When?????

[In Reverse]

there hasn't once been a shred of evidence of a related increase in case numbers.

I am not sure they did a peer review test of everyone attending and then tested them afterwards to reach this conclusion - the fact we have done no research is no reason to conclude its safe. Basically you are 100% assured to find no evidence if you dont do any research. The only conclusion you can reach is if you dont do research you dont have evidence, anything else is a guess.

As for outside you do realise the spikes that occured around football matches in Liverpool and abroad and the Goodwood festival so i don think this is a safe conclusion either [though of course this was pre social distancing]

we can say the risk of catching the virus outdoors is now practically zero.

You can say anything but you cannot prove this and i would argue the evidence disagrees with you - why no open air festivals? Concerts? Football crowds? etc
Unfortunately too many believe this so the infection rate is not going to go down.

Sorry John, going to have to disagree with everything you've said there.

We have a wide range of evidence streams to assess:

• ongoing ONS testing and reporting
• the Kings College Symptoms Tracker app, a dataset of c 4million users backed by testing of any reported symptoms (probably the strongest indicator of case numbers imo)
• daily updates on a variety of metrics from Public Health England
• data from NHS Pathways on 111 & 999 triage
• a bunch of other stuff that was used in the daily briefing slides that's still being published

...and several more.

You can get regional and historical data from pretty much all of those. I'd challenge you to go through them and find an upturn in cases numbers/111 calls/any other metric associated with any of the outdoor gatherings I mentioned. (*don't do this obvs as many people have already tried and failed)

The other things you've mentioned don't constitue evidence - a lack of football matches or festivals isn't evidence of high (or even moderate) risk of outdoor transmission. The reason they aren't currently allowed, as the CMO has explained, is because those outdoor events all have an associated indoor element - going to the pub before and after the match, travelling to the ground on public transport/in cars, being in bars and tents at festivals etc.

Every set of data above shows the number of infections falling, so I don't think it's particularly helpful (or accurate) to say things like "the infection rate is not going to go down" tbh.

[ScotRoutes]

I think the biggest issue with outdoor gatherings, be that beach, riot or rave, is that they are setting an expectation. Having dismissed the 2 metre guidance and the "no crowds" guidance, there is a higher risk of increased infection rates as folk begin to gather indoors.

Maybe this was always inevitable.

Smaller numbers or not, the evidence is that Wales, NI and Scotland have all done better by maintainimg a slightly stricter lockdown.

[Lazarus]

a lack of football matches or festivals isn't evidence of high (or even moderate) risk of outdoor transmission

You have missed my point we had thempre lockdown and people got infected - this is not disputable. They had spikes and clusters in he areas of the game and the Goodwood festival in both liverpool, cheltenham and also in spain from the away fans - i would strongly argue this proves that outside trasmission does occur and the reason there are no crowds now is because there is outside transimision. They also discouraged celebrating the win outside Anfield - why did they do that if the risk is " zero [ish]" outside as you claim?
Unless you have data on those before and those after[testing the same people and adecent % of attendees] there is no way to be certain it has not lead to cases- what you have shown is that the general population rates have not risen which is not the same as showing no one at these events got infected. I also accept , as there is no data, I cannot prove my claim either but neither view is impossible hence the debate/discussion.
Basically I think we dont know for certain and i would argue saying there is near zero outide is not provable and potentially a very risky assumption to make for you as an individual and society in general. It may well turn out to be true, with approproate social distancing measures deployed] but i dont think we can say this with any certainity currently- we need 4-6 weeks IMHO.
I would also cite what is happening in the US after lockdown and surges there - though of course it is the US being led by a moron so I am not sure i would wish to generalise from what rednecks do to the general world population.

On the plus side we have found the one person who trusts the government track and trace procedure and i assure you i have to dsagree with that


Also worth noting young people are both more likely to protest and more likely to be asymptomatic so not being tested[ if you have no symptoms why would you ] is not proof you are not infected.

South korea - which test everyone not just those infected found 22% of those 20-29 were infected for example

Its interesting doing science in realtime [and how quickly we have all become experts in infectious diseases ] as it shows the " data lag" issues- if no one smoked and we all started how long is the data lag till we know it causes smoking ? Also possibly one here but only time will tell.

[In Reverse]

I think the biggest issue with outdoor gatherings, be that beach, riot or rave, is that they are setting an expectation. Having dismissed the 2 metre guidance and the "no crowds" guidance, there is a higher risk of increased infection rates as folk begin to gather indoors.

The 2 metre guidance hasn't been dismissed. Everyone should still be following the 2m rule where possible. If that's not possible then other control measures should be used.

Smaller numbers or not, the evidence is that Wales, NI and Scotland have all done better by maintainimg a slightly stricter lockdown.

The evidence doesn't show correlation to strictness of lockdown - for instance Scotland has a far worse death rate than Sweden which had much more lax lockdown measures.

The evidence isnt currently available to properly compare Scotland with England either - the most recent set of data is 8 weeks old and shows England with 363.8 deaths per 100,000 population and Scotland, with 319.5 deaths per 100,000 population. Scotland has had a higher rate of cases than England through the intervening period so it's a reasonable assumption that their eventual excess mortality rates will be similar to or even worse than England's.

You can't just say "smaller numbers or not" either ffs

[In Reverse]

a lack of football matches or festivals isn't evidence of high (or even moderate) risk of outdoor transmission

You have missed my point we had thempre lockdown ... *loads more words*

I still disagree with pretty much everything there John but nevermind. we'll agree to disagree.

We've had 4-6 weeks of data btw, it's all there in those links I posted.

PS - the Liverpool-Atletico match and Cheltenham are both examples of outdor events where there is a large indoor element - pubs and bars in Liverpool/inside Anfield and all the bars at the racecourse. There's no evidnce to indicate significant outdoor transmission associated with either event.

[Lazarus]

Amusingly you are using the same arguments i do when i give you data as I do when you give data

There's no evidnce to indicate outdoor transmission associated with either event

.nor is their evidence it only occured in bars all we have is an event took place with crowds and folk got infected - you are free to argue it ONLY happend inside but you have to accept you cannot prove that claim - you cannot even try to prove it - and of course i cannot prove ,or try, to show ANY happened outside.
We dont know for certain do we?

the reality is they are not allowing outside crowds - You can decide for yourself what the reason is but I think its very hard to argue the reason is because its 100% safe [ish] outside but other things[which is essentially the pub] , they are about to allow/open , are the dangerous part - then again its this government so this contradiction may well indeed be their genuine view
After all a cricket ball is a "vector for disease" but a football is absolutely fine .

[wriggles]

Scottish high deathrate is due to 80% population living in the Glasgow-Edinburgh central belt and some of the highest density (& deprived) population in Europe. Compare to the Outer Hebredes, Orkney & SHetland or even Dumfries & Galloway with very low infection and mortality.

Sweden has a much lower population density. Only two cities have a population greater than 500k. Dont think can compare the two.

I cant believe that there is no transmission at densely packed out door events.

[In Reverse]

You haven't actually given me any data tbf John. Got any?

edit - you dont need to tbf. We're arguing at slightly crossed purposes anyway - you've missed a very important word in my original statement about the risk of outdoor transmission:

we can say the risk of catching the virus outdoors is now practically zero.

[In Reverse]

Sweden has a much lower population density. Only two cities have a population greater than 500k. Dont think can compare the two.

Absolutely agreed. I was using that as an illustration of why trying to compare countries using one variable isn't helpful. The final reckoning will be a lot more nuanced than just "strictness of lockdown conditions" or whatever.

[Lazarus]

I explained why there is no data so you know i dont have any data, you also know why i think your data does not answer /prove your argument.

Unfortunately we did not test rioters before or after or beach goers or celebrating fans and even if i did you would still say there was some "inside" component of the event.
Finally I dont need data whilst arging we dont know Its actually helpful to not have any when this is your view I get your point obviously but hope you get mine.

I have science degree and taught stats , briefly, at uni so I do understand your argument and the data [ though no expertise in diseases obvs] and it shows general rates [largely excluding asymptomatic cases] have not risen as measured by testing - this is still not the same as proving that outside events have zero ish transmission risk as you claimed.
I do not think you will be ableto prove this for the reasons mentioned in my various posts - nor can I prove mine for the same reason -no data

[In Reverse]

outside events have zero ish transmission risk as you claimed.

You keep saying that but it's not something I've ever said and is a deliberate misrepresentation of my actual point.

But I'll let it slide.

Veering slightly off-topic for a second - with your statistician's hat on, how accurate would you say it is to describe Black Lives Matters protestors as "rioters" and what conclusion might you infer about the person who described them thus?

[Lazarus]

we can say the risk of catching the virus outdoors is now practically zero

Is this what you will let it slide?
I do not think I am is interpreting this unkindly/unfairly by calling it zero[ish]

how accurate would you say it is to describe Black Lives Matters protestors as "rioters" and what conclusion might you infer about the person who described them thus?

I meant the right wing ones the BLM were noble protestors
Mea culpa apologies

That said my personal experience of protests is that there is always a fair number up for the fight and just there for the aggro and that is not just the coppers

[In Reverse]

we can say the risk of catching the virus outdoors is now practically zero

Is this what you will let it slide?
I do not think I am is interpreting this unkindly/unfairly by calling it zero[ish]

Nowhere in that sentence does it say anything about "outside events" - that's the misrepresentation and you kept banging on about it. I'm specifically talking about the outdoors risk now. If you're going about your normal business outdoors then the risk of you contracting the virus is practically zero.

No worries on the other bit - alarm bells were starting to ring though

[redefined_cycles]

Good banter... I'm with Andy. I'd defibelty have joined the protests and its about time

[Lazarus]

cannot say I blame you for the alarm bells and @shaf if it was not lockdown I would have been there with my kids


so 100,.000 of us in a park/beach/protest is fine as long as its not an event because its the event that makes it dangerous - just trying to be equally pedantic but of course i know that is not what you are actually saying

Personally i agree outside is generally safe but it really depends on how many of you are there and what you are doing there. and its almost certainly [ apart from complete isolation] the safest thing you can do

That said i wont be on the beach with 50000 others any time soon[ and that is not an event !!!]

[Jurassic]

I believe there is some evidence that the much mentioned football match/horse racing festival cases were overstated as a cause of mass spreading of the virus (although some spreading did occur). I've read that research carried out more recently suggested that people returning from foreign travel (and then returning to their own households) had resulted in far greater spread of the virus than from outdoor events. There's loads of theories and counter theories out there but there seems to be a lot of evidence that socially distanced outdoor contact presents very little risk.

[redefined_cycles]

https://www.cochrane.org/news/special-c ... tical-care

For anyone interested in evidence based reviews and Meta Analysis... Cochrane is a good source. After the H1N1 previously, the director of Cochrane released a special piece of research (massive meta analysis AFAIR) explaining how all the BS the world govts was totally flawed as well as pointing out the bits where they'd blatantly (sorry for using the word) bullshited us all. I'm keen for (and hope it will be) when thats released for the Covid when all this is over.

Certainly a site (used to be at least) very passionate about chasing the evidence...

[Bearbonesnorm]

For anyone interested in evidence based reviews and Meta Analysis.

Don't you come round here muddying the waters with your evidence based analysis. We want speculation, gut reaction and knee jerk, thank you very much

[Cheeky Monkey]

For anyone interested in evidence based reviews and Meta Analysis.

Don't you come round here muddying the waters with your evidence based analysis. We want speculation, gut reaction and knee jerk, thank you very much

Without meaning to be mean to Shaf I think he's on a 50 / 50 strike rate of "presenting evidence"

[whitestone]

Sometimes I wonder why I bother.

I'm trying to manage small groups (three people or less) attempting a challenge. Normally it's register a date/time of your choosing and set off but we've settled on only one group per hour - to set an example.

Then you get the great unwashed/uneducated (uneducatable?) displaying all the social skills of a flatulent rhino at a vicar's tea party.

Lockdown ended when a certain government advisor saw fit to travel half the length of the country to take his symptomatic wife to visit his at risk parents. Everything since then has been soundbites to cover over the ineffectiveness of any meaningful policies.

[redefined_cycles]

For anyone interested in evidence based reviews and Meta Analysis.

Don't you come round here muddying the waters with your evidence based analysis. We want speculation, gut reaction and knee jerk, thank you very much

Without meaning to be mean to Shaf I think he's on a 50 / 50 strike rate of "presenting evidence"

took me a while...

This week been on one shift which every one was probably fighting for (but cos I'm good at driving 2 hours straight I probably won) and the other for my contracted work. Almost totally dead at both hospitals but word on the street is that when services open back up fully and properly we'll have more work than we can shake a stick at !!

In the meanwhile I'm managing to make up my 'bike-spending money' by moving stuff forth which is good as it helps me clear out alot of unneeded stuff...

Plus, I have time to make Redefined-boxes... Hope Wriggles appreciates the work thats gone into this beauty...

[wriggles]

He does. Im sure that will be perfect

[MuddyPete]

When?

Not just yet...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-c ... d+Cumbria+

[RIP]

"Fires on summit cairns", "Refused to leave after being asked. Fined".

FFS.

Does us absolutely no favours at all.

Uh-oh, I can see Stu coming..... <runs away, hides at a safe distance behind sofa, puts fingers in ears>

[RIP]

"In the Ullswater area".