Where did they go away though? I looked and couldn’t see that information.
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
That analogy only works if there aren’t other sources of local fuel also being thrown on the fire. Zante was on the allowed list so these people weren’t even required to quarantine at the time. I’m not saying there’s no examples of people going abroad and then spreading the virus but we have just as many example of people not travelling abroad and spreading it. Ultimately, it’s going to spread if people are interacting. The two week quarantining will make minimal difference in my opinion. We missed our chance to be effective there.
Should people with covid be forced to wear nametags?
This is kind of an interesting study of spread in India with large sample size tracking infection pathways of 575,071 exposed to 84,965 with confirmed cases
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/09/29/science.abd7672
Essentially saying that just over 70% of confirmed cases were not found to be directly responsible to infecting others. With 8% of infected individuals accounting for about 60% of new infections in others. Also said that kids were found to effective transmitters of the disease (point of contention before). Mentioned also kids and young adults more likely to catch it from people their own age.
Definitely points to super-spreaders but do wonder if there are any biological reasons for them spreading it so much (e.g. whether there is a particularly infectious phase of the disease they are in or whether they have a propensity for just spreading more for other reasons) or whether its certain behaviours. Not sure what practical applications are though from this study because beyond conjecture it would just be too difficult to elucidate the answers to question of what makes a super-spreader.
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/09/29/science.abd7672
Essentially saying that just over 70% of confirmed cases were not found to be directly responsible to infecting others. With 8% of infected individuals accounting for about 60% of new infections in others. Also said that kids were found to effective transmitters of the disease (point of contention before). Mentioned also kids and young adults more likely to catch it from people their own age.
Definitely points to super-spreaders but do wonder if there are any biological reasons for them spreading it so much (e.g. whether there is a particularly infectious phase of the disease they are in or whether they have a propensity for just spreading more for other reasons) or whether its certain behaviours. Not sure what practical applications are though from this study because beyond conjecture it would just be too difficult to elucidate the answers to question of what makes a super-spreader.
Strange that the South of England seems to be exempt from any local lockdowns. Government looking after their own as per.
The south of england is well known to be more civilised than the hinterlands.
Joking obviously.
That story would be more interesting if we knew if any of the other passengers actually caught it. Have you seen any kind of follow-up on them? In an ideal world they'd have been tested during their quarantine - though even that would only help if they could do it in a way that would exclude the "brought it back from Zante" ones.
As with that flight, I have the same kind of curiosity about this superspreader incident. I'd be fascinated to know if there are other factors in play - singing Happy Birthday, compulsive huggers, selfie enthusiasts or whatever. I guess I'm pondering my odds when sitting at a neighbouring table in a restaurant, or the next row of seats on a train.
But do you just not exist if you don't go abroad / come from abroad ? If the infection rate is the same in the source as the destination country it makes just as much sense to randomly quarantine someone who has traveled as it makes sense to pick someone of the street and randomly quarantining them. They might have it, they might spread it, just as much as someone who just traveled.
Last edited:
I wish people would stop blaming certain age groups. There are probably youngsters have parties somewhere. I know just as many middle aged people who don’t care about the rules. I see more elderly people who can’t put a mask over their nose properly. Everyone is responsible for their own behaviour. The media is creating this unnecessary divide to always blame someone, something or a group of people.
I’m actually guilty of assuming these people are young. Their age doesn’t get mentioned. They could be middle-aged. Reckless behaviour all round, anyway.
People are still stuck on this mental model it seems, that only made sense in March and probably not even then. As if the virus is mainly something that comes "from the outside" and not something that is already strongly present in several societies.
I get your point but that very much depends how much of a risk factor a flight is because it seems like it's much higher than any activity undertaken by the average person off the street.
Unfortunately there's not really been much debate of high risk activities that might require extra diligence. We make stuff permissible and that's that rather than saying fine do it but don't then do xyz.
No, it's not that strange when you look at the data. Cases are all concentrated in the North.
No, sadly not seen any follow up. If we did it would probably highlight the inefficiencies in the tracing system most likely. I'd be curious to see how many stuck to quarantine as well.
I live in an area put under new rules today. It's interesting that for the first time in generations the Tory's won a few historically entrenched Labour seats but the "north south" divide issue is now being firmly pushed by local politicians. Middlesbrough's mayor has been particularly scathing stating it will "kill" jobs, and he's correct. I understand that rates of infection in my town are no more than in may places in the south, or certainly, weren't the last we heard.
I am aware that my local Council asked for these measures. Along with new measures comes significant extra funding. I am not suggesting for one moment that these two points are linked.
Small businesses in hospitality are shafted with this. The tap has been turned off and people will just have to starve.
No, it's not that strange when you look at the data. Cases are all concentrated in the North.
You really have to wonder why regions typically assumed as being less affluent are highest on this list.
On the face of it, it kinda looks like the areas which have historically been shafted and caused resentment amongst the populace are more likely to lead to lack of compliance. This itself could be argued as being rooted in some decisions made by the Tory gubernments of the past few decades
Or maybe the South just has natural virus killing air...
If you look at a Covid map of the UK you quickly see that it's the cities that make up most of the rise in cases.
Quite simply outside of London you don't have many proper cities down South. Everything is very spread out down here and sprawling cities aren't common.
By that logic, why was London the hardest hit in the first wave?
The virus doesn't discriminate based on voting history or preference.
Yeah, I agree with that. The unifying factors aren't age, but selfishness and stupidity.
Agree, it made sense right at the start of the pandemic and still does for countries that have a significantly lower infection rate, but for everyone else it's just additional hardship with no benefit.
Also agree here, if flying itself is a major contributing factor in infections that in itself needs to be looked at. That's equally true for internal flights as it is for international ones though.
Gah. Can’t find the fecking tweet but I saw a Tweet this morning showing a British regional incidence map for covid beside a map for the 1918 flu pandemic. They looked almost identical.
In other news.
It's the Mourinho gif for me.To anyone that follows their covid strategy/numbers closer, is this just a reflection of increased contact? I used to work with a Swedish office and they took the whole of August off, coming back to September (like we see in schools here) is it not just a natural situation of that?
UK Figures - 59 deaths, 6,914 new cases.
Other point to note, test turnaround times are slightly improving. Currently at 2.6 days on average now. 1st & 2nd week of September was averaging at 3.3 days.
Other point to note, test turnaround times are slightly improving. Currently at 2.6 days on average now. 1st & 2nd week of September was averaging at 3.3 days.
To anyone that follows their covid strategy/numbers closer, is this just a reflection of increased contact? I used to work with a Swedish office and they took the whole of August off, coming back to September (like we see in schools here) is it not just a natural situation of that?
That’s what I’ve been assuming. Apparently they don’t just take August off, loads of them relocate to very remote holiday homes for the month. Considering their population density is low to begin with that’s the perfect scenario to keep on top of the virus.
Ah but the maps I’m remembering (which I can’t actually fecking show to anyone) had incidence/100k so population independent. Basically higher incidence in North than South.
"Jose, how are the covid numbers in Sweden? "
To anyone that follows their covid strategy/numbers closer, is this just a reflection of increased contact? I used to work with a Swedish office and they took the whole of August off, coming back to September (like we see in schools here) is it not just a natural situation of that?
Not bothered to read any of it yet, but is this because of individual biology or individual routines (i.e. a teacher might be a super-spreader)?
From a statistical point of view this has hopefully always been the baseline assumption. What's more likely - that everyone transmits the virus at the same rate, or that different people transmit it at different rates, with some underlying distribution?
In real-world modelling there's always priors to priors to priors. The vast majority of models underestimate real-world randomness/variance/dependencies, unless the creator has manually accounted for it (educated guesswork). Other examples include the 2008 crash and recent elections.
It may explain some of the 'critical mass' effects we've seen prior to exponential growth / waves, and some of the apparent randomness in the spread when comparing places with similar initial conditions.
Perhaps much of the UK summer was below the critical interaction levels of potential "super-spreaders", rather than the population at large and their average r0.
This over-dispersion is a good and a bad thing. It means there's more chance of controlling transmission, but more severe once it's no longer under control.
"Jose, how are the covid numbers in Sweden? "
this thread isn't for memes, but there's some milage in a 'Jose reaction to covid news' thread.Nobody knows. They’re pretty clear on the scenarios where super-spreader events happen (indoor, poorly ventilated etc) but don’t know if individual biology of index case is also a factor.
Two different situations. London is full of some of the poorest, cramped areas in the UK which could be argued as one of the big reasons why it spread quickly there at the beginning.
My point about lack of compliance is more of a long-term thing (i.e., the longer it goes on, the less people living in places which are historically badly represented by government, are willing to comply with government advice).
Will also admit that I'm just hypothesizing. Shooting the shit, as the yanks say.
This is really interesting!
Last edited: