Small "bubbles" ...

[TRINITY]

2 hours ago, Retsdon said:

I'm impressed. A government document that actually specifies breaking 'the chain of transmission' as a goal. I've mentioned on PW before that one of my beefs with the Westminster government is that leadership has been almost non existent. Fine, lock people down, but then they need to know why. Not overwhelming the NHS, or keeping Nan safe as goals are far too vague for most people to relate to. But a specific target - to drive the R0 rate below 1 - is a real target that everyone can see and aim for. Daily updates, little graphs on the news  etc, etc, - get the whole country to feel they have skin in the game and can personally make a difference. Not the same thing at all as enforcing a lockdown on a sullen and unwilling populace at policepoint. 

A little bit of leadership...

 

Sorry to disappoint but the explanation of the R value and the target to reduce it to has been mentioned and discussed weeks ago on the press conferences. Nothing new in that. 

As far as the Scottish document is concerned I started to read it but lost the will to live. Its says a lot but means absolutely nothing , all generalisations but no specifics. I conceed they may be mentioned later on before I stopped reading.

[TRINITY]

In fact re R value, back on 30th March ,Sir Patrick Vallence covered it at length in press conference. 

[Retsdon]

36 minutes ago, TRINITY said:

Sorry to disappoint but the explanation of the R value

Sure, it's been mentioned. But that's not the same thing as making it the whole focus of the lockdown so every man and his dog knows a) what it is b) why it's important c) what the target is d) what the current number is.

If you asked everyone coming out of B&Q what the R0 number is  I'll guarantee that at least 40% won't know. And fewer will know what it currently stands at. The figure dropped below 1 the other day and that information was buried in a Whitty update. It should have been headline news.

[grrclark]

6 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Sure, it's been mentioned. But that's not the same thing as making it the whole focus of the lockdown so every man and his dog knows a) what it is b) why it's important c) what the target is d) what the current number is.

If you asked everyone coming out of B&Q what the R0 number is  I'll guarantee that at least 40% won't know. And fewer will know what it currently stands at. The figure dropped below 1 the other day and that information was buried in a Whitty update. It should have been headline news.

I don't watch the briefing every day, but I would estimate that at least 70% of the ones I have watched all the way through at least one of the scientists have talked about the R value, Whitty referenced a week or so ago that in the community it was very likely about .5 or .6, but in care homes and hospitals it was higher.

[henry d]

52 minutes ago, TRINITY said:

As far as the Scottish document is concerned I started to read it but lost the will to live. Its says a lot but means absolutely nothing , all generalisations but no specifics. I conceed they may be mentioned later on before I stopped reading.

Of course it is all generalisation what else do you expect but have a read between the lines, they indicate that schools may go back, probably primary transition classes and last three years of secondary, lessening of lockdown in certain workplaces if they can sort out distancing, .... lots of good stuff if you look

[TRINITY]

1 hour ago, henry d said:

Of course it is all generalisation what else do you expect but have a read between the lines, they indicate that schools may go back, probably primary transition classes and last three years of secondary, lessening of lockdown in certain workplaces if they can sort out distancing, .... lots of good stuff if you look

Reading between lines ! may be !, probably ! someones interpretation may be different to someone else. In other words it's a load of long winded guff that says absolutely nothing.As far as I read it before getting bored, not one single factual statement. Not having a go at you directly Henry, but in my opinion I really cant see the point of of such a vague unfactual document.