FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > 2% of Londoners have Covid.
2% of Londoners have Covid.
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas." The big problem with 2% of Londoners having covid, especially the possibility of it being the new faster spreading kind, is that unchecked, 2% is 4% next week. And 8% the week after. 16% by mid January, 32% third week of January, 64% by end of January. That equates to between 50,000 and 100,000 dead by the end of January. In London alone. So no, probably not a good idea to for everyone to crack on with their lives as if things were normal, because if they do there's going to be a hell of a lot where their life is only another 4 to 6 weeks. | |||
| |||
"OP I'd listen to Polly if I were you She knows stuff" I agree with that  | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. The big problem with 2% of Londoners having covid, especially the possibility of it being the new faster spreading kind, is that unchecked, 2% is 4% next week. And 8% the week after. 16% by mid January, 32% third week of January, 64% by end of January. That equates to between 50,000 and 100,000 dead by the end of January. In London alone. So no, probably not a good idea to for everyone to crack on with their lives as if things were normal, because if they do there's going to be a hell of a lot where their life is only another 4 to 6 weeks." Especially if its all new improved covid with added infectiousness. That will spread through an undergound carriage like a dose of salts. | |||
"OP I'd listen to Polly if I were you She knows stuff I agree with that "Polly told me back in March " people will need a health certificate to fly" I laughed I aint laughing anymore | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. The big problem with 2% of Londoners having covid, especially the possibility of it being the new faster spreading kind, is that unchecked, 2% is 4% next week. And 8% the week after. 16% by mid January, 32% third week of January, 64% by end of January. That equates to between 50,000 and 100,000 dead by the end of January. In London alone. So no, probably not a good idea to for everyone to crack on with their lives as if things were normal, because if they do there's going to be a hell of a lot where their life is only another 4 to 6 weeks. Especially if its all new improved covid with added infectiousness. That will spread through an undergound carriage like a dose of salts." I heard on the radio earlier that 2 out of 3 if the infections there were from the new strain...so it look worryingly like it is gathering some momentum  | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas." And the bellend post of 2020 goes to... 2% have it, the R rate is above 1.... give it a week, 5% will have it, 2 weeks, 10%, 3 weeks, 20%, 4 weeks, 40%... I’m sure anyone working London’s ICU’s will love your flippant and to be blunt fkn selfish view. | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas." Let's just get on with our lives appropriately, which will not be as they were for quite some time. As Polly highlights, just having fairly slow growth in infected people in London,, can mean an awful tragedy for too many. If the 2& are actively socially, they may spread it to a greater number of people than the average person. The doubling of numbers can also escalate its rate, so doubling occurs in ever shorter time periods. | |||
| |||
That’s 2% that are aware they have it, equate that to UK towns and it’s all residents of Aberdeen or Bolton or Bournemouth.
Our numbers have trebled and not doubled, as predicted, in two weeks. Those mostly affected are 20-50, a switch from earlier in the year, along with significant increases in 15-19 and 20-29.
| |||
| |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate." Read the second post....and you still think the costs of your herd immunity is worth the deaths?...seriously  | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate. Read the second post....and you still think the costs of your herd immunity is worth the deaths?...seriously "Unfortunately many see the elderly or people with underlying conditions as collateral damage. | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate. Read the second post....and you still think the costs of your herd immunity is worth the deaths?...seriously
Unfortunately many see the elderly or people with underlying conditions as collateral damage."Yep and it's been the same ones since this started. | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. The big problem with 2% of Londoners having covid, especially the possibility of it being the new faster spreading kind, is that unchecked, 2% is 4% next week. And 8% the week after. 16% by mid January, 32% third week of January, 64% by end of January. That equates to between 50,000 and 100,000 dead by the end of January. In London alone. So no, probably not a good idea to for everyone to crack on with their lives as if things were normal, because if they do there's going to be a hell of a lot where their life is only another 4 to 6 weeks." If the 2% is 200,000 * then at those rates in 6 months time there would be 6,710,886,400,000 people infected. * far to lazy to check London population. | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. The big problem with 2% of Londoners having covid, especially the possibility of it being the new faster spreading kind, is that unchecked, 2% is 4% next week. And 8% the week after. 16% by mid January, 32% third week of January, 64% by end of January. That equates to between 50,000 and 100,000 dead by the end of January. In London alone. So no, probably not a good idea to for everyone to crack on with their lives as if things were normal, because if they do there's going to be a hell of a lot where their life is only another 4 to 6 weeks. If the 2% is 200,000 * then at those rates in 6 months time there would be 6,710,886,400,000 people infected. * far to lazy to check London population." I reckon its about right seeing is the population of London is around 10 million. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I wonder just how many of the 2% have just spread all over the country for Christmas? " Look at it the other way round. How many have contracted it outside london and gone back there with it. | |||
"I dont really believe any of the figures, you can expect it to be alot less, but yes it is hardly anyone, as you have to go by the total population of 9304000 mill and divide it by that, when they say they have it, it could also be a mild symptoms of it." Hardly anyone! you being serious? Seeing as the vast majority of people thet have it are asymptomatic it is likely to far higher than the numbers quoted. | |||
"I wonder just how many of the 2% have just spread all over the country for Christmas? Look at it the other way round. How many have contracted it outside london and gone back there with it." Exactly People travelling anywhere. And mixing with other humans, anywhere Can spread it Which is why we are all confined to our homes! | |||
"I wonder just how many of the 2% have just spread all over the country for Christmas? Look at it the other way round. How many have contracted it outside london and gone back there with it. Exactly People travelling anywhere. And mixing with other humans, anywhere Can spread it Which is why we are all confined to our homes!" However all across the forums people are just saying they should do what they think is right for their family. People are actively encouraging people to travel even when thay have said they aren't sure if they should. | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate." We have admitted our 3rd double infected patient this week... forget herd immunity | |||
"I dont really believe any of the figures, you can expect it to be alot less, but yes it is hardly anyone, as you have to go by the total population of 9304000 mill and divide it by that, when they say they have it, it could also be a mild symptoms of it." Every claim above is without any foundation in reality. | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate. We have admitted our 3rd double infected patient this week... forget herd immunity" Oh crap, thats really bad news.  | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate. We have admitted our 3rd double infected patient this week... forget herd immunity" Poor soul | |||
"I dont really believe any of the figures, you can expect it to be alot less, but yes it is hardly anyone, as you have to go by the total population of 9304000 mill and divide it by that, when they say they have it, it could also be a mild symptoms of it." You could have it mildly shag and give it to your mum, grandparent who might have it severely with potentially fatal consequences.. Do the math on what 2% of the population of London is and divide that figure with the number of icu beds in the capital . | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate. We have admitted our 3rd double infected patient this week... forget herd immunity" Really! Oh crap. | |||
| |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. The big problem with 2% of Londoners having covid, especially the possibility of it being the new faster spreading kind, is that unchecked, 2% is 4% next week. And 8% the week after. 16% by mid January, 32% third week of January, 64% by end of January. That equates to between 50,000 and 100,000 dead by the end of January. In London alone. So no, probably not a good idea to for everyone to crack on with their lives as if things were normal, because if they do there's going to be a hell of a lot where their life is only another 4 to 6 weeks." Absolutely spot in , well said | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate. We have admitted our 3rd double infected patient this week... forget herd immunity Oh crap, thats really bad news. "Not good at all.. | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas." Wow! Thought I'd heard it all but that's the height of it! Are people that ignorant?! | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate. We have admitted our 3rd double infected patient this week... forget herd immunity Really! Oh crap. "Serious question, Charli - how is CMFT evidencing re-infection, seeing as the overwhelming majority of cases in which first wave were never actually identified by PCR test? My infection included (I had Covid in the last week of March but they were only testing people admitted to hospital. Antibody testing by the NHS in August confirmed antibodies). Very few people before July/August had swab tests done and antibody testing by the NHS limited to certain individuals/situations. | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. The big problem with 2% of Londoners having covid, especially the possibility of it being the new faster spreading kind, is that unchecked, 2% is 4% next week. And 8% the week after. 16% by mid January, 32% third week of January, 64% by end of January. That equates to between 50,000 and 100,000 dead by the end of January. In London alone. So no, probably not a good idea to for everyone to crack on with their lives as if things were normal, because if they do there's going to be a hell of a lot where their life is only another 4 to 6 weeks." Your numbers are utter nonsense, we have enough experience of Covid to know that 100,000 dead by the end of January is never going to happen, lockdown or not. | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate." It's not a worthwhile solution, unless from vaccination. Too many people, in excess of the deaths, get organ damage and failure, others get crippling long covid and many will experience life long invisible damage that they don't even know they have but could predispose them for other fatalities in the future, | |||
| |||
"I dont really believe any of the figures, you can expect it to be alot less, but yes it is hardly anyone, as you have to go by the total population of 9304000 mill and divide it by that, when they say they have it, it could also be a mild symptoms of it." Shag - have you researched how the figures are produced, where they are derived from? We have to have some figures to rely on, so they need to be accurate and guide decisions, for the care and well-being of the population and country. The official numbers are the ones to use and don't need dividing by anything. Not everyone will be tested, so you also need to allow for this too. | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate. We have admitted our 3rd double infected patient this week... forget herd immunity Really! Oh crap.
Serious question, Charli - how is CMFT evidencing re-infection, seeing as the overwhelming majority of cases in which first wave were never actually identified by PCR test? My infection included (I had Covid in the last week of March but they were only testing people admitted to hospital. Antibody testing by the NHS in August confirmed antibodies). Very few people before July/August had swab tests done and antibody testing by the NHS limited to certain individuals/situations."There’s two methods of reporting firstly those suspected of previously infected based on the patients own testimony. The second which is the only figures taken as a solid basis (the first just give us a guide) is those who have swabbed positive or have shown positive on the antibody test prior to infection. | |||
"covid nonsense We should be allowed to get on with our normal lives now I refuse to wear a mask Total b sh#t" How incredibly naive and selfish. Why you’d want to declare that I do not know. | |||
"covid nonsense We should be allowed to get on with our normal lives now I refuse to wear a mask Total b sh#t How incredibly naive and selfish. Why you’d want to declare that I do not know." attention probably and I bet he’d be the first to whinge and whine on if he got it | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate. We have admitted our 3rd double infected patient this week... forget herd immunity Really! Oh crap.
Serious question, Charli - how is CMFT evidencing re-infection, seeing as the overwhelming majority of cases in which first wave were never actually identified by PCR test? My infection included (I had Covid in the last week of March but they were only testing people admitted to hospital. Antibody testing by the NHS in August confirmed antibodies). Very few people before July/August had swab tests done and antibody testing by the NHS limited to certain individuals/situations.
There’s two methods of reporting firstly those suspected of previously infected based on the patients own testimony. The second which is the only figures taken as a solid basis (the first just give us a guide) is those who have swabbed positive or have shown positive on the antibody test prior to infection.
"The reason I ask is that internationally, confirmed cases of re-infection are only being confirmed if genomic sequencing of the two positive tests demonstrates different strains causing each infection. Relying on patient testimony is, unfortunately, incredibly unreliable. Of the teachers and staff at our college who went for tests, suspecting symptoms (at least 40+ staff), only about 5 actually tested positive. Many of their children also had tests and I'm not aware of any staff with children testing positive at all. The negative ones had some sort of non specific symptom (like a cough), but did not have Covid. It's a fairly well characterised situation where viral shedding can occur for a long period in some people, including shedding viral RNA material after the patient ceases to be infectious (all published internationally). If it's all the same, I'd reserve judgement on true re-infection, unless sequencing confirms a patient has had conclusive positive tests from different strains of SARS-CoV-2. It's fair that re-infections might start happening more frequently, as natural antibody levels wane and the virus mutates, that I am of no doubt. | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas." Yawn. Yes let's just get on with life. If you didn't read about it you wouldn't notice it. Hyped to hell. | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. Yawn. Yes let's just get on with life. If you didn't read about it you wouldn't notice it. Hyped to hell. " Unless of course you had to self isolate or had it yourself or lost someone to it. | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. Yawn. Yes let's just get on with life. If you didn't read about it you wouldn't notice it. Hyped to hell. " Yeah mate, my sister writing goodbye letters to us all from hospital in April was something I totally didn't notice.. | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. Yawn. Yes let's just get on with life. If you didn't read about it you wouldn't notice it. Hyped to hell. " If you've not noticed it, you must be going about with blinkers on. Shopping in any shop is different/non existent (depending where you are). Hospitality is different/non existent. My job has changed beyond belief, as have the jobs of many others. | |||
| |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate. We have admitted our 3rd double infected patient this week... forget herd immunity Really! Oh crap.
Serious question, Charli - how is CMFT evidencing re-infection, seeing as the overwhelming majority of cases in which first wave were never actually identified by PCR test? My infection included (I had Covid in the last week of March but they were only testing people admitted to hospital. Antibody testing by the NHS in August confirmed antibodies). Very few people before July/August had swab tests done and antibody testing by the NHS limited to certain individuals/situations.
There’s two methods of reporting firstly those suspected of previously infected based on the patients own testimony. The second which is the only figures taken as a solid basis (the first just give us a guide) is those who have swabbed positive or have shown positive on the antibody test prior to infection.
The reason I ask is that internationally, confirmed cases of re-infection are only being confirmed if genomic sequencing of the two positive tests demonstrates different strains causing each infection.
Relying on patient testimony is, unfortunately, incredibly unreliable. Of the teachers and staff at our college who went for tests, suspecting symptoms (at least 40+ staff), only about 5 actually tested positive. Many of their children also had tests and I'm not aware of any staff with children testing positive at all. The negative ones had some sort of non specific symptom (like a cough), but did not have Covid.
It's a fairly well characterised situation where viral shedding can occur for a long period in some people, including shedding viral RNA material after the patient ceases to be infectious (all published internationally).
If it's all the same, I'd reserve judgement on true re-infection, unless sequencing confirms a patient has had conclusive positive tests from different strains of SARS-CoV-2.
It's fair that re-infections might start happening more frequently, as natural antibody levels wane and the virus mutates, that I am of no doubt."As I stated previously we only look at test confirmed results. As standard we investigate strains as it can influence treatment choices quite dramatically. We collect patient based information as an aside because in this pandemic it still has a value when viewed en masse. We know through track and trace data the patients mentioned have been positive previously and at a time when the variety they are now carrying wasn’t known. That’s about as accurate as anyone can get when we are talking about a virus we still do not fully understand. We have nowhere near enough data nationally or worldwide to draw conclusions surrounding natural immunity or indeed vaccination effectiveness which is quite a terrifying question filling out thoughts currently. From what you typed, do I assume you work in teaching? | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate." True, though sadly we will also have very full hospitals and grave yards. We have been in this long enough that no one should really be as so uneducated about the situation as the OP is | |||
"We will have herd immunity before we know it at this rate. We have admitted our 3rd double infected patient this week... forget herd immunity Really! Oh crap.
Serious question, Charli - how is CMFT evidencing re-infection, seeing as the overwhelming majority of cases in which first wave were never actually identified by PCR test? My infection included (I had Covid in the last week of March but they were only testing people admitted to hospital. Antibody testing by the NHS in August confirmed antibodies). Very few people before July/August had swab tests done and antibody testing by the NHS limited to certain individuals/situations.
There’s two methods of reporting firstly those suspected of previously infected based on the patients own testimony. The second which is the only figures taken as a solid basis (the first just give us a guide) is those who have swabbed positive or have shown positive on the antibody test prior to infection.
The reason I ask is that internationally, confirmed cases of re-infection are only being confirmed if genomic sequencing of the two positive tests demonstrates different strains causing each infection.
Relying on patient testimony is, unfortunately, incredibly unreliable. Of the teachers and staff at our college who went for tests, suspecting symptoms (at least 40+ staff), only about 5 actually tested positive. Many of their children also had tests and I'm not aware of any staff with children testing positive at all. The negative ones had some sort of non specific symptom (like a cough), but did not have Covid.
It's a fairly well characterised situation where viral shedding can occur for a long period in some people, including shedding viral RNA material after the patient ceases to be infectious (all published internationally).
If it's all the same, I'd reserve judgement on true re-infection, unless sequencing confirms a patient has had conclusive positive tests from different strains of SARS-CoV-2.
It's fair that re-infections might start happening more frequently, as natural antibody levels wane and the virus mutates, that I am of no doubt.
As I stated previously we only look at test confirmed results. As standard we investigate strains as it can influence treatment choices quite dramatically. We collect patient based information as an aside because in this pandemic it still has a value when viewed en masse.
We know through track and trace data the patients mentioned have been positive previously and at a time when the variety they are now carrying wasn’t known.
That’s about as accurate as anyone can get when we are talking about a virus we still do not fully understand.
We have nowhere near enough data nationally or worldwide to draw conclusions surrounding natural immunity or indeed vaccination effectiveness which is quite a terrifying question filling out thoughts currently.
From what you typed, do I assume you work in teaching? "I'm a microbiologist who now works in education, yes. I manage a team of science and engineering teachers but we also have other subjects and courses. Quite a number of staff had various symptoms this term, but few actually tested positive (fortunately). It's good to know genomic data is being used to confirm re-infections | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. The big problem with 2% of Londoners having covid, especially the possibility of it being the new faster spreading kind, is that unchecked, 2% is 4% next week. And 8% the week after. 16% by mid January, 32% third week of January, 64% by end of January. That equates to between 50,000 and 100,000 dead by the end of January. In London alone. So no, probably not a good idea to for everyone to crack on with their lives as if things were normal, because if they do there's going to be a hell of a lot where their life is only another 4 to 6 weeks." Yep. Was just coming along to say this. 2% is a massive number of people. | |||
| |||
| |||
"What sits weirdly with me, is how these new strains have popped up in England, where we have had lockdowns, masks, social distancing and have world beating research? How is it that they haven't popped up in countries where very little of those measures have been taken? If any. How wasn't it a country with near no measures, and a far higher population density? Where there is a barely functioning health service? It just sits very weirdly that it just happens to be a world leading country. " It's a mutation that could and will happen in probably every country. As for how it can spread here...just look at a few of the posters on this thread. Your answer is right here... | |||
| |||
"What sits weirdly with me, is how these new strains have popped up in England, where we have had lockdowns, masks, social distancing and have world beating research? How is it that they haven't popped up in countries where very little of those measures have been taken? If any. How wasn't it a country with near no measures, and a far higher population density? Where there is a barely functioning health service? It just sits very weirdly that it just happens to be a world leading country. " Genetic variations are going to occur, that's the nature of things. Masks, lockdowns etc doesn't stop the virus from existing, they just hinder the spread of it. As to a health service, well the covid 19 virus doesn't give a fiddlers about that. I think we know already the UK isn't unique in reporting new strains, although I understand it is ahead of the pack when it comes to genomic fingerprinting. | |||
| |||
"What sits weirdly with me, is how these new strains have popped up in England, where we have had lockdowns, masks, social distancing and have world beating research? How is it that they haven't popped up in countries where very little of those measures have been taken? If any. How wasn't it a country with near no measures, and a far higher population density? Where there is a barely functioning health service? It just sits very weirdly that it just happens to be a world leading country. " If the other countries aren't testing for different virus strains they won't be detected. We are testing so..... | |||
"All hyped by the press because they got butt fucked over brexit. If we had a Covexit vote we would be out of lockdown the next day. It’s up to people to look after themselves. " Do you have an ICU in your house?  | |||
"covid nonsense We should be allowed to get on with our normal lives now I refuse to wear a mask Total b sh#t How incredibly naive and selfish. Why you’d want to declare that I do not know." Attention seeker with nothing interesting or sensible to say probably | |||
"I think I remember reading somewhere that the who has had hundreds of strains reported to them, I guess this is just the first one that has taken hold of a population. Guess it was just sods law that it would be us. Hopefully there aren't too many more iterations either here or elsewhere... " There's thousands of mutations. The original Wuhan SARS-CoV-2 isn't circulating really anywhere, all the strains around the world now are genetically slightly different to the original (and are therefore mutants). This is very normal in single stranded RNA viruses. Single stranded genomes acquire mutations more frequently as there isn't a template strand like there is in double stranded genomes (like our double stranded DNA). However, all coronaviruses have an in-built genome proof reading mechanism, so many mistakes in the RNA replication get picked up and edited out. For comparison, single stranded RNA influenza viruses do not have the proof reading mechanism. Therefore the rate of mutation in coronaviruses is much lower than flu viruses. The UK has particular expertise in genomic sequencing and so we are characterising the mutations more quickly than many countries. Plenty of mutations ARE arising in other countries, they just aren't sequencing and identifying them as frequently/quickly. | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas." Think of things your way going to be a sad new year for many get real | |||
| |||
"Lets hope it gets weaker as it mutates and dies so we can get back to normal. " It's unlikely to become more lethal. More likely to become more transmissible, because that's what makes evolutionary sense. | |||
"Lets hope it gets weaker as it mutates and dies so we can get back to normal. " Had a few to many have you? | |||
| |||
"covid nonsense We should be allowed to get on with our normal lives now I refuse to wear a mask Total b sh#t How incredibly naive and selfish. Why you’d want to declare that I do not know." Saves having to hide his hypocrisy | |||
| |||
| |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. And the bellend post of 2020 goes to... 2% have it, the R rate is above 1.... give it a week, 5% will have it, 2 weeks, 10%, 3 weeks, 20%, 4 weeks, 40%... I’m sure anyone working London’s ICU’s will love your flippant and to be blunt fkn selfish view." I am certain your figures are correct however, if the Christmas party the OP is suggesting happened, the figures don't matter. Why? Because the starting 2% should be isolated and not passing the virus on ... Simples | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. And the bellend post of 2020 goes to... 2% have it, the R rate is above 1.... give it a week, 5% will have it, 2 weeks, 10%, 3 weeks, 20%, 4 weeks, 40%... I’m sure anyone working London’s ICU’s will love your flippant and to be blunt fkn selfish view. I am certain your figures are correct however, if the Christmas party the OP is suggesting happened, the figures don't matter. Why? Because the starting 2% should be isolated and not passing the virus on ... Simples "But alot of people dont know they have it | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. The big problem with 2% of Londoners having covid, especially the possibility of it being the new faster spreading kind, is that unchecked, 2% is 4% next week. And 8% the week after. 16% by mid January, 32% third week of January, 64% by end of January. That equates to between 50,000 and 100,000 dead by the end of January. In London alone. So no, probably not a good idea to for everyone to crack on with their lives as if things were normal, because if they do there's going to be a hell of a lot where their life is only another 4 to 6 weeks." But will they??? To self isolate you have to stay off work for 14 days (since been dropped to 10 days) so on that basis if you have 2% in week one, 4%in week two then by week three it’s drops back to 2% as week one are over and out of isolation? | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. And the bellend post of 2020 goes to... 2% have it, the R rate is above 1.... give it a week, 5% will have it, 2 weeks, 10%, 3 weeks, 20%, 4 weeks, 40%... I’m sure anyone working London’s ICU’s will love your flippant and to be blunt fkn selfish view. I am certain your figures are correct however, if the Christmas party the OP is suggesting happened, the figures don't matter. Why? Because the starting 2% should be isolated and not passing the virus on ... Simples
But alot of people dont know they have it "How do the boffins no the people have it but the people don't  | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. And the bellend post of 2020 goes to... 2% have it, the R rate is above 1.... give it a week, 5% will have it, 2 weeks, 10%, 3 weeks, 20%, 4 weeks, 40%... I’m sure anyone working London’s ICU’s will love your flippant and to be blunt fkn selfish view. I am certain your figures are correct however, if the Christmas party the OP is suggesting happened, the figures don't matter. Why? Because the starting 2% should be isolated and not passing the virus on ... Simples
But alot of people dont know they have it
How do the boffins no the people have it but the people don't "Michael Caine told them | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. And the bellend post of 2020 goes to... 2% have it, the R rate is above 1.... give it a week, 5% will have it, 2 weeks, 10%, 3 weeks, 20%, 4 weeks, 40%... I’m sure anyone working London’s ICU’s will love your flippant and to be blunt fkn selfish view. I am certain your figures are correct however, if the Christmas party the OP is suggesting happened, the figures don't matter. Why? Because the starting 2% should be isolated and not passing the virus on ... Simples
But alot of people dont know they have it
How do the boffins no the people have it but the people don't
Michael Caine told them "He da man | |||
"covid nonsense We should be allowed to get on with our normal lives now I refuse to wear a mask Total b sh#t" Then you are; a) a major part of the problem b) selfish c) fucking stupid 
E | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas." That's 180,000 people. Considering most Londoners have second homes, large communities that don't social distance, wear masks even though high risk, and the situation just gets worse. | |||
| |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. The big problem with 2% of Londoners having covid, especially the possibility of it being the new faster spreading kind, is that unchecked, 2% is 4% next week. And 8% the week after. 16% by mid January, 32% third week of January, 64% by end of January. That equates to between 50,000 and 100,000 dead by the end of January. In London alone. So no, probably not a good idea to for everyone to crack on with their lives as if things were normal, because if they do there's going to be a hell of a lot where their life is only another 4 to 6 weeks. But will they??? To self isolate you have to stay off work for 14 days (since been dropped to 10 days) so on that basis if you have 2% in week one, 4%in week two then by week three it’s drops back to 2% as week one are over and out of isolation?" IF everyone who was infected did self isolate for the whole period, then it would have died out last March or April, no more than three or four weeks after it first came into the country. But people keep refusing to self isolate, keep refusing to social distance, keep refusing to wear masks, keep refusing to practice appropriate infection control measures. No everyone, many many people have done their absolute best. But sufficient will not, and here we are now... Fact is that over the last couple of months, even with a lot of people totally sacrificing their personal life for the greater good, because of the actions of those that don't care and who think it won't matter if they catch it or just think it's everybody elses problem, the number of confirmed cases has been doubling and doubling and doubling and doubling. So now, it is only six doubles away from every single person in the country being exposed. At least then it will stop doubling. And there will be no need for vaccinations. It's christmas day though, so I'll refrain from pointing out the downside... Merry Christmas all, and wishing you a covid free New Year. | |||
"It's just been announced 24/12/2020, that 2% of Londoners have Covid. By definition, this means that 98% of Londoners DON'T have it. Let's just get on with our lives. Merry Christmas. The big problem with 2% of Londoners having covid, especially the possibility of it being the new faster spreading kind, is that unchecked, 2% is 4% next week. And 8% the week after. 16% by mid January, 32% third week of January, 64% by end of January. That equates to between 50,000 and 100,000 dead by the end of January. In London alone. So no, probably not a good idea to for everyone to crack on with their lives as if things were normal, because if they do there's going to be a hell of a lot where their life is only another 4 to 6 weeks. But will they??? To self isolate you have to stay off work for 14 days (since been dropped to 10 days) so on that basis if you have 2% in week one, 4%in week two then by week three it’s drops back to 2% as week one are over and out of isolation? IF everyone who was infected did self isolate for the whole period, then it would have died out last March or April, no more than three or four weeks after it first came into the country. But people keep refusing to self isolate, keep refusing to social distance, keep refusing to wear masks, keep refusing to practice appropriate infection control measures. No everyone, many many people have done their absolute best. But sufficient will not, and here we are now... Fact is that over the last couple of months, even with a lot of people totally sacrificing their personal life for the greater good, because of the actions of those that don't care and who think it won't matter if they catch it or just think it's everybody elses problem, the number of confirmed cases has been doubling and doubling and doubling and doubling. So now, it is only six doubles away from every single person in the country being exposed. At least then it will stop doubling. And there will be no need for vaccinations. It's christmas day though, so I'll refrain from pointing out the downside... Merry Christmas all, and wishing you a covid free New Year. " | |||
