[Oldmanmatt]

Loving the rhetoric coming from the “Government”.

“We will not hesitate to act” they say, delaying the decision to next week...

[IanP]

Tweets now appearing with data/slides from CWiddy’s briefing to the Northern MP’s...

Edit: here’s a link https://twitter.com/singharj/status/1314179590412271617?s=21

Showing in 18-30’s 30% of cases linked to visits to Pubs and restaraunts, and another 10% from people working there. Total drops to 30% for older groups.

What frustrates me is that if this data isnt super new - why couldn’t we see it before? It smells like its being released now as part of an orchestrated plan to justify more lockdown (which BTW I completely agree with...). I listened to Sturgeons briefing the other day live (having my lunch when WFH) and I wish Englands leaders could treat the audience with the same level of respect and intelligence.

Since that's just a part view of a single slide with no explanation and no background so its completely not clear what it means but since it talks about 'exposure settings' I would suggest that its most likely about what sort environments people have potential exposure rather than than a causal link to where they caught covid.  This seems likely since there's no mention of obvious other places people could have caught covid such as schools/educational establishments. work places etc etc.  In fact from the info it the title it looks that these other setting may have been specifically excluded.

The most recent government weekly surveillance reports shows that the vast majority of covid incidents in the week to 2/10 occurred in educational establishments, work places and care homes (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/923668/Weekly_COVID19_Surveillance_Report_week_40.pdf , fig 20).  Again covid incidents isn't synonymous with the source of all covid infections but this indicates that (not suprisingly) a significant amount of covid may be transmitted within these environments,

Assuming that this is about exposure settings then the fact that 30% of under 30's who have contracted Covid have been to pubs / cafes only gives us significant information if that is higher than a control sample of all under 30s.  No idea whether this is the case, but out of interest a quick google points to between 6% and 9% of the employed population being in hospitality which seems to be in the ballpark with the numbers reporting exposure working in hospitality,

[tomtom]

I think I was trying to get across that part of the problem is that we don’t get all the data - just leaks or snippets.

So we’re left filling in the blanks for ourselves.. I wish they’d trust us more... or even a bit!

[Stu Littlefair]

There was a CDC study (from US obvs) showing that Covid+ cases reported visiting a hospitality venue at a rate of twice that of the general population...

[tomtom]

Good news on the job furloughing payment plan for locked down areas today.

[TobyD]

There was a CDC study (from US obvs) showing that Covid+ cases reported visiting a hospitality venue at a rate of twice that of the general population...

I think that there was something similar in the UK as well, but most experts considered that it was very likely that someone engaging in any risky behaviour would also be more likely to visit a hospitality venue so that it wasn't terribly conclusive as to where one might be more likely to get / transmit it. I'd guess that a well managed restaurant would be pretty safe really, but most city centre bars / pubs... not so much.

[IanP]

I think I was trying to get across that part of the problem is that we don’t get all the data - just leaks or snippets.

So we’re left filling in the blanks for ourselves.. I wish they’d trust us more... or even a bit!

Agree completely, I would like to see all the data and analysis and then the rationale on any decisions and the objectives that expect/hope to achieve.  It would be nice also to see some honesty about the limitations of what we can do.

[IanP]

There was a CDC study (from US obvs) showing that Covid+ cases reported visiting a hospitality venue at a rate of twice that of the general population...

Saw that quoted in the coverage.  Looking up the study I couldn't really make sense on a quick skim.  As I understood it the figures had  41% of covid cases visiting restaurant vs 27 % of non covid, which is 50% more rather than twice as many?.  Still seems like a potentially significant difference which didn't appear to be present for other exposure settings, despite possible questions around the methodology of the study.

I think the bigger question is how big an impact  hospitality visits have in terms of transmission - obviously really difficult to answer but these sort of studies don't seem to attempt to answer this.  It may well be that closing pubs / restaurants does lead to some reduction in covid transmission but I'm not clear how significant that would be compared to that in workplaces/households etc.

[tomtom]

Yes - if it were an experiment you’d have ten identical towns and for each town ‘unlockdown’ one feature (bar, cafe, restaraunt, church, gym etc.. ) and compare rates to lockdown rates.

Destined not to be that simple of course and impossible to implement except in a ruthless authoritarian dictatorship 😮 (getting there though 😀).

I’m putting together a grant proposal at the moment with a load of health scientists - and have some insights into how tricky it is to gain meaningful data from how people behave!

[Oldmanmatt]

Yes - if it were an experiment you’d have ten identical towns and for each town ‘unlockdown’ one feature (bar, cafe, restaraunt, church, gym etc.. ) and compare rates to lockdown rates.

Destined not to be that simple of course and impossible to implement except in a ruthless authoritarian dictatorship 😮 (getting there though 😀).

I’m putting together a grant proposal at the moment with a load of health scientists - and have some insights into how tricky it is to gain meaningful data from how people behave!

Health scientists like some of the signatories of the Guff Borington  tantrum?

Dr I P Freely?
Dr Not A F Uckinclue?
Dr Harold Shipman?
Or, perhaps, the great, Dr Person Fakename?

If you are a top notch academic and you want to organise a letter signed by other top notch academics and experts, to convince world governments of your superior understanding; yet somehow remain ignorant of basic human nature (despite the “Boaty McBoatface incident et al) you immediately lose the “top notch” appellation.

I wonder if the instigators conducted their respective research work with the same degree of rigour...😂.

[petejh]

So as per my posts on B3 from here: https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603070.html#msg603070

and here:
://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30489.msg603488.html#msg603488


There's now more evidence to back this up.

Preclinical research on NR and its role in covid-19 infected cells has now been released today in pre-print form, available here: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.17.047480v3

Note my disclaimers - I'm a shareholder in Chromadex (which are up 22% on this news)

Further research adding evidence to the B3 / NAD+ hypothesis.

https://twitter.com/FehrLab/status/1260342672688119810

Update on this. The next pre-clinical study was released last night US time. It reinforces the hypothesis that's been building around NAD depletion leading to worse outcomes from covid-19 infection; and the role of NAD augmentation using NR to slow virus replication.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/chromadex-announces-study-results-highlighting-103600635.html
These are great times to be a mouse.
Human study coming soon..

(I'm an investor, I'm biased)

Something a bit more practical than whinging about how shit the world is...

Following my posts in March, April and July about vitamin B3 being possibly effective both as a prophylactic and a treatment for covid - results from a phase 2 human study in covid patients were released this week which add more evidence to the mouse studies, cell studies and original hypothesis. Trial was open label.. but with a placebo control. Shows 30% reduction in recovery time in patients with covid. Other compounds in the mix as well as B3.



(disclaimer: investor in Chromodex, manufacturer of Nigen).

[teestub]

Other compounds in the mix as well as B3.

This sounds like a fairly crucial point! If the other compounds are Dexa, anabolics and chilled monkey brains or whatever Trump has been on then that may make a difference.

Sounds like a good catastrotunity anyway.

[tomtom]

In non drug company related good news - It was great to see this fella getting a gong in the honours.

He set up Ceredigion’s track and trace - and their county based strategy right at the onset of the pandemic and is instrumental to the very low transmission rates there. A genuine unsung hero etc..

https://www.cambrian-news.co.uk/article.cfm?id=134121&fbclid=IwAR34iurv7J530MTcYkSuXNT0xLwnjXQyeYNpstkxLZtm3Tdu_VfKyi8Xy5A

[petejh]

Sorry forgot to add the link to the news release for the study:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/chromadex-announces-study-results-showing-103500784.html


Nobody lives in Ceredigion TT.. It's hardly surprising they have a low transmission rate! I hear Ranoch Moor is faring well..

[tomtom]

Stop whinging Pete 😛

Embrace the good news. 🤗

[petejh]

Interesting thoughts on seasonality and vitamin D. Summary: the UK's fucked.

The vitamin D theory for flu seasonality is especially interesting in light of this *prescient analysis of likely COVID-19 hot spots published by researchers at the University of Maryland Medical School, which evaluated the weather patterns of cities that were particularly hard hit by coronavirus through community spread. The paper highlights a band of between 30-50 degrees north latitude with temperatures of between 5-11 degrees celsius as most vulnerable to community spread.

*https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3550308

[tomtom]

Welsh lockdown for two weeks.

Sounds like some fairly sensible detail in there - including primary/nursery schools reopening after half term....

From the other side of the border looks like some decisive action - that’d be welcome here.

[Paul B]

I'm not sure Pete's going to agree with you when he reads the exercise guidelines... 

[petejh]

On first glance it appears the guidance on outdoor leisure activities is as per last time. The bits of the guidance about not driving to exercise in the outdoors away from home are ridiculous for people who live close to mountainous areas (or any rural area really), and punish healthy behaviour that the evidence shows has virtually zero impact on transmission but significantly positive impact on wellbeing. I won't be complying with those parts of the lockdown.

e.g.

''Can you leave home to exercise?
Yes, you can, and you can do so as often as you like for exercise as long as you do so from home and are alone or with members of your household (and/or a carer).

What kind of exercise is permitted?
There are no legal limits on this, but in practice this is constrained by other restrictions that have been imposed such as the closure of leisure centres, gyms and swimming pools.

Are there any limits on how far you can run or cycle for exercise?
There are no limits on the distance you can travel during exercise, though the nearer you stay to your home, the better. Your exercise should start and finish from your home and you should exercise alone or with a member of your household.

Can you exercise by going fishing or horse riding?
This is not specifically prohibited. However, you should not be driving to get to somewhere to exercise, and the need to carry sports equipment isn’t regarded as a justification on its own for driving in these circumstances. This will mean in practice most people cannot do these things for the short period of the lockdown.

All exercise must be undertaken alone or with members of your household.

Can you drive somewhere to exercise?
Exercise should be undertaken locally, the guidelines say. That means from home or as close as possible to the home. In general this should not involve people driving to a location away from home for this purpose. No journeys of any significant distance should be taken, for example, just in order to exercise in the countryside or at beauty spots.

There are exceptions for people with specific health or mobility issues.''

[Anti]

On first glance it appears the guidance on outdoor leisure activities is as per last time. The bits of the guidance about not driving to exercise in the outdoors away from home are ridiculous for people who live close to mountainous areas (or any rural area really), and punish healthy behaviour that the evidence shows has virtually zero impact on transmission but significantly positive impact on wellbeing. I won't be complying with those parts of the lockdown.

e.g.

''Can you leave home to exercise?
Yes, you can, and you can do so as often as you like for exercise as long as you do so from home and are alone or with members of your household (and/or a carer).

What kind of exercise is permitted?
There are no legal limits on this, but in practice this is constrained by other restrictions that have been imposed such as the closure of leisure centres, gyms and swimming pools.

Are there any limits on how far you can run or cycle for exercise?
There are no limits on the distance you can travel during exercise, though the nearer you stay to your home, the better. Your exercise should start and finish from your home and you should exercise alone or with a member of your household.

Can you exercise by going fishing or horse riding?
This is not specifically prohibited. However, you should not be driving to get to somewhere to exercise, and the need to carry sports equipment isn’t regarded as a justification on its own for driving in these circumstances. This will mean in practice most people cannot do these things for the short period of the lockdown.

All exercise must be undertaken alone or with members of your household.

Can you drive somewhere to exercise?
Exercise should be undertaken locally, the guidelines say. That means from home or as close as possible to the home. In general this should not involve people driving to a location away from home for this purpose. No journeys of any significant distance should be taken, for example, just in order to exercise in the countryside or at beauty spots.

There are exceptions for people with specific health or mobility issues.''

Yeah, this is from the same Welsh Government who opened golf courses and garden centres while massive parts of the national park were still off limits. I'll be driving 15 minutes to go bouldering outside thanks.

[petejh]

They’ve also rolled out the same bullshit logic from March about ‘risky activities’:

As one of the purposes of the restrictions is to reduce pressure on the Welsh NHS, we also ask people to avoid activities that involve a significant degree of risk (for example swimming or other exercise at sea, or in lakes, rivers or other waterways).


While the logic of not unnecessarily impacting A&E makes sense, the calculation of what constitutes a risky activity is as illogical now as it was in March. If you look at the excess deaths figures for cycling in 2020 the numbers have gone crazy.

So it’ll be for reasons of lazy superficial impressions if the Welsh government rules lead to climbing being perceived as being too ‘risky’ - notwithstanding climbers already breaking ridiculous rules preventing travel to exercise - while increasing numbers of cyclists once again hit the roads again over the next 17 days of lockdown, this time in autumn weather and low light levels.. So incentivising an activity with already high figures for risk of death or seriously injury, while penalising genuinely zero-harm lower risk activities such as route-climbing, bouldering, hillwalking. Total bullshit.

I await the BMC’s policy of bending itself over the nearest style to be lubed up by Snowdonia National Park and fucked up the ass by Natural Resources Wales.

[Paul B]

They’ve also rolled out the same bullshit logic from March about ‘risky activities’:

...that was the bit I thought might hit the spot 

while increased numbers of cyclists once again  hit the roads again over the next 17 days, this time in autumn weather and low light levels..

Unless they like cleaning their bike as much as riding it I guess there won't be as much as during the stonking weather afforded to us during the last lockdown.

[tomtom]

"I'm just off to pick up my takeaway" is probably as good an excuse as you need. Giving the name Will Hunt of course....

[sdm]

They’ve also rolled out the same bullshit logic from March about ‘risky activities’:

As one of the purposes of the restrictions is to reduce pressure on the Welsh NHS, we also ask people to avoid activities that involve a significant degree of risk (for example swimming or other exercise at sea, or in lakes, rivers or other waterways).

This policy didn't have the effect they intended. As swimming pools were so much later to reopen than in England, all of the serious swimmers took to open water training every day because they couldn't train in their usual pools.

The swimming clubs are planning to do the same during this lockdown.

[petejh]

Yeah I’ve already ordered my fake driving license through alibaba, with Will’s details on it. 😁