UKBouldering.com

Local Lockdowns (Read 64239 times)

Fiend

Offline
  • *
  • _
  • forum hero
  • Abominable sex magick practitioner and climbing heathen
  • Posts: 13413
  • Karma: +676/-67
  • Whut
#550 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 04, 2020, 10:36:10 am
This may be interesting:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54785032

Given that "numbers of deaths" was likely a major influence on and justification for the governments lockdown decision:

Quote
But it now turns out that projection was out-of-date.

It was based on figures from the start of October, which show by now there should be 1,000 deaths a day. The current average is a quarter of that number.

What is more, the Public Health England and the Cambridge University team that produced it have since published reports based on the more recently available data.

Grilled by MPs on this on Tuesday, chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance said he apologised if it caused confusion.

Meanwhile, none of the scenarios factored in the regional restrictions that the government has imposed since mid-October.

(Obviously there may be a lot more to it, other factors, alternate hypothesises etc etc)

Johnny Brown

Online
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 11437
  • Karma: +690/-22
#551 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 04, 2020, 11:08:35 am
Quote
by now there should be 1,000 deaths a day

Fucking poor journalism. A month-old model of a worst case scenario, assuming we did nothing. Lots of things were done, a different result ensued. Still, not enough to avoid a lockdown.

Oldmanmatt

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • At this rate, I probably won’t last the week.
  • Posts: 7097
  • Karma: +368/-17
  • Largely broken. Obsolete spares and scrap only.
    • The Boulder Bunker climbing centre
#552 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 04, 2020, 11:12:41 am
This may be interesting:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54785032

Given that "numbers of deaths" was likely a major influence on and justification for the governments lockdown decision:

Quote
But it now turns out that projection was out-of-date.

It was based on figures from the start of October, which show by now there should be 1,000 deaths a day. The current average is a quarter of that number.

What is more, the Public Health England and the Cambridge University team that produced it have since published reports based on the more recently available data.

Grilled by MPs on this on Tuesday, chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance said he apologised if it caused confusion.

Meanwhile, none of the scenarios factored in the regional restrictions that the government has imposed since mid-October.

(Obviously there may be a lot more to it, other factors, alternate hypothesises etc etc)

Pretty sure the decision was made on the number of daily deaths last week and the (by then) known number of daily deaths “baked in” by the known case load; rather than retrospectively reading a worst case prediction, already altered by mitigation efforts.
Or am I missing something?
Seems like scraping the barrel for controversy by the Beeb.

Fiend

Offline
  • *
  • _
  • forum hero
  • Abominable sex magick practitioner and climbing heathen
  • Posts: 13413
  • Karma: +676/-67
  • Whut
#553 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 04, 2020, 11:17:26 am
Quote
by now there should be 1,000 deaths a day

Fucking poor journalism. A month-old model of a worst case scenario, assuming we did nothing. Lots of things were done, a different result ensued. Still, not enough to avoid a lockdown.
It's worth pointing out, as a friend did for me, that that figure doesn't actually tally with the graph predictions. So either the wrong figures were wrong or the wrong graph was wrong. Or something.

OMM, I personally don't know. What I saw was those predictions being made very prominent at exactly the same time the leaked rumours of the lockdown were appearing, and I'm pretty sure a link between the two was being strongly implied. I'm sure others can investigate it more rigorously if they're interested.

Oldmanmatt

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • At this rate, I probably won’t last the week.
  • Posts: 7097
  • Karma: +368/-17
  • Largely broken. Obsolete spares and scrap only.
    • The Boulder Bunker climbing centre
#554 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 04, 2020, 11:45:44 am
Quote
by now there should be 1,000 deaths a day

Fucking poor journalism. A month-old model of a worst case scenario, assuming we did nothing. Lots of things were done, a different result ensued. Still, not enough to avoid a lockdown.
It's worth pointing out, as a friend did for me, that that figure doesn't actually tally with the graph predictions. So either the wrong figures were wrong or the wrong graph was wrong. Or something.

OMM, I personally don't know. What I saw was those predictions being made very prominent at exactly the same time the leaked rumours of the lockdown were appearing, and I'm pretty sure a link between the two was being strongly implied. I'm sure others can investigate it more rigorously if they're interested.

I suppose, what I was trying to say  (rather than have a dig at you), is that there is likely/possibly a difference between the “Lies to children” type approach of the public press release, where impact and dramatic info graphics were desirable to push their point, compared to the data sets they actually referred to in planning.
The mentioned graphs probably represent the projections that began the the lockdown process, regionally, and that the national is just a natural extension of that, based on the rate of change observed not bringing projections below the reasonable worst case scenario.
What the article doesn’t make clear, is that the current, real, rates exceed that benchmark, just not as drastically as the earlier, pre-mitigation, projections forecast.

Edit:
For instance, ~350-400/day, at start Nov. puts the track on or near the Warwick plot.

Nigel

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 1755
  • Karma: +165/-1
#555 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 04, 2020, 12:15:56 pm
The 4000 a day figure / graph is unfortunate mainly because it allows those opposed to lockdown an easy win on saying that the scientists are just doom-mongers (which in the current situation is largely true to some extent i.e. there are no good outcomes, hence it makes "sense"). The nuances of modelling inputs, variation etc. is lost on people such as Graham Brady MP, Steve Baker MP, Peter Bone MP (I could go on...). This is further evidenced by the neat cross over between them and the ERG / no-deal brexiteers - same people. The fact that actually we already have 350 covid deaths per day is then presented as somehow "good news". Rarely are they asked openly how many is acceptable to them, or whether they would happily let covid patients die untreated if the NHS becomes overwhelmed.

Will Hunt

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Superworm is super-long
  • Posts: 7976
  • Karma: +631/-115
    • Unknown Stones
#556 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 04, 2020, 12:19:37 pm
The most bizarre thing about the latest conspiracies/claims that the lockdown is needless is that it relies on an assumption that the Tories (of all people) have a desire to close businesses, trash the economy, and throw lots of public money (even if probably not enough) at trying to rescue businesses that could normally stand on their own feet.

Why on earth would they want to do that? And let's just say that the naysayers are right and that in 2/3 weeks time everything is looking very rosy. Why would the government not decide to claim a great victory and make an early repeal of the regulations?

Isn't it a peculiar coincidence that the lockdown sceptics are those very same people who derive their power and influence from capitalising on anti-establishment feeling? Toby Jones, Farage, et al. This is just another fertile field for them to reap. Whether or not what they're saying is true is immaterial to them, so they're quite happy to take a complex set of numbers and predictions and present them in the worst possible light.

Oldmanmatt

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • At this rate, I probably won’t last the week.
  • Posts: 7097
  • Karma: +368/-17
  • Largely broken. Obsolete spares and scrap only.
    • The Boulder Bunker climbing centre
#557 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 04, 2020, 12:28:18 pm
.


Isn't it a peculiar coincidence that the lockdown sceptics are those very same people who derive their power and influence from capitalising on anti-establishment feeling? Toby Jones, Farage, et al. This is just another fertile field for them to reap. Whether or not what they're saying is true is immaterial to them, so they're quite happy to take a complex set of numbers and predictions and present them in the worst possible light.

The more so, since the actual, current, powers that be, were very much part of that same cabal until a couple of years ago. Pretty sure the scruffy blonde twunt was one of their more prominent klaxons.

spidermonkey09

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 2814
  • Karma: +159/-4
#558 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 04, 2020, 12:46:12 pm
Toby Jones Young

the actor Toby Jones has not yet committed to the right wing grift as far as I know  :lol:

Will Hunt

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Superworm is super-long
  • Posts: 7976
  • Karma: +631/-115
    • Unknown Stones
#559 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 04, 2020, 12:58:27 pm
Toby Jones Young

the actor Toby Jones has not yet committed to the right wing grift as far as I know  :lol:

FFS!  :lol:

tomtom

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 20282
  • Karma: +641/-11
#560 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 04, 2020, 04:10:44 pm
I’ve missed all the debates (been out climbing!!) but basically are a load of the ex ERG/1922 arguing that we’ve become a communist republic because Starbucks is going to shut for 4 weeks.

Presumably they’re ok with the equivalent of 1.5 fully laden Airbus320’s piling into the ground every day? As long as Wetherspoons is open...

Nigel

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 1755
  • Karma: +165/-1
#561 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 04, 2020, 06:48:39 pm
Seeing as its national there will be a vote - it'll be interesting to see how many Tories vote against.

I’ve missed all the debates (been out climbing!!) but basically are a load of the ex ERG/1922 arguing that we’ve become a communist republic because Starbucks is going to shut for 4 weeks.

Yes, unsurprisingly! The 34 who voted against the lockdown: https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/902#noes . On a cursory look I can only find one person on there who isn't an obvious raving Brexit no dealer (Steve Brine, who voted for May's WA agreement). There may be others but the I consider the link obvious. As I posited these people are generally immune to evidence, or rather immune to evidence which they don't like. So its no surprise to see them rebel although it is *interesting* because Johnson is on paper "their man". Frankly I suspect that they are trying to send a warning as much about Brexit as coronavirus. If you think they are voting over genuine concerns for the common people's mental health or economic wellbeing then I have a bridge to sell...

On the face of it they did raise some valid objections, for instance I agree that the government should publish an economic impact assessment of the lockdown. Although I suspect in this instance they should be careful what they wish for, as we can put it alongside a no deal brexit one, compare and contrast. I doubt they would see the obvious oxymoron of their position but there you go.

21 more Tory MPs abstained. That's an effective rebellion of 55. Gov majority is 80, which actually means only 41 are needed to defeat a gov motion (obvious if you think about it). So without the opposition onside in one months time this could spell trouble for Johnson...

teestub

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 2574
  • Karma: +166/-4
  • Cyber Wanker
#562 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 05, 2020, 11:53:23 am
Was out and about yesterday so not sure if I missed anything, but a quick scoot through the legislation and couldn’t find anything about travel, so assume that’s still just as per the previous guidance on the gov website?
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/1200/pdfs/uksi_20201200_en.pdf

tommytwotone

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Southern jessie turned Almscliff devotee
  • Posts: 3633
  • Karma: +199/-3
#563 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 05, 2020, 12:30:15 pm
Interesting, I was looking at this this morning.

For Kirklees at least, the guidance seems to suggest you can make a "short" journey to take exercise / get outdoors etc. I'm assuming that means going to Shipley Glen en famille on Sunday is fine, maybe not going to the seaside in Filey?

spidermonkey09

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 2814
  • Karma: +159/-4
#564 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 05, 2020, 12:35:33 pm
Again though, isn't that guidance not law? So even if you did drive to the seaside from Leeds I don't think you're breaking any laws.

Fiend

Offline
  • *
  • _
  • forum hero
  • Abominable sex magick practitioner and climbing heathen
  • Posts: 13413
  • Karma: +676/-67
  • Whut
#565 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 05, 2020, 12:44:27 pm
Maybe obvious, but for those in the North / North East of England, these should be some useful local crags:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/map/?g=0&loc=barnard+castle&dist=20&km=0&q=&rock=0&dir=0&day=0&rain=0#main

Stabbsy

Offline
  • ****
  • junky
  • Posts: 763
  • Karma: +52/-0
#566 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 05, 2020, 01:12:54 pm
Maybe obvious, but for those in the North / North East of England, these should be some useful local crags:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/map/?g=0&loc=barnard+castle&dist=20&km=0&q=&rock=0&dir=0&day=0&rain=0#main
Surely that’s for climbers in the South East?

Fiend

Offline
  • *
  • _
  • forum hero
  • Abominable sex magick practitioner and climbing heathen
  • Posts: 13413
  • Karma: +676/-67
  • Whut
#567 Re: Local Lockdowns
November 05, 2020, 01:23:53 pm
Very good  :clap2:

 

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal