Do we need to take individual responsibility for Covid prevention measures?

[rmurphy195]

When the government claims to have me their target of testing 100k/ week (which is woefully inadequate in terms of being any sort of useful measure of what public health measures are needed) but in fact have managed fewer than 1/2 of that amount...

It doesn’t matter who is or isn’t being tested - they’re lying.

I couldn’t get a test for love nor money at that time, because they were only testing hospital inpatients.

Well, you may have noticed that as capacity increased so did the range of people who could apply.

[[XAP]Bob]

When the government claims to have me their target of testing 100k/ week (which is woefully inadequate in terms of being any sort of useful measure of what public health measures are needed) but in fact have managed fewer than 1/2 of that amount...

It doesn’t matter who is or isn’t being tested - they’re lying.

I couldn’t get a test for love nor money at that time, because they were only testing hospital inpatients.

Well, you may have noticed that as capacity increased so did the range of people who could apply.

At the time they were claiming that they were hitting their targets with fewer than 1/2 of that target being tested.

The suggestion given was that it was because people weren't asking for them.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Absolutely bang on time, 2 weeks after all the idiots started ‘protesting’ the numbers of deaths are on the up. Yesterday’s sterling efforts on Bournemouth and Poole beaches, and outside Anfield are not going to help either. We are going to get locked down again pretty soon, I just hope the government don’t pay people to be locked away this time, perhaps then they’ll learn. You do not mess with SARS-CoV-2, it’s in charge, not the politicians, not the scientists. Just as things were looking more positive, a load of complete idiots have screwed it up for everyone.

[Paulatic]

Absolutely bang on time, 2 weeks after all the idiots started ‘protesting’ the numbers of deaths are on the up..

As AFAIK people don’t die the minute they contract the virus. Wouldn’t the number of new infections be more of an indicator to two weeks earlier?
I note Scotland number of new infections rose today to 17 whilst the 7 day average is still falling.

Does England produce their figures, I’ve never found them, as I only ever see a figure for the UK.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Absolutely bang on time, 2 weeks after all the idiots started ‘protesting’ the numbers of deaths are on the up..

As AFAIK people don’t die the minute they contract the virus. Wouldn’t the number of new infections be more of an indicator to two weeks earlier?
I note Scotland number of new infections rose today to 17 whilst the 7 day average is still falling.

Does England produce their figures, I’ve never found them, as I only ever see a figure for the UK.

A lot of people develop symptoms within a couple of days of contracting it, if they’re going to die, it’s usually a week to 10 days after it starts, this up tick is very much in keeping with the timings.

[Paulatic]

Absolutely bang on time, 2 weeks after all the idiots started ‘protesting’ the numbers of deaths are on the up..

As AFAIK people don’t die the minute they contract the virus. Wouldn’t the number of new infections be more of an indicator to two weeks earlier?
I note Scotland number of new infections rose today to 17 whilst the 7 day average is still falling.

Does England produce their figures, I’ve never found them, as I only ever see a figure for the UK.

A lot of people develop symptoms within a couple of days of contracting it, if they’re going to die, it’s usually a week to 10 days after it starts, this up tick is very much in keeping with the timings.

Aye but if i Iooked at my own region we’ve not had a death for nearly 6 weeks. We’ve even had many days without any new cases but today we’ve 10. If I had been looking at deaths it would have given no idea of infections. Which is why I asked is it not better to look at the new infections number?