Covid-19

[dsr]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... is-at-pmqs

Johnson was never going to be a first rate prime minister, but he’s turned out worse that I could have imagined.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... lert-level

The easing of the lockdown isn’t backed by scientific advice, and above we can see the government tried to get the threat level reduced, against medical advice. Effectively saying now the economy is more important than people’s lives.

How can you post such rubbish? There is plenty you can have a go at the government for without making stuff up. What the Guardian says happened is that the government asked the four CMOs if they could reduce the threat level, the CMOs all said no, so the government left it as it is.

Next complaint - Boris Johnson breathes in and out in the wrong order.

As for "the economy is more important than people’s lives", do you drive a car?

[Devils_Advocate]

How can you post such rubbish?

Really

There is plenty you can have a go at the government for without making stuff up.

Go on do tell as I don't think I've ever heard you even accept criticism of this Govt let alone dish some out

[Lord Rothbury]

Seems Spain has approx 20,000 unexplained excess deaths above those attributed to Corvid 19. Who would have believed it . Maybe our figures are closer to the truth than some of ou EC neighbours ?

[Devils_Advocate]

Seems Spain has approx 20,000 unexplained excess deaths above those attributed to Corvid 19. Who would have believed it . Maybe our figures are closer to the truth than some of ou EC neighbours ?

Based on a quick look and calculation the UK was reporting around 36k Covid deaths on 22nd May. Some detailed analysis that came out yesterday showed the UK's excess deaths at around 62K for the same date

So as of 22nd May the UK had around 26k unexplained excess deaths above those attributed to Covid 19. Maybe our figures aren't any closer to the truth than some of our EC neighbours after all

[Grumps]

Seems Spain has approx 20,000 unexplained excess deaths above those attributed to Corvid 19. Who would have believed it . Maybe our figures are closer to the truth than some of ou EC neighbours ?

I would believe it, but got ridiculed when I did. Good luck, hope you have more luck.

[dsr]

Based on a quick look and calculation the UK was reporting around 36k Covid deaths on 22nd May. Some detailed analysis that came out yesterday showed the UK's excess deaths at around 62K for the same date

So as of 22nd May the UK had around 26k unexplained excess deaths above those attributed to Covid 19. Maybe our figures aren't any closer to the truth than some of our EC neighbours after all

Got a link? If you start counting on the first week that total deaths went above the five year average, you get 56,380. I'd be interested to see how they worked out the rest.

Who did the analysis?

[Devils_Advocate]

The analysis was done with the FT guy who's data I showed you Id used when we talked about some data analysis recently (cant remember what about exactly)

He posts all his analysis on Twitter but you can access his recent update through this link to the threadreader app and within that there is a link to his FT site where all his data, sources and analysis is stored

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1267 ... 42401.html

[martin_p]

The analysis was done with the FT guy who's data I showed you Id used when we talked about some data analysis recently (cant remember what about exactly)

He posts all his analysis on Twitter but you can access his recent update through this link to the threadreader app and within that there is a link to his FT site where all his data, sources and analysis is stored

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1267 ... 42401.html

So where has this figure of 20k unexplained deaths in Spain come from then? The FT data shows circa 43k excess deaths in Spain with them reporting around 28k as having dies after testing positive for Covid. That’s 15k, which is broadly in line with the 10-15k estimate they have for care home deaths.

[Devils_Advocate]

So where has this figure of 20k unexplained deaths in Spain come from then? The FT data shows circa 43k excess deaths in Spain with them reporting around 28k as having dies after testing positive for Covid. That’s 15k, which is broadly in line with the 10-15k estimate they have for care home deaths.

Could be that Spain have more up to date figures or could be Lord Rothbury's figures are wrong.

I didn't look up Spain as it was easy to show his basic premise was floored by just showing some comparative UK figures and thats all I intended to do in my post

[AndrewJB]

I think he is saying that lives lost to the lockdown matter just as much as lives lost to the virus. See my post at 8.06pm last might, which generated zero interest - although it did have unfair competition from the Sunday Sport.

I think this is a good thing to consider, but simply describing excess deaths as “lockdown deaths” is playing to the government line. What is a lockdown death? Suicide? Then let’s see the stats. Traffic accidents - a major cause of early deaths - should be down, as with industrial accidents. Would lack of access to cancer care be lock down related? Or related to the ability of the NHS to provide services? If the lockdown wasn’t in place, then wouldn’t NHS services be even more stretched and therefore less able to provide things like cancer care? If someone starves to death because they’re unable to work due to the lockdown, would anyone actually blame that on the lockdown, or would it be more rightly blamed on the all levels of government and the local community for failing to protect the vulnerable?

[joey13]

I would believe it, but got ridiculed when I did. Good luck, hope you have more luck.

So you believe Spain has more unexplained deaths , but not the UK

[AndrewJB]

So you believe Spain has more unexplained deaths , but not the UK

It would be easier to judge if the government didn’t release misleading figures.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... irus-tests

When Starmer asked Johnson about this, Johnson used misleading statistics to answer the question, and then accused Starmer of undermining public trust - when the whole point is public confidence being undermined by misleading stats.

[Grumps]

So you believe Spain has more unexplained deaths , but not the UK

Never said that... The original post of mine was saying that other countries weren't counting all deaths in the figures shown in a specific post. Which if 20,000 are missing from Spanish figs would shown to be right.

[Bfcboyo]

Why they have only just determined masks will help not to spread covid is worrying . I think whoever is advising the government on the masks and decided now it is a good idea wants sacking.

Should have been one of the first measures implemented and I'm not quick to criticise the current delinquents at the helm.

John sneezes on a bus accidentally doesn't cover it up fully in time 100 million virus particles released into the bus environment spreading the virus.

John sneezes on a bus accidentally doesn't cover it up in time. John was wearing an appropriate face mask . Hundreds of thousands of virus particles released into the bus environment spreading the virus less.

It isn't hard is it just ban John from public transport.

[joey13]

Never said that... The original post of mine was saying that other countries weren't counting all deaths in the figures shown in a specific post. Which if 20,000 are missing from Spanish figs would shown to be right.

So you do believe there have been more deaths in the UK than the government admits to ?

[Grumps]

So you do believe there have been more deaths in the UK than the government admits to ?

I don't know.... All I've said was, for example, was Spain figures were higher than those published on a post on here some while ago. And that's all I've said I believe in my post today, which in your normal way you've jumped on without looking at what was actually said.

[aggi]

That's true as a stand alone point but it ignores the lockdown impact, which seems to be the elephant in the room.

We now have something of the order of 60,000 excess deaths this year (there are different ways of calculating it so no point trying to be too precise) and of the order of 40,000 covid deaths. The covid deaths total is far from completely objective given the mix of "of covid", "with covid" and "suspected of covid" but setting aside that doubt, there is surely a significant gap between excess deaths and deaths directly as a result of covid infection. And yet, neither government, opposition or media seem willing to engage in consideration of the deaths caused by the lockdown - which could provide the additional motivation we need to get out of it and minimise the human cost. The prevalent mindset seems to be that we must do everything to avoid a covid death and lockdown deaths don't enter into the equation. Any such concern is dismissed as being all about money.

Government will not discuss it, as lockdown is on them. The opposition has tied themselves to the earlier, harder, longer lockdown position so I suppose they cannot pivot from that (although opposition to lockdown should be a classic soft left argument - human rights, liberty, mental health, access to healthcare, economic hardship and so on). But where are the BBC, Sky, ITV and the newspapers on this? There is anecdotal evidence of suicides and lack of cancer care but given there is prima facie evidence of thousands of lockdown deaths already - surely worse to come sadly - why is there seemingly such little interest in the human cost of lockdown?

A fair point. I guess if it is things like missing diagnosis/care of terminal illnesses then you wouldn't expect that to change the timelines that much.

If however it is other, undefined, lockdown deaths of those with a long life expectancy (i.e. so it wouldn't jump into negative excess deaths) then, as you point out, there's a huge scandal in not dealing with these.

[paulatky]

I don't know.... All I've said was, for example, was Spain figures were higher than those published on a post on here some while ago. And that's all I've said I believe in my post today, which in your normal way you've jumped on without looking at what was actually said.

Another day and Grumps into another trivial argument. Nothing changes.

Lets hope we are past the peak now

[BurningBeard]

Test, trace and isolate not expected to be fully operational until September or October...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... oronavirus

[Grumps]

Another day and Grumps into another trivial argument. Nothing changes.

Lets hope we are past the peak now

So somebody says something wrong about me, and I just accept it? That's how it works on here is it?

By the way is this you, or your wife.

[TheFamilyCat]

Test, trace and isolate not expected to be fully operational until September or October...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... oronavirus

Don't you think it's worth the wait for a world beating system?

[BurningBeard]

Don't you think it's worth the wait for a world beating system?

Effective will do!

[android]

I think this is a good thing to consider, but simply describing excess deaths as “lockdown deaths” is playing to the government line. What is a lockdown death? Suicide? Then let’s see the stats. Traffic accidents - a major cause of early deaths - should be down, as with industrial accidents. Would lack of access to cancer care be lock down related? Or related to the ability of the NHS to provide services? If the lockdown wasn’t in place, then wouldn’t NHS services be even more stretched and therefore less able to provide things like cancer care? If someone starves to death because they’re unable to work due to the lockdown, would anyone actually blame that on the lockdown, or would it be more rightly blamed on the all levels of government and the local community for failing to protect the vulnerable?

I don't think it is taking the government's line to talk of "lockdown deaths" - I haven't heard them talk about it. Any deaths, whether directly due to the virus or indirectly due to the lockdown will be seen to be on them to some extent. But I don't see this as a political point. It's a genuine dilemma faced by all governments. They hope that the lockdowns were necessary and have reduced virus deaths by hundreds of thousands here (and millions worldwide) but we don't have a lot of evidence to say whether that is the case. At the same time any government that has implemented a lockdown knows that it is going to take a toll on quality of life (broadly accepted by most people at least in the short term) and ultimately in lives lost (not so acceptable but largely ignored to date). We have some evidence that "lockdown deaths" already run into thousands in the UK. It's a really tough balance to try to strike. And you ask some of the many questions that need to be asked. I'm just surprised that so far the media have shown very little interest in those questions.

You mention cancer care for example. I understand that many of our hospitals are largely empty. But people who need to go to hospital are afraid to go there. You will presumably want to blame the government for that but I just see it as a consequence of the virus and of a lockdown that had overwhelming public support. It's difficult and not always about a blame game.

[android]

A fair point. I guess if it is things like missing diagnosis/care of terminal illnesses then you wouldn't expect that to change the timelines that much.

If however it is other, undefined, lockdown deaths of those with a long life expectancy (i.e. so it wouldn't jump into negative excess deaths) then, as you point out, there's a huge scandal in not dealing with these.

I don't see a huge scandal I see a difficult dilemma - see above to Andrew.

[aggi]

I don't see a huge scandal I see a difficult dilemma - see above to Andrew.

I mean it's a huge scandal if a significant number of those excess deaths are "lockdown deaths" rather than covid deaths.

[UnderSeige]

I think this is a good thing to consider, but simply describing excess deaths as “lockdown deaths” is playing to the government line. What is a lockdown death? Suicide? Then let’s see the stats. Traffic accidents - a major cause of early deaths - should be down, as with industrial accidents. Would lack of access to cancer care be lock down related? Or related to the ability of the NHS to provide services? If the lockdown wasn’t in place, then wouldn’t NHS services be even more stretched and therefore less able to provide things like cancer care? If someone starves to death because they’re unable to work due to the lockdown, would anyone actually blame that on the lockdown, or would it be more rightly blamed on the all levels of government and the local community for failing to protect the vulnerable?

There is a debate about whether we should focus on saving lives or saving the economy. It's a wrong debate. We could have done both.

In South Korea there was no lockdown but they did have an effective 'containment strategy' that was learned from the 2015 MERS outbreak. Their health services were not overwhelmed. They did not suffer anywhere near the same economic loss that we did. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/23/worl ... curve.html

COVID-19 has shown up some fundamental weaknesses in the UK economic model. I think that in the months and years ahead we should be asking questions such as:

• Why were we not able to put together an effective 'containment strategy' ?

• Why were we not able to turn production lines (if they exist) to producing PPI - which is basically only bits of plastic garments?

• Why was our centralised NHS England slow at procuring and distributing PPI to hospitals, care homes etc?

• What is wrong with our economy such that "someone starves to death because they’re unable to work due to the lockdown"?

• Is the country, businesses and individuals so bogged down by debt that we can't afford to lose our income for a few months? Are we living beyond our means fuelled by debt? Whatever happened to 'saving for a rainy day'?

Failure to put an 'effective containment plan' into place resulted in lockdown imo. Fear of the NHS hospitals being overwhelmed by COVID resulted in a large scale emptying of beds. In a very controversial 'so what your saying is' interview (not all of which I agree with) Historian David Starkey outlines the steps that were taken at the start of lockdown:

• "Stop all forms of surgery and diagnostic testing completely - cancer, heart disease, the lot"

• "The National Health Service becomes the National Covid Service"

• "Clear every bed that you can so that you can deal with the expected influx of Covid patients"

• "Shut down dentistry".

• "Shut down all Private Medicine".

This resulted in two other sets of fatalities:

• "The people who should have been treated for cancer, for heart disease and other people who were terrified of going into a hospital for fear of catching the disease".

• "Care home deaths."

If you want to listen to David Starkey's interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8S8Js-tEmlg
His steps that were taken at the start of lockdown are 9:30 minutes into the interview. Just a warning though. Some of the things he says are very controversial.

[Swizzlestick]

I like how much you love bullet points.

[FactualFrank]

Test, trace and isolate not expected to be fully operational until September or October...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... oronavirus

Incompetence at it's finest.

[ecc]

Let's be honest about this: without going into conspiracy theory territory, how can the bloke in the street know whether figures from any country reflect the truth?

[CombatClaret]

Let's be honest about this: without going into conspiracy theory territory, how can the bloke in the street know whether figures from any country reflect the truth?

I would base it on something like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

Even high scoring countries should be fact checked, luckily high scoring countries often have a free and open press which will highlight any government 'mis-reporting' such as with Spain's and our own beloved UK.

[tiger76]

Test, trace and isolate not expected to be fully operational until September or October...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... oronavirus

If true it's bonkers that in the 21st century, with all the modern technology available, we can't even get a functioning track and trace system in place.

What do this government actually do with their time.

[AndrewJB]

How can you post such rubbish? There is plenty you can have a go at the government for without making stuff up. What the Guardian says happened is that the government asked the four CMOs if they could reduce the threat level, the CMOs all said no, so the government left it as it is.

Next complaint - Boris Johnson breathes in and out in the wrong order.

As for "the economy is more important than people’s lives", do you drive a car?

In the second link it’s described how the government asked those of the devolved governments whether they’d reduce their threat levels, and they said no. The government wouldn’t have asked for this without wanting to to do it themselves.

You’re right that the government has got a lot wrong in all of this. It’s been an utter shambles, and far too many people have died. Our economy is a bit of a shambles too. And we’re carrying on with Brexit no matter what? Indefensable.

[kentonclaret]

Presumably, the wearing of face masks will be mandatory not only while travelling on the train but also whilst on the station concourse and platform. I wonder if Network Rail and TFL will be closing all of the coffee shops and fast food outlets that currently operate from these areas? Not much point in grabbing a takeaway coffee if you cannot then remove your mask to drink it during the journey. Sort of defeats the object of wearing a mask in the first place. The trolley services on Network Rail trains will presumably also disappear.

This will not just result in many more job losses but also important revenue streams for the transport operators will disappear.

A "coffee to go" will be something from a previous era.

[UnderSeige]

Presumably, the wearing of face masks will be mandatory not only while travelling on the train but also whilst on the station concourse and platform. I wonder if Network Rail and TFL will be closing all of the coffee shops and fast food outlets that currently operate from these areas? Not much point in grabbing a takeaway coffee if you cannot then remove your mask to drink it during the journey. Sort of defeats the object of wearing a mask in the first place. The trolley services on Network Rail trains will presumably also disappear.

This will not just result in many more job losses but also important revenue streams for the transport operators will disappear.

A "coffee to go" will be something from a previous era.

The mask wearing will be just for a few months until the pandemic is over and during any further pandemics (hopefully a long way in the future).

I cant see why you can't pull your mask down to take a gulp or two of coffee. You would need to be in a place where you are a couple of meters away from other people though when you do it.

[mdd2]

We now have an antibody test that is almost 100% accurate in identifying those who have had the virus I think about 4 weeks after the infection. I know a front line doctor who has tested ab negative whilst his wife a nurse is ab positive. Given his wife had the virus some weeks ago it does show how hit and miss infectivity can be-as he says, should he have spent more time at home or at work?
Reminds me of my 3 young boys and chicken pox. All the kids were encouraged to play together in the street, but one of my boys never became ill until he got chicken pox at 23!!!!
Would be of interest to see if there are many such examples and how it comes about. Always felt, like HIV, there would be some amongst us who could not be infected given we are 7 billion and most of us appear on earth with a different DNA make up from the rest, save for identical twins.

[Devils_Advocate]

This is from thelancet on the 29th May

For now, the information provided by antibody tests on an individual level remains limited. The results cannot tell you whether you are currently infected with SARS-CoV-2, nor whether you can infect others. If the test is administered too soon after the infection, there might not be detectable antibodies (although if you are in week 3 of the illness, an antibody test might be better than the RT-PCR test). Crucially, it has yet to be determined whether the presence of antibodies implies immunity. In a briefing to the media on May 20, 2020, NHS England's medical director Stephen Powis said that he “would not want people to think just because you test positive for the antibody that it necessarily means that you can do something different in terms of social distancing, in the way you behave”.

Full article link below

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanr ... 2/fulltext

[aggi]

My boss at work and his family (six of them in total, all locked down in the same house) had the anitbody test. Five were negative, one was positive. Who knows what that means.

[bfcjg]

My boss at work and his family (six of them in total, all locked down in the same house) had the anitbody test. Five were negative, one was positive. Who knows what that means.

They're got a very big house perhaps ?

[martin_p]

My boss at work and his family (six of them in total, all locked down in the same house) had the anitbody test. Five were negative, one was positive. Who knows what that means.

I have two nephews who, along with their partners, are 1st year junior doctors. All have been working on Covid wards at various times. One nephew has tested negative for antibodies while his wife has tested positive (without symptoms), the other tested positive (again without symptoms) although his girlfriend had a mild Covid infection a few weeks ago (and he spent 2 weeks isolating as a result).

There doesn’t seem to be an obvious pattern, the most worrying thing being that two have tested positive without symptoms and may have been infecting people without realising.

[UnderSeige]

A few weeks back, Chris Martenson's daily podcast featured a study in Korea of people who had been through the disease with mild symptoms. It found that a third of the people (mainly at the younger end) had not developed antibodies at all. Chris then went on to discuss what could have happened. He thought that the immune systems of these people might have been able to fight off the infection before creating antibodies. Possibly the macrophage or cytokins did the job.

Chris then went on to say that those who had not developed the antibodies would still be open to re-infection. Presumably their immune systems would fight it off again but it would be a bit of a nuisance to have to keep catching it.

I can't see much on the internet about it except this https://www.businessinsider.com/coronav ... ?r=US&IR=T

[UnderSeige]

I have two nephews who, along with their partners, are 1st year junior doctors. All have been working on Covid wards at various times. One nephew has tested negative for antibodies while his wife has tested positive (without symptoms), the other tested positive (again without symptoms) although his girlfriend had a mild Covid infection a few weeks ago (and he spent 2 weeks isolating as a result).

There doesn’t seem to be an obvious pattern, the most worrying thing being that two have tested positive without symptoms and may have been infecting people without realising.

I wonder if there are some people out there who can just fight it off at the early stages without developing symptoms or producing antibodies? We know that there are some who have no symptoms but develop antibodies. Like you say both of these groups could be infecting people during the time that they are carrying the virus.

If there are people who can fight it off without developing antibodies it would be good if some university, or government organisation could establish if there is a pattern to these people. Chris Martenson, referring to the Korean study, said they were mainly young people. Could it be something genetic or even in the diet?

[martin_p]

I wonder if there are some people out there who can just fight it off at the early stages without developing symptoms or producing antibodies? We know that there are some who have no symptoms but develop antibodies. Like you say both of these groups could be infecting people during the time that they are carrying the virus.

If there are people who can fight it off without developing antibodies it would be good if some university, or government organisation could establish if there is a pattern to these people. Chris Martenson, referring to the Korean study, said they were mainly young people. Could it be something genetic or even in the diet?

I doubt it’s genetic, my nephews are twins (albeit non-identical).

[CombatClaret]

This is from thelancet on the 29th May
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanr ... 2/fulltext

I ordered a home antibody kit, processed by Abbot labs, the same being used for NHS staff along with Roche. The very day I got it the government ordered both labs to pause home testing over concerns accuracy may be altered because the blood comes from capillaries (finger prick) rather than a vein.
Both labs claim there's "no statistically significant difference between the two types of samples".

A bit annoyed the govt had decided to interfere given the complete lack of an alternative from them.

[tiger76]

Right there's not enough positive posts on this thread recently so this is great news.

AstraZeneca starts making potential vaccine https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52917118

And the fact that almost 3m people have recovered from this virus, shows that you can beat it. This chap for one.

Man finally heads home after 35-day coma

With so many disturbing headlines around, it helps to remember there are many stories of survival too - even among those gravely ill with Covid-19.

Richard Hanson, 66, spent 35 days in a coma after catching the coronavirus while on holiday in Tenerife. Doctors also treated him for pneumonia and kidney failure. But now, against all odds, he's finally able to leave hospital in the UK.

Richard is far from the only case to survive such an ordeal though.

Other survivors who've come out of comas have shared messages of hope, while almost 2.9 million people worldwide have recovered from the virus, according to the tally kept by US-based Johns Hopkins University.

[tiger76]

Latest ONS figures on coronavirus infections in England

Robert Cuffe

BBC head of statistics

How many people have it?

The number of infections in homes in England is falling.

The Office for National Stastics estimates that 1 in 1,000 (0.1%) people in the England have coronavirus in community settings. That equates to 53,000 people.

This is considerably lower than last week's estimate of 133,000 and 137,000 and 148,00 in the two weeks before that.

There are wide margins of error around each of these figures (the 133,000 could be between 62,000 and 250,000), so it’s hard to be sure that figures have halved in a week but the ONS are confident that the trend is downwards.

New infections per day

The ONS further estimate that there are about 5,600 new infections per day in homes in England.

Last week's was 7,700, the week before 8,700.

One in five (22%) report experiencing symptoms on the day of the test.

This is only for households in England. Getting tests from households means this doesn’t cover infections in places like hospitals, care homes or prisons.

Self-adminstering a swab test is not easy, and so the pilot may be missing some current/new infections because of poorly completed swabs.

This week, the ONS analysed data from 19,723 households. Among those households, there were 21 infections (down from 36 in the last set of figures).

[Billy Balfour]

Another well thought-out policy from this shower.

Apparently, the-after-the-horse-has-well-and-truly-bolted, two-week quarantine period for anyone arriving in the UK, was brought in because Tory Party private polling showed it to be a popular policy among their voters.

Now it transpires that the very same people no longer want the policy if it means they can't go abroad on holiday without having to spend two weeks in quarantine when they arrive home. You couldn't make this stuff up, but the govt does it all the time without thinking about the wider consequences. What an incompetent bunch - and I'd say the same no matter who was in power.

The Tory Parliamentary Party has to get rid of Johnson and his clique of chancers. It's times like these when we need the best they have to offer be in charge, not Johnson and his 'yes men'.

[Grumps]

Not saying you're totally wrong, but who would you suggest?

[tiger76]

Presumably, the wearing of face masks will be mandatory not only while travelling on the train but also whilst on the station concourse and platform. I wonder if Network Rail and TFL will be closing all of the coffee shops and fast food outlets that currently operate from these areas? Not much point in grabbing a takeaway coffee if you cannot then remove your mask to drink it during the journey. Sort of defeats the object of wearing a mask in the first place. The trolley services on Network Rail trains will presumably also disappear.

This will not just result in many more job losses but also important revenue streams for the transport operators will disappear.

A "coffee to go" will be something from a previous era.

According to Grant Shapps the rule only applies when your in the vehicle itself.

Face-covering rule 'applies when in vehicles' - Shapps

Today Programme

BBC Radio 4

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps has said England's new compulsory face-coverings rule for public transport applies to "when you're in the vehicle itself".

Shapps told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that police officers, Network Rail workers, Transport for London workers and volunteers would be encouraging people to put on their face coverings when entering stations.

He said it would be "wise" to do so, but added: "The actual condition of transit, the condition of carriage, is actually when you're in the vehicle itself."

Shapps went on to explain that "often platforms are outside and that changes the risk profile".

Asked why the rule is not also being introduced for shops, the transport secretary said there was a "larger chance" of being next to someone for between 10 and 30 minutes on public transport - rather than in a shop where "you're going to move on".

[CombatClaret]

The Tory Parliamentary Party has to get rid of Johnson and his clique of chancers. It's times like these when we need the best they have to offer be in charge, not Johnson and his 'yes men'.

The trouble is the Tory party castrated itself at the alter of Brexit, throwing out level headed politicians and putting slavish yes men in their place. It became a single issue party and did not stop to ask if these people were competent to govern a country, and now when faced with an actual grown up crisis that is not of their own making to lie their way out of they simply do not have the skills to deal with it.
A crisis of this kind requires details, planning, honesty, a willingness to listen to others, trust in experts, accountability, sacrifice etc. It's completely outside their wheelhouse and an anathema to their populist, chancer playbook.
They tried to spin £300million a week and now their trying to spin the death toll, but it's a lot harder to hide bodies.

[tiger76]

Congrats to Fiji, the Pacific nations have dealt admirably with this crisis, compared to our useless idiots.

Fiji says it's free of coronavirus

The Pacific island of Fiji has declared itself free from coronavirus, after its last known infected patient was given the all-clear.

Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama said its success was a result of "answered prayers, hard work and affirmation of science".

Fiji was among a handful of Pacific Islands struck by the virus. The first case was recorded there in mid-March, sparking panic across the nation.

The Pacific Islands were initially seen as among the world's most vulnerable to the disease due to their under-resourced health infrastructure system. But countries acted quickly to close their borders and shut down tourism - and many have remained successful in keeping the virus at bay.