On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 19:37:01 +0000, mechanic <mechanic@example.net>
wrote:

>On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 11:06:55 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> I first saw them at scale in a pub which had just reopened with
>> stringent Covid precautions. Tables separated, pre-booked only, one-way
>> system, one person in toilets at a time, table service only etc. It was
>> not at all clear what protection they gave either the waitresses or
>> customers.
>
>That was when we were fed the 'droplets' theory, science is now
>reluctantly moving to the aerosol idea where earlier instructions to
>clean surfaces and wash hands have given way to more emphasis on
>ventilation and effective masks.

Science isn't "reluctantly" moving, it's following the data as it has
been collected.

In the early stages of the pandemic, droplet transmission was the most
plausible hypothesis because that is known to be a major transmission
vector of other respiratory diseases such as colds and flu. In the
absence of any other data, it would have been foolish in the extreme to
have disregarded the possibility that Covid also spreads in much the
same way. As more data was gathered, the evidence for aerosol
transmission became stronger, and now, over two years in, that has
become the generally accepted consensus. But that doesn't mean the
initial hypothesis was a bad one, it simply demonstrates that the most
important part of science is collecting data and then responding to it.

Mark

Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 19:37:01 +0000, mechanic <mechanic@example.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 11:06:55 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> I first saw them at scale in a pub which had just reopened with
>>> stringent Covid precautions. Tables separated, pre-booked only, one-way
>>> system, one person in toilets at a time, table service only etc. It was
>>> not at all clear what protection they gave either the waitresses or
>>> customers.
>>
>> That was when we were fed the 'droplets' theory, science is now
>> reluctantly moving to the aerosol idea where earlier instructions to
>> clean surfaces and wash hands have given way to more emphasis on
>> ventilation and effective masks.
>
> Science isn't "reluctantly" moving, it's following the data as it has
> been collected.
>
> In the early stages of the pandemic, droplet transmission was the most
> plausible hypothesis because that is known to be a major transmission
> vector of other respiratory diseases such as colds and flu. In the
> absence of any other data, it would have been foolish in the extreme to
> have disregarded the possibility that Covid also spreads in much the
> same way. As more data was gathered, the evidence for aerosol
> transmission became stronger, and now, over two years in, that has
> become the generally accepted consensus. But that doesn't mean the
> initial hypothesis was a bad one, it simply demonstrates that the most
> important part of science is collecting data and then responding to it.
>

I think the authorities were much too slow to take note of the early
evidence of airborne transmission which quickly emerged. The early papers
citing this evidence were rejected because they questioned the received
wisdom, and the WHO was really slow to update its bad advice.

On 22/03/2022 19:23, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 22/03/2022 13:47, Recliner wrote:
>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 12:06:18 +0000, mechanic <mechanic@example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:13:01 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mainly because it's the only such disease where in plenty of areas 10%
>>>>> of the population have it during any one week (it's 11% here). Also
>>>>> apparently the second most infectious one, behind measles.
>>>>
>>>> Strange that we've eliminated smallpox, ebola, even measles to some
>>>> extent, but given up on covid.
>>>
>>> Because it's evolved to become a pretty benign disease, much like the
>>> common cold. We've not tried to eliminate colds,
>>> either.
>>
>> They've been trying to cure colds for around 70 years, they haven't
>> succeeded yet.
>>
>
> AIUI one of the problems is that there are around 400 different Common
> Colds with very similar symptoms but caused by at least four totally
> different classes of virus.
>
>
> Anna Noyd-Dryver
>

I've heard something similar. And while I understand that some strains
of the rhinovirus are technically treatable, the proliferation of other
strains pretty much cancels out any real benefit.

The task, AIUI, is to understand the structure of the rhinovirus itself.
That would subsequently allow research for treatment across the board.
Unfortunately, however, they have not successfully cracked that.

On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 15:52:22 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:

[snipping other nonsense]

> the most important part of science is collecting data and then
> responding to it.

Unfortunately there was reluctance (not least in the WHO) to accept
that the original idea was wrong, so valuable time was lost getting
people to put the right precautions in place. Boris tells us that
the (UK) govt is 'following the science' but what he wants to
science to do is support the govt decisions. Once again more lives
unnecessarily lost.

Of course there are many other examples of scientific ideas to
persist long after careful experiment have proved them wrong.

On 24/03/2022 06:55, Tweed wrote:
> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 22/03/2022 12:06, mechanic wrote:
>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:13:01 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mainly because it's the only such disease where in plenty of areas 10%
>>>> of the population have it during any one week (it's 11% here). Also
>>>> apparently the second most infectious one, behind measles.
>>>
>>> Strange that we've eliminated smallpox, ebola, even measles to some
>>> extent, but given up on covid.
>>
>> We can also easily effectively treat some cancers in some cases, yet we
>> have not found a cure for the common cold.
>>
>
> Well we might get closer to preventing *some* of the common cold viruses.
> Like cancers, the cold isn’t just one disease but just a catch all term. I
> think the huge advance in deploying the newish vaccine technologies for
> covid can now be applied to these viruses.
>

Were that the case.

I've had all three vaccines, yet I caught two colds -- one in March and
one in October.

On 24/03/2022 19:37, mechanic wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 11:06:55 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> I first saw them at scale in a pub which had just reopened with
>> stringent Covid precautions. Tables separated, pre-booked only, one-way
>> system, one person in toilets at a time, table service only etc. It was
>> not at all clear what protection they gave either the waitresses or
>> customers.
>
> That was when we were fed the 'droplets' theory, science is now
> reluctantly moving to the aerosol idea where earlier instructions to
> clean surfaces and wash hands have given way to more emphasis on
> ventilation and effective masks.

I always either wash my hands or rub them in alcohol when using the
Underground or bus as I am convinced that I have fallen ill with a cold
after touching surfaces.

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 24/03/2022 06:55, Tweed wrote:
>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 22/03/2022 12:06, mechanic wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:13:01 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mainly because it's the only such disease where in plenty of areas 10%
>>>>> of the population have it during any one week (it's 11% here). Also
>>>>> apparently the second most infectious one, behind measles.
>>>>
>>>> Strange that we've eliminated smallpox, ebola, even measles to some
>>>> extent, but given up on covid.
>>>
>>> We can also easily effectively treat some cancers in some cases, yet we
>>> have not found a cure for the common cold.
>>>
>>
>> Well we might get closer to preventing *some* of the common cold viruses.
>> Like cancers, the cold isn’t just one disease but just a catch all term. I
>> think the huge advance in deploying the newish vaccine technologies for
>> covid can now be applied to these viruses.
>>
>
> Were that the case.
>
> I've had all three vaccines, yet I caught two colds -- one in March and
> one in October.
>

I didn’t say we were there yet…..

Yes I’ve had some nasty colds recently. Not covid, or at least not
according to the lateral flow tests.

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 24/03/2022 19:37, mechanic wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 11:06:55 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> I first saw them at scale in a pub which had just reopened with
>>> stringent Covid precautions. Tables separated, pre-booked only, one-way
>>> system, one person in toilets at a time, table service only etc. It was
>>> not at all clear what protection they gave either the waitresses or
>>> customers.
>>
>> That was when we were fed the 'droplets' theory, science is now
>> reluctantly moving to the aerosol idea where earlier instructions to
>> clean surfaces and wash hands have given way to more emphasis on
>> ventilation and effective masks.
>
> I always either wash my hands or rub them in alcohol when using the
> Underground or bus as I am convinced that I have fallen ill with a cold
> after touching surfaces.
>

Aeroplane flu (falling ill shortly after flying, which afflicts me often)
is now thought to be due to contaminated surfaces, such as the tray tables,
arm rests etc, rather than the air conditioning.

On 25/03/2022 17:51, Tweed wrote:
> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 24/03/2022 19:37, mechanic wrote:
>>> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 11:06:55 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>>> I first saw them at scale in a pub which had just reopened with
>>>> stringent Covid precautions. Tables separated, pre-booked only, one-way
>>>> system, one person in toilets at a time, table service only etc. It was
>>>> not at all clear what protection they gave either the waitresses or
>>>> customers.
>>>
>>> That was when we were fed the 'droplets' theory, science is now
>>> reluctantly moving to the aerosol idea where earlier instructions to
>>> clean surfaces and wash hands have given way to more emphasis on
>>> ventilation and effective masks.
>>
>> I always either wash my hands or rub them in alcohol when using the
>> Underground or bus as I am convinced that I have fallen ill with a cold
>> after touching surfaces.
>>
>
> Aeroplane flu (falling ill shortly after flying, which afflicts me often)
> is now thought to be due to contaminated surfaces, such as the tray tables,
> arm rests etc, rather than the air conditioning.
>

I've heard same.

On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 17:31:59 +0000, mechanic <mechanic@example.net>
wrote:

>On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 15:52:22 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
>
>[snipping other nonsense]
>
>> the most important part of science is collecting data and then
>> responding to it.
>
>Unfortunately there was reluctance (not least in the WHO) to accept
>that the original idea was wrong, so valuable time was lost getting
>people to put the right precautions in place.

Remind me again what your qualifications are in this field.

Mark

In message <pqqo3hh9jfint0oe6npsfmmptq72tu3olk@4ax.com>, at 13:03:39 on
Thu, 24 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>>>>>The Flu annual cycle is because they have to try and predict which
>>>>>variant is likely to be the one going round this year. It's quite
>>>>>possible that Covid could end up in a similar position.
>>>>
>>>>That doesn't quite work, because the flu variants they are immunising
>>>>against are already in circulation, they just try to predict which might
>>>>be in the ascendancy six months later.
>>>>
>>>>Covid variants are all brand new.
>>>
>>>No, they aren't brand new. They evolve from existing successful
>>>variants, so we do have clues about what might come
>>>next.
>>
>>Timelines again. They are "brand new" compared to the flu viruses which
>>are selected to be jabbed against each Autumn. And in any event Omicron
>>for example is still "new" in the timescale of creating, testing and
>>rolling out a new vaccine.
>>
>>See below for the dates the Omicrons were first discovered.
>>
>>>> Unless anyone thinks that Alpha (or
>>>>whatever) will be making a comeback next year.
>>>
>>>No, but next winter's dominant variant is very likely to be a
>>>descendant of the current Omicron BA.2 sub-variant. So, a
>>>vaccine designed to combat BA.2 is likely to be much more effective
>>>than one designed to combat Alpha.
>>
>>I'm confident that prediction is as unfounded as others of yours. Like
>>"there won't be a third wave". It doesn't mean there isn't a slim
>>possibility it'll be true, but you are coming across as over-confident.
>>
>>>"Reinfection with BA.2 following infection with BA.1 has been
>>>documented, however, initial data from population-level
>>>reinfection studies suggest that infection with BA.1 provides strong
>>>protection against reinfection with BA.2, at least
>>>for the limited period for which data are available."
>>>
>>><https://www.who.int/news/item/22-02-2022-statement-on-omicron-subline
>>>age-ba.2>
>>
>>More data on Covid lineages at:
>>
>>https://cov-lineages.org/lineage_list.html
>>
>>BA.1 mid Sept 2021
>>BA.2 mid Nov 2021
>>BA.3 end Nov 2021, also an Omicron; you can read the rest for yourself.
>
>The point is that these are close cousins, and prior infection with one
>provides good protection against its cousins.
>It's likely that the same will be true of vaccines, so an
>Omicron-focused vaccine will probably be more effective now
>than the original formulations, even if the virus has evolved further
>by the autumn, which is likely.

As ever, I'm disinclined to make such assumptions unless confirmed by a
qualified epidemiologist.
--
Roland Perry

In message <BMKdnRuxocYQJaH_nZ2dnUU7-fvNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
18:29:33 on Thu, 24 Mar 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
remarked:
>> We took a General Studies A Level, for which there was little or no
>> teaching and everyone got a good grade for turning up.  Universities and
>> employers were looking for "n A Levels excluding General Studies".
>> It wasn't entirely trivial.  It had a strong arty bias (whereas my
>> strengths were scientific) and required recalling to roughly O-Level
>> standard a modern language that we'd had two years to forget.
>
>My school forced people in the lower sixth who weren't doing an A level
>language to do a spurious GCSE language, which timetabling quirks meant
>had to be Spanish (continuing with the compulsory French or German from
>GCSEs would surely have made more sense).

The secondary school my children went to had a significant demand from
parents for Spanish lessons.

But none of the parents could answer the question "we can only afford
two language teachers, which of the German or French ones do you want us
to make redundant".

I did wonder why we couldn't send one of them off to do some evening
classes in Spanish, but that was above my pay-grade.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t1eri8$g6k$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:08:08 on Wed, 23 Mar
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t1elej$372$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:23:47 on Wed, 23 Mar
>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 23/03/2022 08:12, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <t1crcs$4gd$2@dont-email.me>, at 15:53:00 on Tue, 22 Mar
>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 22/03/2022 13:57, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <190dku9sht17s$.dlg@example1357.net>, at 12:06:18 on
>>>>>> Tue, 22  Mar 2022, mechanic <mechanic@example.net> remarked:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:13:01 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mainly because it's the only such disease where in plenty of areas 10%
>>>>>>>> of the population have it during any one week (it's 11% here). Also
>>>>>>>> apparently the second most infectious one, behind measles.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Strange that we've eliminated smallpox, ebola, even measles to some
>>>>>>> extent, but given up on covid.
>>>>
>>>>>>  It takes a generation (or more) to eradicate a disease. And then
>>>>>> you can  only do the ones which aren't mutating in real time.
>>>>>>  There was a TV commercial last night saying that Covid
>>>>>> vaccinations <quote> like all others wear off so need to be boosted.
>>
>>>>>>  That'll be news to people given HPV which I think they've now
>>>>>> decided is  a once-a-lifetime jab.
>>>>
>>>>> Quite a few vaccines need topping up, IIRC yellow fever only lasts 7
>>>>> years. Cut yourself on a rusty nail and you'll get a tetanus booster
>>>>> and so on.
>>
>>>> Yes, not every traditional vaccine lasts a lifetime (or half a
>>>> lifetime), but most last more than six months.
>>>
>>> The operative word being "most".
>>
>> Yes, but apart from Covid which other ones last only six months? The TV
>> adverts are trying to give the impression that "most" traditionally only
>> last six months, which is why we need to accept the need to "also" get
>> re-jabbed for Covid every six months.
>
>That's only for over-75s.

No, it's also for various vulnerable groups. I know two people who have
been quadruple-jabbed since as long ago as January.
--
Roland Perry

In message <atoe0djbfzse$.dlg@example1357.net>, at 19:37:01 on Thu, 24
Mar 2022, mechanic <mechanic@example.net> remarked:
>On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 11:06:55 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> I first saw them at scale in a pub which had just reopened with
>> stringent Covid precautions. Tables separated, pre-booked only, one-way
>> system, one person in toilets at a time, table service only etc. It was
>> not at all clear what protection they gave either the waitresses or
>> customers.
>
>That was when we were fed the 'droplets' theory, science is now
>reluctantly moving to the aerosol idea where earlier instructions to
>clean surfaces and wash hands have given way to more emphasis on
>ventilation and effective masks.

I suppose I always did think it was mainly transmitted by the smaller
droplets know trendily known as aerosols, rather than spit and sneeze.

Still wouldn't want a Covid person to spit in my face though.
--
Roland Perry

In message <kjcm3hpkbjgcv7cbmjo0k7k118f006k2bs@4ax.com>, at 14:56:58 on
Wed, 23 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Masks stop droplets, which is almost irrelevant for Covid.
>>>>>
>>>>> They stop 95% of virus sized particulates, too.
>>>>
>>>> Not most masks. Only a tiny minority of the public, or even hospital staff,
>>>> wear properly fitted N95 respirator masks.
>>
>>Here we go again "properly fitted". Maybe you don't know how to
>>properly fit one, but others do.
>
>Really? It's not in evidence.

Snip, basic arse-covering advice at about the level of "Pop tarts might
be hot when heated".
--
Roland Perry

In message <t1f13m$rl6$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:42:46 on Wed, 23 Mar
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t1es95$lln$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:20:21 on Wed, 23 Mar
>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>> As for new vaccines, they seem to have dropped off the news cycle. Last
>>>> I heard (and I'm not following it closely) they were declining to play
>>>> "whack a mole" with new variants, on the basis by the time a new vaccine
>>>> was on the streets that variant would have come and gone.
>>>
>>> Not so. In your diligent study of the scientific literature, this must
>>> have escaped you:
>>> <https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/news/pfizer-omicron-vaccine-trial/>
>>
>> Timelines never were your strong point, but good for Pfizer trying.
>
>As always, you're surly and ungrateful when someone educates you.

I'm always grateful for well informed education.

>I'm sure you were really popular among your colleagues when you were
>still employed!

Ad-hom noted (did you take the same approach with colleagues when you
were working), I've always been very popular with colleagues as it
happens, and quite unusually with colleagues both up and down the food
chain.

> No wonder you had so many, short-lived jobs in your brief period of
>employment.

Ad-hom noted (sure sign of clutching at straws). My employment
continues, so that's around 48 years now. More than enough to have
earned a full state pension.

Of course, the way my career evolved (always seeking out the latest
bleeding edge technologies) is inherent in my ability to adapt and learn
about multiple industries. I know people who spent a lifetime in just
one industry find it hard to understand why someone could know so much
about so many, but after a year or two one can get stuck in a rut, and
it's time to move on.

>>> Masks stop droplets, which is almost irrelevant for Covid.
>>
>> They stop 95% of virus sized particulates, too.
>
>Not most masks. Only a tiny minority of the public, or even hospital staff,
>wear properly fitted N95 respirator masks.

But isn't an argument against those of us who wear properly fitted
ones. I have to admire the way you so easily dismiss the ability of
professionals to do something as trivial as wearing mask properly.

How do any of them even manage to tie their shoelaces?
--
Roland Perry

In message <gihp3hhuttnadu9d49q08lmnelk2aq2uir@4ax.com>, at 20:40:46 on
Thu, 24 Mar 2022, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
remarked:
>On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 11:00:18 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <t1g6oc$m2p$2@dont-email.me>, at 22:25:16 on Wed, 23 Mar
>>2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>>>> If you are susceptible for whatever reason you need to take *your
>>>>>>> own* precautions, wearing proper FFP3 masks and probably reducing
>>>>>>> your contact with others.
>>>>
>>>>> What about those who cannot wear FFP3 masks?
>>>>
>>>> It's not clear to me who that set comprises. In the early days there
>>>> were some issues with FFP2 masks popping off people's ears all the time,
>>>> but now you can get a gadget that pulls the strings round the back of
>>>> you head instead.
>>>
>>>One which I read in a comment on FB today was autistic people who are
>>>hypersensitive to things touching their face.
>>
>>Autistic people who are that sensitive will have many much greater
>>issues to deal with wrt Covid (and I'm not just saying that, a close
>>friend's day job is respite carer for autistic children whose parents
>>can no longer cope with them 24x7).
>>
>Autism can be very variable in the combinations of features and other
>physical or mental conditions which can accompany them.

Yes I know.

>Many will have their autism not immediately apparent to those they
>work/live with but with individual elements which are.

Being hypersensitive about anything touching their face is not something
that's likely to have been overlooked by their carers.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t1fjve$qc7$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:04:46 on Wed, 23 Mar
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t1fd2r$t3e$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:07:07 on Wed, 23 Mar
>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t1f8a9$me7$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:45:45 on Wed, 23 Mar
>>>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Expecting others to go round wearing non FFP3 masks to save
>>>>>>> you is basically just like relying on a lucky rabbit’s foot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If that's the situation, why were people ever told to wear masks?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Because it slows the rate of infection a bit, and if you are
>>>>>trying to stop
>>>>> your hospitals from being overwhelmed it is helpful. What they
>>>>>won’t do is
>>>>> stop you from ultimately getting infected, just delaying it. As one senior
>>>>> medic put it (I forget which), there are two groups in the population,
>>>>> those who have had omicron and those who are going to get it.
>>>>
>>>> The advice in question was long before any variants had been identified.
>>>
>>> My point was the original advice was issued to smooth out the load on
>>> hospitals. Nothing to do with variants.
>>>
>>> My second point is Omicron is sufficiently infectious that you will get it
>>> at some point.
>>
>> Indeed, but you've been conflating the two somewhat.
>>
>> Back at the start, masks were thought (and I happen to think with some
>> justification) to assist in not-overwhelming hospitals. So apart from
>> preventing people randomly snogging each other, there was probably some
>> useful amount of virus particle filtering going on.
>
>At that early stage, it was thought Covid would be like flu, and mainly
>transmitted through droplets. If that were the case, then almost any mask
>would significantly reduce transmission. Later, it was found that Covid was
>mainly airborne, so most ordinary masks and shields do little to reduce
>transmission, and that includes surgical masks.

I won't dispute that those measures were more theatre than anything
else. It was apparent to me at the time.

>Better ventilation and strong UV lights would be much more useful.

Yes, only meeting people outdoors was one of the precautions I felt
easiest to deploy.

>So it now turns out that the early, well-meaning advice was largely wrong.
>But the authorities were very slow to acknowledge the error.

There's another aspect - shortages of the better masks meant they didn't
want to cause panic buying amongst the general population, which would
mean none available for those who most needed them.
--
Roland Perry

In message <fd2h3hl91adh3h8qap289cdlulek0i9ppq@4ax.com>, at 14:26:56 on
Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>>>>>> Greater Anglia is currently advertising to potential passengers in East
>>>>>> Anglia (on various TV and catch-up channels) to the effect that "It's
>>>>>> not as dangerous as you think to travel on our trains, because we've
>>>>>> deep-cleaned them".
>>>>>
>>>>>That was the slogan for public-transport operators a year ago.
>>>>
>>>>Odd then, I first saw the adverts this weekend.
>>>
>>>Things must move very slowly in time-warped Ely.
>>
>>As far as I know the speed of light is still the same, so if I was
>>watching a programme yesterday, it was probably transmitted yesterday.
>>The culprit here is Greater Anglia.
>
>Yes, but they're catering to yokels like you.

I thought I'd revisit this, because I saw the advert again. The local
demographic splits into three main groups:

Locals who have been here all their lives.
Townies who have retired to the country <waves>.
Incomers who use it as a dormitory for commuting to higher-waged places.

There's a ripple effect in the latter, because quite a few people
commute into Ely (where they can't afford to live) from places like
March and Downham Market.

I don't think any of these three groups is particularly interested in
using trains for leisure purposes, not least because the vast majority
are wedded to their cars.

I suspect the adverts must be for people in East London wanting to go to
the seaside via Colchester.

Meanwhile, GA has sawn off the branch it's sitting on, as far as people
here are concerned, with this news about Easter:

"Railway lines between King's Lynn and London will be blocked
this Easter bank holiday weekend.

Works are taking place in the East of England, blocking lines
through Cambridgeshire, Essex and Hertfordshire.

Greater Anglia passengers are set to face a full line closure
all weekend at Bishop's Stortford - between Cambridge and
London Liverpool Street.

On Easter Sunday (April 17), works are taking place on the line
between Ely and King's Lynn.

There will be no Great Northern or Greater Anglia trains to
Littleport, Downham Market, Watlington or King's Lynn when the
line is closed."

And maybe of more interest to you:

"The Piccadilly line will be closed between Acton Town and
Heathrow Airport."

>>>>>Postponed family reunions happened last year, when international travel
>>>>>opened up again.
>>>>
>>>>I didn't open up until around October.
>>>
>>>There was plenty of foreign travel before October.
>>><https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/traffic-light-system-safe-
>>>return-to-international-travel>
>>
>>Most of that is holiday travel. The USA only relaxed restrictions much
>>later:
>> "WASHINGTON, Sept 20 (Reuters) - The United States will reopen
>> in November to air travelers from 33 countries including China,
>> India, Brazil and most of Europe who are fully vaccinated
>> against COVID-19, the White House said on Monday, easing tough
>> pandemic-related restrictions that started early last year."
>
>You have an American wife,

She's been naturalised British longer than living here as 'just' a
permanent resident.

>but not everyone's family is American.

It may not have escaped your attention that the Europe-US air corridor
is one of the busiest in the world. Regardless of travel for family
purposes.

>>What happened to Herd immunity. HaHa! Bonk.
>
>We've pretty much reached herd immunity, thanks to the vaccines. That's
>why most of us don't worry about it any more.

Not even the 1:20 (or whatever) who today have Covid? Some catching
Omicron for a second time.

--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <gihp3hhuttnadu9d49q08lmnelk2aq2uir@4ax.com>, at 20:40:46 on
> Thu, 24 Mar 2022, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
> remarked:
>> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 11:00:18 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <t1g6oc$m2p$2@dont-email.me>, at 22:25:16 on Wed, 23 Mar
>>> 2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>>>>> If you are susceptible for whatever reason you need to take *your
>>>>>>>> own* precautions, wearing proper FFP3 masks and probably reducing
>>>>>>>> your contact with others.
>>>>>
>>>>>> What about those who cannot wear FFP3 masks?
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not clear to me who that set comprises. In the early days there
>>>>> were some issues with FFP2 masks popping off people's ears all the time,
>>>>> but now you can get a gadget that pulls the strings round the back of
>>>>> you head instead.
>>>>
>>>> One which I read in a comment on FB today was autistic people who are
>>>> hypersensitive to things touching their face.
>>>
>>> Autistic people who are that sensitive will have many much greater
>>> issues to deal with wrt Covid (and I'm not just saying that, a close
>>> friend's day job is respite carer for autistic children whose parents
>>> can no longer cope with them 24x7).
>>>
>> Autism can be very variable in the combinations of features and other
>> physical or mental conditions which can accompany them.
>
> Yes I know.
>
>> Many will have their autism not immediately apparent to those they
>> work/live with but with individual elements which are.
>
> Being hypersensitive about anything touching their face is not something
> that's likely to have been overlooked by their carers.

Not all autistic people who are sensitive to touch have or need carers…

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <fd2h3hl91adh3h8qap289cdlulek0i9ppq@4ax.com>, at 14:26:56 on
> Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>>>>>> Greater Anglia is currently advertising to potential passengers in East
>>>>>>> Anglia (on various TV and catch-up channels) to the effect that "It's
>>>>>>> not as dangerous as you think to travel on our trains, because we've
>>>>>>> deep-cleaned them".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That was the slogan for public-transport operators a year ago.
>>>>>
>>>>> Odd then, I first saw the adverts this weekend.
>>>>
>>>> Things must move very slowly in time-warped Ely.
>>>
>>> As far as I know the speed of light is still the same, so if I was
>>> watching a programme yesterday, it was probably transmitted yesterday.
>>> The culprit here is Greater Anglia.
>>
>> Yes, but they're catering to yokels like you.
>
> I thought I'd revisit this, because I saw the advert again. The local
> demographic splits into three main groups:
>
> Locals who have been here all their lives.
> Townies who have retired to the country <waves>.
> Incomers who use it as a dormitory for commuting to higher-waged places.
>
> There's a ripple effect in the latter, because quite a few people
> commute into Ely (where they can't afford to live) from places like
> March and Downham Market.
>
> I don't think any of these three groups is particularly interested in
> using trains for leisure purposes, not least because the vast majority
> are wedded to their cars.
>

IYO what demographic do use trains for leisure travel? There must be some,
because the GWML is packed today!

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On 26/03/2022 14:58, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <fd2h3hl91adh3h8qap289cdlulek0i9ppq@4ax.com>, at 14:26:56 on
>> Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>>>>> Greater Anglia is currently advertising to potential passengers in East
>>>>>>>> Anglia (on various TV and catch-up channels) to the effect that "It's
>>>>>>>> not as dangerous as you think to travel on our trains, because we've
>>>>>>>> deep-cleaned them".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That was the slogan for public-transport operators a year ago.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Odd then, I first saw the adverts this weekend.
>>>>>
>>>>> Things must move very slowly in time-warped Ely.
>>>>
>>>> As far as I know the speed of light is still the same, so if I was
>>>> watching a programme yesterday, it was probably transmitted yesterday.
>>>> The culprit here is Greater Anglia.
>>>
>>> Yes, but they're catering to yokels like you.
>>
>> I thought I'd revisit this, because I saw the advert again. The local
>> demographic splits into three main groups:
>>
>> Locals who have been here all their lives.
>> Townies who have retired to the country <waves>.
>> Incomers who use it as a dormitory for commuting to higher-waged places.
>>
>> There's a ripple effect in the latter, because quite a few people
>> commute into Ely (where they can't afford to live) from places like
>> March and Downham Market.
>>
>> I don't think any of these three groups is particularly interested in
>> using trains for leisure purposes, not least because the vast majority
>> are wedded to their cars.
>>
>
> IYO what demographic do use trains for leisure travel? There must be some,
> because the GWML is packed today!
I can see the balance between Monday-Friday commuters and leisure
travellers has substantially changed. Around here I reckon the number
of former is still at least 50% down.

In message <t1n9n7$sp1$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:58:47 on Sat, 26 Mar
2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <gihp3hhuttnadu9d49q08lmnelk2aq2uir@4ax.com>, at 20:40:46 on
>> Thu, 24 Mar 2022, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>> remarked:
>>> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 11:00:18 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <t1g6oc$m2p$2@dont-email.me>, at 22:25:16 on Wed, 23 Mar
>>>> 2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you are susceptible for whatever reason you need to take *your
>>>>>>>>> own* precautions, wearing proper FFP3 masks and probably reducing
>>>>>>>>> your contact with others.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What about those who cannot wear FFP3 masks?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not clear to me who that set comprises. In the early days there
>>>>>> were some issues with FFP2 masks popping off people's ears all the time,
>>>>>> but now you can get a gadget that pulls the strings round the back of
>>>>>> you head instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> One which I read in a comment on FB today was autistic people who are
>>>>> hypersensitive to things touching their face.
>>>>
>>>> Autistic people who are that sensitive will have many much greater
>>>> issues to deal with wrt Covid (and I'm not just saying that, a close
>>>> friend's day job is respite carer for autistic children whose parents
>>>> can no longer cope with them 24x7).
>>>>
>>> Autism can be very variable in the combinations of features and other
>>> physical or mental conditions which can accompany them.
>>
>> Yes I know.
>>
>>> Many will have their autism not immediately apparent to those they
>>> work/live with but with individual elements which are.
>>
>> Being hypersensitive about anything touching their face is not something
>> that's likely to have been overlooked by their carers.
>
>Not all autistic people who are sensitive to touch have or need carers

I wonder how many who are so sensitive to touch they can't bear to wear
a mask, have no-one looking out for them.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t1n9n8$sp1$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:58:48 on Sat, 26 Mar
2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <fd2h3hl91adh3h8qap289cdlulek0i9ppq@4ax.com>, at 14:26:56 on
>> Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>>>>> Greater Anglia is currently advertising to potential passengers in East
>>>>>>>> Anglia (on various TV and catch-up channels) to the effect that "It's
>>>>>>>> not as dangerous as you think to travel on our trains, because we've
>>>>>>>> deep-cleaned them".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That was the slogan for public-transport operators a year ago.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Odd then, I first saw the adverts this weekend.
>>>>>
>>>>> Things must move very slowly in time-warped Ely.
>>>>
>>>> As far as I know the speed of light is still the same, so if I was
>>>> watching a programme yesterday, it was probably transmitted yesterday.
>>>> The culprit here is Greater Anglia.
>>>
>>> Yes, but they're catering to yokels like you.
>>
>> I thought I'd revisit this, because I saw the advert again. The local
>> demographic splits into three main groups:
>>
>> Locals who have been here all their lives.
>> Townies who have retired to the country <waves>.
>> Incomers who use it as a dormitory for commuting to higher-waged places.
>>
>> There's a ripple effect in the latter, because quite a few people
>> commute into Ely (where they can't afford to live) from places like
>> March and Downham Market.
>>
>> I don't think any of these three groups is particularly interested in
>> using trains for leisure purposes, not least because the vast majority
>> are wedded to their cars.
>
>IYO what demographic do use trains for leisure travel? There must be some,
>because the GWML is packed today!

Not very many from Fenland, I bet. Who were the ones Recliner was having
a dig at.
--
Roland Perry

On Sat, 26 Mar 2022 13:34:28 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:

>>At that early stage, it was thought Covid would be like flu, and mainly
>>transmitted through droplets. If that were the case, then almost any mask
>>would significantly reduce transmission. Later, it was found that Covid was
>>mainly airborne, so most ordinary masks and shields do little to reduce
>>transmission, and that includes surgical masks.
>
> I won't dispute that those measures were more theatre than anything
> else. It was apparent to me at the time.
>
>>Better ventilation and strong UV lights would be much more useful.
>
> Yes, only meeting people outdoors was one of the precautions I felt
> easiest to deploy.
>
>>So it now turns out that the early, well-meaning advice was largely wrong.
>>But the authorities were very slow to acknowledge the error.
>
> There's another aspect - shortages of the better masks meant they didn't
> want to cause panic buying amongst the general population, which would
> mean none available for those who most needed them.

Maybe people tired of repeated health messages, and the problem when
the messages (eventually) changed was that people lost trust in the
govt advice/messages given out on their tv/radio appearances. Plus
they pick some unimpressive people to front up the message. And they
never apologise! Some videos were, and still do, show govt
spokespeople so shifty it's no surprise that they are not trusted or
believed.