Covid-19

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
KateR
Posts: 4137
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1018 times
Has Liked: 6156 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by KateR » Fri May 15, 2020 2:49 pm

I saw this and thought it was good info, I had noticed at the start of this going food shopping there were a huge number of discarded gloves in the parking lot where people were obviously just throwing them on the floor as they got in cars. Signs were soon posted about not doing this and glad to see it seems to have gone away for the most part.
Attachments
C19 GLOVES].JPG
C19 GLOVES].JPG (33.19 KiB) Viewed 3045 times

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by martin_p » Fri May 15, 2020 2:52 pm

KateR wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 2:46 pm
My daughter in-law is a teacher and has worked throughout, so her thoughts are that the risk has gone down considerably, the worry which was obviously highest weeks ago but nothing has happened, not one word regarding any parent being ill and no children removed. As mentioned and obvious all children have at least one parent on the front line so again obviously most at risk to bring the virus home and start spreading but not happened, this of course is only one school but she says they are in constant contact with some other schools and info in that regard is being shared.
Just to clear up a misconception here, the vast majority of key workers, those eligible to send their children to school now, are not on the ‘frontline’ and are unlikely to come into contact with Covid sufferers.

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5202 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Devils_Advocate » Fri May 15, 2020 2:55 pm

Grumps wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 2:35 pm
As far as iam aware, and you won't be shy in telling me if I am but the only thing being announced at the moment is the very small numbers in the first step. For a month at most, in June, which is all iam talking about
I don't think it's been announced who may, or may not be attending in September so pointless bring that into this discussion
The phased return in June is looking to reach around 33% capacity. That represents a number that needs a lot more discussion and consensus especially as there is still a lot of concern from teachers, unions and parents who are essential to have onboard to make this a success

Now will you please give me the same courtesy and answer my question which I have asked you a few times around what relevance does your comment 'How many of these teachers have caught it?' have to your original post?

Edit: I'll leave it to a few others who obviously have better first hand experience than me like SHP but still free to answering my question Grumps as you seem keen on asking plenty and expect answers
Last edited by Devils_Advocate on Fri May 15, 2020 2:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by martin_p » Fri May 15, 2020 2:59 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 2:55 pm
The phased return in June is looking to reach around 33% capacity. That represents a number that needs a lot more discussion and consensus especially as there is still a lot of concern from teachers, unions and parents who are essential to have onboard to make this a success

Now will you please give me the same courtesy and answer my question which I have asked you a few times around what relevance does your comment 'How many of these teachers have caught it?' have to your original post?
Suspect it’d be more than 33% if everyone asked to go back does so. It’s 3 of the 7 primary years, which is over 40% assuming similar year sizes. Then add in the key worker children not in the years asked to go back and you start nudging 50%.

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Fri May 15, 2020 3:02 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 2:55 pm
The phased return in June is looking to reach around 33% capacity. That represents a number that needs a lot more discussion and consensus especially as there is still a lot of concern from teachers, unions and parents who are essential to have onboard to make this a success

Now will you please give me the same courtesy and answer my question which I have asked you a few times around what relevance does your comment 'How many of these teachers have caught it?' have to your original post?

Edit: I'll leave it to a few others who obviously have better first hand experience than me like SHP but still free to answering my question Grumps as you seem keen on asking plenty and expect answers
If I understood your question I'd answer it no problem

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5202 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Devils_Advocate » Fri May 15, 2020 3:02 pm

martin_p wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 2:59 pm
Suspect it’d be more than 33% if everyone asked to go back does so. It’s 3 of the 7 primary years, which is over 40% assuming similar year sizes. Then add in the key worker children not in the years asked to go back and you start nudging 50%.
Yep I was being deliberately conservative to stop those who like to focus on less important points in order to deflect away from the real discussion from having the chance to do so.

Sounds like theres parents with young kids and teachers discussing now so I'll step back as they will know a lot more than me

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5202 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Devils_Advocate » Fri May 15, 2020 3:05 pm

Grumps wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:02 pm
If I understood your question I'd answer it no problem
In short what was the purpose of the highlighted point made in your initial post.
Grumps wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 1:27 pm
People do realise that most schools are already open don't they?
Looking after the children of those most at risk of having the virus
How many of these teachers have caught it?
I would suggest, not many, or we'd have heard about it

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Paul Waine » Fri May 15, 2020 3:14 pm

android wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 1:13 pm
I believe the ONS included the 13/1000 healthcare workers in their overall average estimate of 0.27%. If so, the numbers are somewhere around my rounded 1 in 400 (0.25%) or as you and/or Grumps put it slightly more conservatively 3 in 1000 (0.3%) rather than 4 in 100.

All a bit too academic perhaps and if you were encouraging us all to remain cautious then I agree! Probably better if we imagine that 4 in 100 might still have it even if the real number might be lower according to the ONS.
Thanks, android. As the ONS repeats their survey I'd expect the numbers to be more focussed - as well as, hopefully, showing reductions.

I didn't get the impression that ONS included the healthcare workers in their 0.27% - I think they said that people working in healthcare were excluded. I'd have to go back and read their report again to check if this is the case.

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by dsr » Fri May 15, 2020 3:22 pm

Key workers, like the NHS, are obviously taking the risk of going to work even though they will come into contact with coronavirus.

Non-key workers, like many of us, may or may not go in to work, but those that do will certainly come into contact with people who might be carrying and transmitting the disease.

Other non-key workers, as teachers evidently believe themselves to be, are threatening not to go into work even though there is a good chance (reference Iceland's survey with detailed track and trace that found no child has transmitted coronavirus to any family member) that they will come into contact with few people with the virus.

The National Education Union does not want schools to reopen but also says that teachers should not teach online. Though I think they stopped short of telling their staff to ask for furlough. :roll:

Steve-Harpers-perm
Posts: 5744
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
Been Liked: 1868 times
Has Liked: 835 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Steve-Harpers-perm » Fri May 15, 2020 3:26 pm

They don’t need to reopen they have never closed.

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Fri May 15, 2020 3:29 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:05 pm
In short what was the purpose of the highlighted point made in your initial post.
It was a question, not a point, or comment, hence the question mark. .... Asking how many teachers, who have been teaching children from high risk parents had caught the virus from them
So if answer is lots, then don't send more children to school
If the answer is none, then it would be safe to send children from less risk parents

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Paul Waine » Fri May 15, 2020 3:29 pm

CombatClaret wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 11:47 am
So did a paid journalist take a photo intending to cause outrage and then take and publish a second to discredit their own work?

Surprisingly not...

BUT! The first photo was used widely by the press in late April about people flocking to the seaside.

A Brighton local did an excellent job of breaking it down, showing the 40 people in the photo were spread over a distance of half a kilomenter which If you put them in a line would be 12.5m meters apart.

DM.jpg

brighton.jpg

https://twitter.com/alukeonlife/status/ ... 4928999425
What was the "Brighton local" doing in Bouremouth. Surely that wasn't "essential travel?" ;)

EDIT: Having read thru more of this thread I've seen that other posters also commented on Brighton is not the same place as Bournemouth - and all good Burnley fans should know that, though maybe we won't get the chance to see the Clarets play at either of those teams next season. ;)

I agree, btw, that camera lens can give very different impression from the reality. The BBC had a picture Easter w/end leading their BBC News website - a place I know well and been there myself same day. They took it down after a couple of hours. Everyone was more than 2 metres apart, probably 10 metres plus in many cases.
Last edited by Paul Waine on Fri May 15, 2020 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5202 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Devils_Advocate » Fri May 15, 2020 3:33 pm

dsr wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:22 pm
The National Education Union does not want schools to reopen but also says that teachers should not teach online. Though I think they stopped short of telling their staff to ask for furlough. :roll:
This is not true and is exactly what I was talking about earlier when I mentioned how people are starting to politicise the issue

The NEU and its members want to reopen schools but want to ensure it is safe to do so and have issued their 5 tests plan which they would like to work with the govt on.

This is backed by most teachers and has received the full support of the British Medical Association.

Watch out though cos the right wing gutter media is ready to go into attack mode

Image

Oh and look at the Mail's nice editing

Image

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Fri May 15, 2020 3:38 pm

David Blunkett right wing?

Steve-Harpers-perm
Posts: 5744
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
Been Liked: 1868 times
Has Liked: 835 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Steve-Harpers-perm » Fri May 15, 2020 3:40 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:33 pm
This is not true and is exactly what I was talking about earlier when I mentioned how people are starting to politicise the issue

The NEU and its members want to reopen schools but want to ensure it is safe to do so and have issued their 5 tests plan which they would like to work with the govt on.

This is backed by most teachers and has received the full support of the British Medical Association.

Watch out though cos the right wing gutter media is ready to go into attack mode

Image

Oh and look at the Mail's nice editing

Image
Trust me I can’t wait to get back to work and a bit of normality like with the rest of the nation. I’d just like to do so safely and without being one the cause of infection rates potentially going up again. I don’t really understand why this has become political as per the front page above.
This user liked this post: Devils_Advocate

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5202 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Devils_Advocate » Fri May 15, 2020 3:45 pm

Grumps wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:29 pm
It was a question, not a point, or comment, hence the question mark. .... Asking how many teachers, who have been teaching children from high risk parents had caught the virus from them
So if answer is lots, then don't send more children to school
If the answer is none, then it would be safe to send children from less risk parents
You seemed pretty sure the answer was none or minimal as your next sentence and then your following post alluded to so it seemed a bit of a rhetorical question.

Your last line in the post above is the point you were making and its is a floored one.

If your logic is that stats stating zero teachers have caught the virus when schools only have a handful of pupils present has any bearing on the risk of teachers catching the virus when the numbers ramp up towards 33%-50% then thankgod all you are responsible for is pontificating on a football forum

android
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 10:01 am
Been Liked: 119 times
Has Liked: 43 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by android » Fri May 15, 2020 3:46 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:14 pm
Thanks, android. As the ONS repeats their survey I'd expect the numbers to be more focussed - as well as, hopefully, showing reductions.

I didn't get the impression that ONS included the healthcare workers in their 0.27% - I think they said that people working in healthcare were excluded. I'd have to go back and read their report again to check if this is the case.
The infection estimates were 1.33% for healthcare workers and 0.22% for everyone else making an overall average of 0.27%. If my maths is correct that would mean healthcare workers make up about 5% of the population (1.33 x 0.05 plus 0.22 x 0.95 making 0.27 ish), which doesn't sound unreasonable depending on where the line is drawn.

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Fri May 15, 2020 3:50 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:45 pm
You seemed pretty sure the answer was none or minimal as your next sentence and then your following post alluded to so it seemed a bit of a rhetorical question.

Your last line in the post above is the point you were making and its is a floored one.

If your logic is that stats stating zero teachers have caught the virus when schools only have a handful of pupils present has any bearing on the risk of teachers catching the virus when the numbers ramp up towards 33%-50% then thankgod all you are responsible for is pontificating on a football forum
Glad you know what I was thinking

I wouldn't normally point it out, but as its comes from a know it all..... Floored?

As for pontificating on a football forum..... Pot and kettle come to mind :lol: :lol: :lol:

I'll bow out at this stage on this topic, just like you promised

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Paul Waine » Fri May 15, 2020 3:55 pm

android wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:46 pm
The infection estimates were 1.33% for healthcare workers and 0.22% for everyone else making an overall average of 0.27%. If my maths is correct that would mean healthcare workers make up about 5% of the population (1.33 x 0.05 plus 0.22 x 0.95 making 0.27 ish), which doesn't sound unreasonable depending on where the line is drawn.
What did ONS mean by "excluding healthcare workers?" 5% of 55 million (England) is 2.5+ million. NHS employs 1+ million. 53,000 care homes (I think that's the number we've heard...) - but was ONS counting all the NHS employees and all the care home staff as "healthcare workers" or just those in the "patient facing" roles?

fatboy47
Posts: 4178
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:58 am
Been Liked: 2309 times
Has Liked: 2691 times
Location: Isles of Scilly

Re: Covid-19

Post by fatboy47 » Fri May 15, 2020 3:55 pm

I suspect the response from teachers and their unions would be radically different should there be a significant reduction in pay for those finding it "" too dangerous"" to go to work.

Teaching is an incredibly poorly paid, stressful and under-appreciated job...I for one cant really blame them for milkng this fully paid free holiday to the max.
Last edited by fatboy47 on Fri May 15, 2020 3:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ksrclaret
Posts: 6804
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:56 am
Been Liked: 2488 times
Has Liked: 760 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by ksrclaret » Fri May 15, 2020 3:59 pm

I for one can’t wait to get back in my classroom. The only year group I have potentially coming back before the summer though are Y12s, so I’ll be waiting a while yet anyway.
This user liked this post: Grumps

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by martin_p » Fri May 15, 2020 4:06 pm

fatboy47 wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:55 pm
I suspect the response from teachers and their unions would be radically different should there be a significant reduction in pay for those finding it "" too dangerous"" to go to work.

Teaching is an incredibly poorly paid, stressful and under-appreciated job...I for one cant really blame them for milkng this fully paid free holiday to the max.
It’s hardly a holiday. While it’s clearly not as onerous as teaching in normal circumstances the teachers at my sons school have been very active in providing content and keeping in touch.

Comparing teachers to health care workers in terms of appetite for risk, as some on here (and the Daily Mail) have is a bit off too. It’s healthcare workers job to deal with slick people and there’s always a risk of catching something infectious, although clearly that risk has gone up significantly during the pandemic. Teachers don’t go into teaching expecting to have to deal with that so I don’t see why people expect them to do so.

android
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 10:01 am
Been Liked: 119 times
Has Liked: 43 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by android » Fri May 15, 2020 4:07 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:55 pm
What did ONS mean by "excluding healthcare workers?" 5% of 55 million (England) is 2.5+ million. NHS employs 1+ million. 53,000 care homes (I think that's the number we've heard...) - but was ONS counting all the NHS employees and all the care home staff as "healthcare workers" or just those in the "patient facing" roles?
The 1.33% category includes "NHS professionals, such as nurses and doctors, as well as social care workers, such as nursing home or home care workers"

Allowing for rounding the maths would work with about a 96% non-healthcare / 4% healthcare workers ratio if that helps!

Not entirely sure where you saw "excluding healthcare workers" but that must have been when they were referring to the 0.22% and not the overall average of 0.27%.

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5202 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Devils_Advocate » Fri May 15, 2020 4:18 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:45 pm
You seemed pretty sure the answer was none or minimal as your next sentence and then your following post alluded to so it seemed a bit of a rhetorical question.
Grumps wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:50 pm
Glad you know what I was thinking
Ive a fair idea
Grumps wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 1:27 pm
Looking after the children of those most at risk of having the virus
How many of these teachers have caught it?
Grumps wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 1:27 pm
I would suggest, not many, or we'd have heard about it
Grumps wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 2:11 pm
If teachers had caught the virus with the bare minimum of pupils, as you say, do you not think the unions would be shouting it from the roof tops?

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Fri May 15, 2020 4:22 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 4:18 pm
Ive a fair idea
Excellent editing

Steve-Harpers-perm
Posts: 5744
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
Been Liked: 1868 times
Has Liked: 835 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Steve-Harpers-perm » Fri May 15, 2020 4:35 pm

fatboy47 wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:55 pm
I suspect the response from teachers and their unions would be radically different should there be a significant reduction in pay for those finding it "" too dangerous"" to go to work.

Teaching is an incredibly poorly paid, stressful and under-appreciated job...I for one cant really blame them for milkng this fully paid free holiday to the max.
Sure you’ll reel a few in with the free holiday jibe!

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by aggi » Fri May 15, 2020 4:40 pm

dsr wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 3:22 pm
Key workers, like the NHS, are obviously taking the risk of going to work even though they will come into contact with coronavirus.

Non-key workers, like many of us, may or may not go in to work, but those that do will certainly come into contact with people who might be carrying and transmitting the disease.

Other non-key workers, as teachers evidently believe themselves to be, are threatening not to go into work even though there is a good chance (reference Iceland's survey with detailed track and trace that found no child has transmitted coronavirus to any family member) that they will come into contact with few people with the virus.

The National Education Union does not want schools to reopen but also says that teachers should not teach online. Though I think they stopped short of telling their staff to ask for furlough. :roll:
A lot of teachers (probably most where there aren't other reasons such as health problems) are going in to work. The issue is more that there are a lot of questions about how it can be expanded safely. It's probably one of those situations where the guidelines should have, and could have, been sorted out before the announcement.
This user liked this post: Steve-Harpers-perm

Steve-Harpers-perm
Posts: 5744
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
Been Liked: 1868 times
Has Liked: 835 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Steve-Harpers-perm » Fri May 15, 2020 4:58 pm

aggi wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 4:40 pm
A lot of teachers (probably most where there aren't other reasons such as health problems) are going in to work. The issue is more that there are a lot of questions about how it can be expanded safely. It's probably one of those situations where the guidelines should have, and could have, been sorted out before the announcement.
Putting a plan in place would have been a novel idea! Anyway slightly worrying they are now saying the infection rate has gone back up.
Last edited by Steve-Harpers-perm on Fri May 15, 2020 4:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Paul Waine » Fri May 15, 2020 4:58 pm

android wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 4:07 pm
The 1.33% category includes "NHS professionals, such as nurses and doctors, as well as social care workers, such as nursing home or home care workers"

Allowing for rounding the maths would work with about a 96% non-healthcare / 4% healthcare workers ratio if that helps!

Not entirely sure where you saw "excluding healthcare workers" but that must have been when they were referring to the 0.22% and not the overall average of 0.27%.
I've re-read ONS report. I now agree your figures, people who work in healthcare are included in the survey of covid-19 in the community. As you say, patient facing healthcare roles are separately identified. It is patients in hospital and residents in care homes that are excluded.

So, 0.27% incorporates both the 0.22% and the 1.33%.

Colburn_Claret
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:30 pm
Been Liked: 3060 times
Has Liked: 5023 times
Location: Catterick N.Yorks

Re: Covid-19

Post by Colburn_Claret » Fri May 15, 2020 5:28 pm

CombatClaret wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 1:18 pm
Sorry but that's sounds very docile and accepting of any authority with a good power point presentation. A graph or a chart is just that, a collection of data presented in one of many ways. The question is how and why we are acting on such data, and yes there maybe 66 million people in the country but we don't need their opinion. What we're asking for is the opinions of the few thousand people who've made it their lives work to study, health, epidemiology etc. Because not all of them will agree and it's highly likely that scientific advice and guidance can be corrupted by ideology once it meet politics.
For example there's been no hard evidence to suggest children do not spread the disease just as much as adults. Should teachers not be entitled to know that before they put themselves and their own families at home at risk? I think that evidence was asked for in PMQs and the response was "We'll tell you later", that's not acceptable.
Thank you for answering your own question YES, they don't all agree, which is why it is dangerous to play pick the scientists brain, because too many people just want to agree with the scientist that supports their own point of view, with no basis to say they are right and everyone else is wrong. It's not a reasoned debate, its a political witch hunt.

jackmiggins
Posts: 797
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:29 pm
Been Liked: 197 times
Has Liked: 48 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by jackmiggins » Fri May 15, 2020 5:47 pm

Thank goodness that ALL children are little angels....can’t see any possible problems when they go back to school now that substantial info/advice has/is being made available to schools.
Incidentally, for those that still haven’t understood, whilst children don’t seem to be badly affected by the virus, they are excellent carriers.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Covid-19

Post by FactualFrank » Fri May 15, 2020 6:03 pm

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 4:58 pm
Putting a plan in place would have been a novel idea! Anyway slightly worrying they are now saying the infection rate has gone back up.
Seems to be still below 1 with new estimates. 0.9 will do.

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by dsr » Fri May 15, 2020 6:09 pm

jackmiggins wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 5:47 pm
Incidentally, for those that still haven’t understood, whilst children don’t seem to be badly affected by the virus, they are excellent carriers.
What level of evidence constitutes proof?

Up to 1st May, 33,365 people have died with covid-19 quoted on the death certificate. Of these, 2 have been children. But this is not enough to say that children are not badly affected by the virus; only that they seem to be not badly affected.

And yet you can state with certainty that they spread it well. Much of the evidence appears to suggest that it doesn't - a certain Professor Snape (not that Professor Snape!) is quoted by the BBC as saying they aren't sure.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52003804

The Icelandic authorities have been unable to find any case of a child infecting anybody.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/i ... g-parents/

I'm not saying they are right and you are wrong, but I would be interested to read your sources.
This user liked this post: Colburn_Claret

KateR
Posts: 4137
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1018 times
Has Liked: 6156 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by KateR » Fri May 15, 2020 6:12 pm

martin_p wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 2:52 pm
Just to clear up a misconception here, the vast majority of key workers, those eligible to send their children to school now, are not on the ‘frontline’ and are unlikely to come into contact with Covid sufferers.
just to clear up a misconception,
I will try to make it clear for you then, I did things in 2 para's in an attempt to be clear, before the weekend & BJ's speech and 2nd one after BJ's speech and what has/is going to happen. Your response was all to pre-BJ's speech so nothing to with here and now and was purely based on frontline workers and frontline staff but of course not all being in contact with C-19 suffers. I never mentioned key workers, her class size was very small but obviously going to grow quickly, hence the second para, but perhaps your post was to the general and not aimed at the para you responded to

Stay Alert and have a good weekend.

CombatClaret
Posts: 4381
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:09 pm
Been Liked: 1825 times
Has Liked: 929 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by CombatClaret » Fri May 15, 2020 6:18 pm

dsr wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 6:09 pm
What level of evidence constitutes proof?

Up to 1st May, 33,365 people have died with covid-19 quoted on the death certificate. Of these, 2 have been children. But this is not enough to say that children are not badly affected by the virus; only that they seem to be not badly affected.
And yet you can state with certainty that they spread it well. Much of the evidence appears to suggest that it doesn't - a certain Professor Snape (not that Professor Snape!) is quoted by the BBC as saying they aren't sure.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52003804

The Icelandic authorities have been unable to find any case of a child infecting anybody.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/i ... g-parents/
I'm not saying they are right and you are wrong, but I would be interested to read your sources.
I think we can agree there is no consensus so while we don't really have a scooby we should not be making real world decisions based on a lack of evidence.

KateR
Posts: 4137
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1018 times
Has Liked: 6156 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by KateR » Fri May 15, 2020 6:30 pm

just on a different subject this virus/lockdown is leading to some new thoughts as we move forward and look to coming out the other end, thought this was interesting:

https://www.bbc.com/future/bespoke/foll ... ities.html
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

jackmiggins
Posts: 797
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:29 pm
Been Liked: 197 times
Has Liked: 48 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by jackmiggins » Fri May 15, 2020 6:35 pm

dsr wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 6:09 pm
What level of evidence constitutes proof?

Up to 1st May, 33,365 people have died with covid-19 quoted on the death certificate. Of these, 2 have been children. But this is not enough to say that children are not badly affected by the virus; only that they seem to be not badly affected.

And yet you can state with certainty that they spread it well. Much of the evidence appears to suggest that it doesn't - a certain Professor Snape (not that Professor Snape!) is quoted by the BBC as saying they aren't sure.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52003804

The Icelandic authorities have been unable to find any case of a child infecting anybody.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/i ... g-parents/

I'm not saying they are right and you are wrong, but I would be interested to read your sources.
If you’re happy assuming that anyone, no matter what age, who contracts a virus cannot pass it on, then fine. I’ll stick with my assumption that they most certainly can.
As a further point - load of rubbish about only picking it up from touching infected areas. It is airborne, as all viruses are. How many, I wonder, have been on a flight and subsequently developed some cold symptoms?

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Fri May 15, 2020 6:52 pm

jackmiggins wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 6:35 pm
If you’re happy assuming that anyone, no matter what age, who contracts a virus cannot pass it on, then fine. I’ll stick with my assumption that they most certainly can.
As a further point - load of rubbish about only picking it up from touching infected areas. It is airborne, as all viruses are. How many, I wonder, have been on a flight and subsequently developed some cold symptoms?
Here's a weird one. My wife always ends up with a dry cough after a flight, outgoing and incoming.
As you well know, we flew back to the UK in the middle of March, She didn't have any type of cough following that flight. :lol:

Holtyclaret
Posts: 1120
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:35 pm
Been Liked: 342 times
Has Liked: 1558 times
Location: Wantage

Re: Covid-19

Post by Holtyclaret » Fri May 15, 2020 6:55 pm

In countries where primary schools have remained open, most experienced a tricky first week (with full numbers) but then through imagination and common sense had fun learning new ways and routines like novel ways of saying hello/goodbye like shaking feet and dancing in the hand wash queue, breaking down larger groups into smaller bubbles and outdoor lessons. They’ve been fine throughout.

jackmiggins
Posts: 797
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:29 pm
Been Liked: 197 times
Has Liked: 48 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by jackmiggins » Fri May 15, 2020 6:56 pm

Thanks Grumps - message received and understood, or FAB

jackmiggins
Posts: 797
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:29 pm
Been Liked: 197 times
Has Liked: 48 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by jackmiggins » Fri May 15, 2020 6:57 pm

Holtyclaret wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 6:55 pm
In countries where primary schools have remained open, most experienced a tricky first week (with full numbers) but then through imagination and common sense had fun learning new ways and routines like novel ways of saying hello/goodbye like shaking feet and dancing in the hand wash queue, breaking down larger groups into smaller bubbles and outdoor lessons. They’ve been fine throughout.
But these countries closed their borders early on.

Holtyclaret
Posts: 1120
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:35 pm
Been Liked: 342 times
Has Liked: 1558 times
Location: Wantage

Re: Covid-19

Post by Holtyclaret » Fri May 15, 2020 7:05 pm

So did we to the initial hot spots and subsequent flights are largely freight or repatriated brits who came back into the country to join lockdown.

The comment about imagination and common sense in schools was just to illustrate that there are ways to manage a very slow and safe return to school for kids, particularly in warmer months and obviously if the curve continues it’s slow but steady descent.
This user liked this post: KateR

jackmiggins
Posts: 797
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:29 pm
Been Liked: 197 times
Has Liked: 48 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by jackmiggins » Fri May 15, 2020 7:12 pm

No, we didn’t stop flights. Want to fly in from anywhere at end of May? Divert to Paris......simples

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by Grumps » Fri May 15, 2020 7:29 pm

jackmiggins wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 7:12 pm
No, we didn’t stop flights. Want to fly in from anywhere at end of May? Divert to Paris......simples
It's easier than that... Tenerife to Luton with wizz air. Iam sure there's more out there.

EDIT... Just checked, flight operated this Tuesday....

Holtyclaret
Posts: 1120
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:35 pm
Been Liked: 342 times
Has Liked: 1558 times
Location: Wantage

Re: Covid-19

Post by Holtyclaret » Fri May 15, 2020 8:00 pm

So Wuhan to Tenerife to Luton, right then what happens when you check in at Tenerife or try to?

Because ports weren’t completely locked down though, the next best option is being taken by introducing quarantine when numbers (hopefully) become smaller.

Anyway, I’m sure that’s an old row on here but if data remains going the way it is a slow careful opening of schools should happen at some stage next month.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by martin_p » Fri May 15, 2020 8:07 pm

KateR wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 6:12 pm
just to clear up a misconception,
I will try to make it clear for you then, I did things in 2 para's in an attempt to be clear, before the weekend & BJ's speech and 2nd one after BJ's speech and what has/is going to happen. Your response was all to pre-BJ's speech so nothing to with here and now and was purely based on frontline workers and frontline staff but of course not all being in contact with C-19 suffers. I never mentioned key workers, her class size was very small but obviously going to grow quickly, hence the second para, but perhaps your post was to the general and not aimed at the para you responded to

Stay Alert and have a good weekend.
You’re very touchy aren’t you!

You said, and I quote, ‘ As mentioned and obvious all children have at least one parent on the front line so again obviously most at risk to bring the virus home and start spreading but not happened‘

You said that every child at the school has a parent on the frontline, also saying it was obvious. It’s not obvious because the children of non-frontline workers are at school as well and have been since lockdown started.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by martin_p » Fri May 15, 2020 8:18 pm

Holtyclaret wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 8:00 pm
So Wuhan to Tenerife to Luton, right then what happens when you check in at Tenerife or try to?

Because ports weren’t completely locked down though, the next best option is being taken by introducing quarantine when numbers (hopefully) become smaller.

Anyway, I’m sure that’s an old row on here but if data remains going the way it is a slow careful opening of schools should happen at some stage next month.
The latest infection rates are up.

NewClaret
Posts: 13222
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 3037 times
Has Liked: 3759 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by NewClaret » Fri May 15, 2020 8:22 pm

I’ve got an idea :idea:

Why don’t we close all schools permanently. Get one brilliant teacher for each subject (Joe Wickes can do PE), who teaches the nations children online in their homes.

Invest massively in broadband infrastructure so most can work from home. Then we can close the railways and massively reduce carbon emissions.

This way there will be no virus spreading AND the teaching/transport unions will be happy! Whoop whoop!

NewClaret
Posts: 13222
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 3037 times
Has Liked: 3759 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by NewClaret » Fri May 15, 2020 8:23 pm

martin_p wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 8:18 pm
The latest infection rates are up.
Don’t tell me, this is because lockdown was “lifted” two days ago? :lol:
This user liked this post: Holtyclaret

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Covid-19

Post by martin_p » Fri May 15, 2020 8:25 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Fri May 15, 2020 8:23 pm
Don’t tell me, this is because lockdown was “lifted” two days ago? :lol:
Nope.

Locked