London put in emergency lockdown as U.K. fights new strain • Hacker News Board

Re: London put in emergency lockdown as U.K. fights new strain

#441

Post by Symbiote » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 10:40 AM UTC

toast0 wrote: post #217

makomk wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'd also have meant severing food supply chains (and probably also medical supply chains and a bunch of others). The UK relies on trucks coming across from the continent and continuing on to destinations throughout the country with their original drivers. Ending that would make Brexit look like a walk in the park by comparison. Also, you've got to remember that the time period during which the UK would've had to do…

> The UK relies on trucks coming across from the continent and continuing on to destinations throughout the country with their original drivers. I'm not familiar with freight in Europe, so please excuse the diversion. They drive freight vehicles onto the Eurotunnel Shuttle or on ferries? I'm guessing this isn't containerized freight, which would seem to make sense to transfer to freight rail (at least to cross the ch…

Now that France has closed the border (first time ever?) we have some numbers:

“To put this into context, there are about 6,000 vehicles we would expect, just under in Dover today, probably I’d say 4,000 would have gone across from Dover, just under 2,000 on the Eurotunnel,” he said.

“But there’s probably something like 32,000 units that would have been the daily total so the vast majority including virtually all the vaccine actually comes via container.”

Containers will mostly be on ships, but some will come on normal freight trains. (Eurotunnel is the lorries-on-trains service.)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/21/france-ban-uk-...

Re: London put in emergency lockdown as U.K. fights new strain

#442

Post by tonyedgecombe » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 5:20 PM UTC

rhino369 wrote: post #89

LatteLazy wrote: post #59

I live in London. The core issue here is that the government hasn't really taken any action. There are "rules" but they are full of loopholes and totally unenforced. 2 cases in particular stand out to me: Compliance with mask wearing on TFL is less than 50%. "Covid enforcement" officers walk around about one train in 50, and despite it being 8 months since this started, "I don't have one" is an acceptable answer to w…

I'm pretty shocked staff in supermarket employees aren't required to wear masks in London. But this isn't really true: "One staff member with covid will rapidly infect a few 1000 people given how busy they are on a Saturday morning. Covid is pretty contagious, but you really need to be around someone for ~15 minutes to have a good chance of infecting them. Superspreading events can occur, but they are fairly rare. I…

>I bet supermarkets aren't big transmission vectors.

I think that is probably true, after all we continued to buy groceries right through the lockdown period and cases remained low.

Re: London put in emergency lockdown as U.K. fights new strain

#443

Post by mellosouls » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 1:21 AM UTC

matthewmacleod wrote: post #27

mellosouls wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree; I'm not somebody who would have voted for him, but he's had some really tough decisions to make, and whether or not he's made the right call or dragged his heels at times, he's clearly been prepared to upend his own ideological leanings when needed and I respect him and the government for that.

I am baffled that somebody could observe the actions of the UK government and come to this conclusion. They seem to have been determined to do the worst possible thing to the very last moment, then abruptly about-face when that position was unsustainable.

What I said:

he's clearly been prepared to upend his own ideological leanings

What you said:

[nothing to do with him upending his ideological leanings].

Your bafflement would arguably be less if you took more care in reading the comments before you respond.

Re: London put in emergency lockdown as U.K. fights new strain

#444

Post by 747cwd » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:54 AM UTC

LatteLazy wrote: post #59

I live in London. The core issue here is that the government hasn't really taken any action. There are "rules" but they are full of loopholes and totally unenforced. 2 cases in particular stand out to me: Compliance with mask wearing on TFL is less than 50%. "Covid enforcement" officers walk around about one train in 50, and despite it being 8 months since this started, "I don't have one" is an acceptable answer to w…

I agree with every word 100%. Shops, supermarkets, staff, even an NHS clinic allowed someone to talk to reception without a mask..I have asked managers if they are comfortable with the staggering non compliance. “I’ll lose my job” has been their reply. Not surprising a “new strain” has developed.

Re: London put in emergency lockdown as U.K. fights new strain

#445

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 10:02 AM UTC

mellosouls wrote: post #443

matthewmacleod wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am baffled that somebody could observe the actions of the UK government and come to this conclusion. They seem to have been determined to do the worst possible thing to the very last moment, then abruptly about-face when that position was unsustainable.

What I said: he's clearly been prepared to upend his own ideological leanings What you said: [ nothing to do with him upending his ideological leanings ]. Your bafflement would arguably be less if you took more care in reading the comments before you respond.

[deleted]

Re: London put in emergency lockdown as U.K. fights new strain

#446

Post by matthewmacleod » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 10:09 AM UTC

mellosouls wrote: post #443

matthewmacleod wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am baffled that somebody could observe the actions of the UK government and come to this conclusion. They seem to have been determined to do the worst possible thing to the very last moment, then abruptly about-face when that position was unsustainable.

What I said: he's clearly been prepared to upend his own ideological leanings What you said: [ nothing to do with him upending his ideological leanings ]. Your bafflement would arguably be less if you took more care in reading the comments before you respond.

I would suggest taking your own advice here and reading the comment that you are replying to.

I am baffled that anybody could observe what has happened and come to the conclusion that the prime minister has “clearly been prepared to upend his own ideological leanings”, because it has to me been clearly demonstrated that the prime minister and government will push forward with policies in line with their “ideological leanings”, even though they are likely harmful, until the very last moment when they are forced by circumstance to change direction.

Re: London put in emergency lockdown as U.K. fights new strain

#447

Post by mellosouls » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 12:49 PM UTC

matthewmacleod wrote: post #446

mellosouls wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I said: he's clearly been prepared to upend his own ideological leanings What you said: [ nothing to do with him upending his ideological leanings ]. Your bafflement would arguably be less if you took more care in reading the comments before you respond.

I would suggest taking your own advice here and reading the comment that you are replying to. I am baffled that anybody could observe what has happened and come to the conclusion that the prime minister has “clearly been prepared to upend his own ideological leanings”, because it has to me been clearly demonstrated that the prime minister and government will push forward with policies in line with their “ideological…

Your new response includes the argument I pointed out was missing; rereading your original comment can hardly be expected to anticipate future fundamental additions...

Re: London put in emergency lockdown as U.K. fights new strain

#448

Post by timr » Fri, Dec 25, 2020, 9:16 PM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #383

timr wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I made an accurate summary of the study. From the Results: "Although the difference observed was not statistically significant, the 95% CIs are compatible with a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection." The points you are raising about limitations in no way affect the conclusion of the work. Short of putting infected people in a room with uninfected people, there is no ethical way to test the hypothesis that "m…

It seems to me that you're trying to fight two battles at once. 1. do masks inhibit production of and exposure to aerosols carrying SARS-COV-2? This seems (to me) to me clearly established, and essentially irrefutable. 2. do mask mandates reduce the spread of COVID19? this is an entirely different question, and has almost nothing whatsoever to do with the abilities of masks referenced in (1) above. I would suggest th…

> do masks inhibit production of and exposure to aerosols carrying SARS-COV-2? This seems (to me) to me clearly established, and essentially irrefutable.

Aerosols? It's far from established. In fact, it's a dubious claim, unless you're far more specific about what you mean by "masks". The best laboratory studies show that properly fitted respirators (i.e. as used in hospitals), can reduce aerosol emissions. But few people are wearing respirators, and essentially nobody is fitting them correctly.

Cloth masks? Surgical masks? Cup masks? About the only claim you can make is that they might reduce heavy droplets and then, only by about 30% or so. There's no reason to believe they have any effect on aerosol emission.

Michael Osterholm covered this extensively:

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/podcasts-webinars/specia...

Anyone who has done a mask fitting -- where they put you in a room with vaporized stuff that you can taste to detect leaks -- will tell you how difficult it is to get an aerosol-resistant seal on a mask. The chances that the general public is doing it is 0%.