clinic (phlebotomists) - run I think by King's - then the surgery will have no record of your attendance. And I doubt whether the phlebotomists hold a record anyway, they send on details with the bloods to King's.

Frankly, unless you are wearing full surgical barrier equipment (hospital grade mask, screen face protector etc., and change these no more than 4 hours after first use) then you will find little that protects you - why we are asked to wear masks is to protect others, if we have (asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic) Covid-19 - as the mask will substantially reduce the infected spray droplets we breathe out. Any mask you are wearing where you can't blow out a candle flame will certainly be quite effective - which probably means two or more ply, with or without an additional filter (which can just be a folded paper tissue).

Re the Green Bus idea - East: West routes, where now served, tend to be very long and convoluted, which means it can take an hour on the bus to get where a car could take you in 15 minutes (because of the circuity of the route chosen). What we need is something which can compete with car journey times, if we are to encourage use (taking into account the need to stop and start). Short, local routes where just a couple or four of buses could offer short wait times would significantly alter (I'm guessing) take-up and use. With perhaps more buses 'on' during commute and school pick-up times. I think that was the sort of route which Robin was thinking of...? Oh, and whilst we are still on very limited numbers allowed on a bus because of Covid-19 - this wouldn't be an economic runner anyway... but come (fingers firmly crossed) the spring...?

I wouldn't want to put anyone off either. Data can be wiped securely but it must be done properly. A simple reformat won't do it.

We can absolutely help by talking anyone through the process of how to commence a reformat, which wipes the computer. No it doesn't - what it does is to erase the address tables - and I quote 'However a computer specialist would be able to recover most or all the data that was on the disk before reformat'. It is more secure than simply erasing (i.e. dragging to the bin and emptying it) the data on the disk (one pass) - but you should disk wipe or disk scrub. And whatever you do, don't use 'quick format'. https://uk.pcmag.com/how-to/88534/how-to-wipe-your-hard-drive

This is a really good idea - but make sure you wipe any data or programmes from the hard drives - you don't want to jeopardise any personal or proprietary data and if you 'give away' a programme, such as office, you can't continue using it on your current machine.

I believe fatalities (and injuries) in missing cats in town are almost always vehicle accidents nowadays. Cats, and small dogs, used to be taken to 'train' fighting dogs, but I'm not sure how much dog-fighting actually still goes on. With many more people about, and bored, in lockdown (and generally now in these days of Covid-19) those cats that are promiscuous in their loyalties may well have found new temporary homes/ feeding places, which may explain they're being 'missing' when not actually injured. At least one 'stranger' cat has taken to visiting my garden in the last weeks (I don't feed cats - other than inadvertently by feeding small birds -) this may be one that is being reported as missing, in which case this seems a voluntary state.

Yes definitely innocent and not suspicious in any way. I expect they work for a charity and doing up old bikes for the NHS or orphans. I expect that probably people leave them to pick up chained to lamp posts. FFS. Good post. The actions reported were certainly, on the face of it, suspicious, and recording details and even sharing them here (and certainly informing the police) was eminently sensible. But the van used, apparently not stolen, is very identifiable which makes its use in crime, at the very least, curious. Hence my initial cautionary note, supported by others who (unlike me) had bothered to check the van's status. Perhaps because we are rarely exposed (in e.g. the news etc.) to good actions (because they are, generally, boring) but have a high exposure to bad we tend naturally to think the worst. Sometimes it's helpful to temper those thoughts, if remaining wary.

Although the OP reported the men as 'taking' a bicycle and loading it into van, it would be helpful to have confirmed that the bicycle was in fact actually stolen - unless the van was also stolen it is pretty conspicuous and the thieves must be pretty brazen to be using it in theft.

The incidence of Covid-19 in Southwark is quite low - the Zoe app suggests well less than 2000 active cases - if we assume those are self-isolating then probably only about 800 or fewer asymptomatic cases from whom infection is more likely. Those who exhibit symptoms or suspect them are specifically being excluded from visits to surgeries. As long as all those in surgeries are wearing masks, and social distancing, it is very safe. The most likely way of contracting Covid indoors (if you are not a clinician caring for Covid patients) is to have a prolonged (way more than 10 minute) conversation with an infected person - such conversations tend not to happen in distanced waiting rooms!

I'm not sure why they're not all signposted the same way. How on earth do you think the council is to get their forecast level of fines if they don't make it difficult and obscure for motorists, particularly those new to the area, possibly forced there by other road closures.

I do sweep up the fallen leaves from a sycamore in my front garden which fall on the pavement - but then I start by sweeping the ones in my garden and I do have a brown bin. If I don't they tend to blow back into my garden anyway, so in the long run it saves me (some) effort. But if I didn't have a garden waste bin I probably wouldn't (and, to head off critics, I compost the fallen leaves in my back garden, and the ones in my brown bin will go to be composted anyway). Maybe if the council left those large fibre Builders sacks that e.g. sand or gravel comes in in areas of high leaf fall and close houses people without brown bins could put leaves in these, but I suspect that they would be mis-used - it's the sort of thing that works in villages but not inner city suburbs perhaps.

In the last lockdown this started as verboten but later was allowed - so long as you are breaking no other 'rules' - i.e. not mixing households - and not travelling so far that you could not return the same day I suspect you would be able to argue it out. I am not sure what, if really anything, the police are doing to enforce these rules. I think they will be looking for gross infringements, not acts of individuals.

We only have 2 items plugged in in that room as it is a spare room and have smelt the plugs etc but cannot pinpoint where it's coming from. Definitely unplug anything in that room - and switch off any socket if you can. And you need to check this quickly - mice can e.g. chew through wires and insulation so it may not be directly related to any plug but to the wiring behind the sockets

Make sure others can also smell this, or you don't smell burning in other locations, , as the smell of burning can be symptomatic, if it's just you, of neurological problems I believe.