Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[strichener]

57 minutes ago, 101 said:

Can everyone calm down and cut the hyperbole, it's bordering on anti-semitism.

 

Behave yourself.

[Elixir]

I wonder what P&B poster this is.

 

[Left Back]

19 minutes ago, Wee Bully said:

Posted without comment…

Posting it is comment enough.

If you don’t have a website you’re not real

[101]

3 minutes ago, strichener said:

Behave yourself.

Checking of papers provokes connotations of the most horrific crimes against humanity, regardless of whether people agree with vaccine passports or not the language used is very important.

[UsedToGoToCentralPark]

Checking of papers provokes connotations of the most horrific crimes against humanity, regardless of whether people agree with vaccine passports or not the language used is very important.

Ok.
Better get this cancelled then.

[Todd_is_God]

12 minutes ago, UsedToGoToCentralPark said:

Ok.
Better get this cancelled then.

Been meaning to give that a go for a few days!

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Found it, NHS Scotland COVID check.

Printed off my proof and the app struggled to scan it.

I'm guessing this is fairly common with printouts as I was speaking to a couple of people who went out at the weekend and both clubs they went into let them in when it wouldn't scan, 2nd club checked the name on the printout matched their photo ID.

I just clicked for them to send their printed version - arrived in 2 days and scanned no problem when being verified for my return to UK Passenger Locator Form.

[Elixir]

And the Scottish Government think this is a good idea just to be different. Oh dear.

 

[ICTChris]

Me when one of the pen pushers from the Scottish Government ask me for my papers

 

 

[strichener]

1 hour ago, 101 said:

Checking of papers provokes connotations of the most horrific crimes against humanity, regardless of whether people agree with vaccine passports or not the language used is very important.

Checking of papers has many connotations, not just by the Germans during the war. 

I notice that the irony of you calling out hyperbole whilst similarly posting hyperbole was completely lost on you.

[craigkillie]

4 hours ago, Left Back said:

https://www.gov.scot/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-modelling-epidemic-issue-no-74/

While it's literally true that Figure 11 in the report stretches as high as 44,000, it would be misleading to suggest that the Scottish Government were seriously expecting or believe it's at all likely that this is possible. Instead, it's basically a perfect example of extending an extrapolated prediction too far into the future for it to have any value. The models shown are generally fairly suitable for predicting a small way into the future, say a week or even two, but are completely inappropriate for trying to predict cases in a month's time. You can see that the range of possible cases basically goes from 0-44,000, which the text describes as being the result of a large amount of uncertainty relating to schools going back and the effects of COP26.

The real problem here is the decision to display this projection so far into the future, clearly the model presented is not suitable for that and it's just confusing for people.

 

[Left Back]

53 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

While it's literally true that Figure 11 in the report stretches as high as 44,000, it would be misleading to suggest that the Scottish Government were seriously expecting or believe it's at all likely that this is possible. Instead, it's basically a perfect example of extending an extrapolated prediction too far into the future for it to have any value. The models shown are generally fairly suitable for predicting a small way into the future, say a week or even two, but are completely inappropriate for trying to predict cases in a month's time. You can see that the range of possible cases basically goes from 0-44,000, which the text describes as being the result of a large amount of uncertainty relating to schools going back and the effects of COP26.

The real problem here is the decision to display this projection so far into the future, clearly the model presented is not suitable for that and it's just confusing for people.

 

I don’t think anyone, except the very thickest and most naive in society (which covers a lot of people tbf), would believe that figure is possible at this point in time.  That wasn’t the context this was discussed in though.

The context was that these models are being published by SG (presumably coming from their “expert” scientific modellers) and they show that cases could be 44,000 per day in about 2 weeks time based on data from 5 days ago.
 

 ETA what you’re basically saying is the models are bullshit and shouldn’t have been published.

Edited October 25, 2021 by Left Back

[craigkillie]

25 minutes ago, Left Back said:

I don’t think anyone, except the very thickest and most naive in society (which covers a lot of people tbf), would believe that figure is possible at this point in time.  That wasn’t the context this was discussed in though.

The context was that these models are being published by SG (presumably coming from their “expert” scientific modellers) and they show that cases could be 44,000 per day in about 2 weeks time based on data from 5 days ago.
 

 ETA what you’re basically saying is the models are bullshit and shouldn’t have been published.

I don't think it's necessarily that the models are bullshit, it's that the projections so far into the future are pointless. I don't know the methodology, but the models themselves might be good for short term predictions. The upper limit of 44,000 per day is in more like a month's time based on the plot, and the issue is publishing that sort of timescale.

[Left Back]

6 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I don't think it's necessarily that the models are bullshit, it's that the projections so far into the future are pointless. I don't know the methodology, but the models themselves might be good for short term predictions. The upper limit of 44,000 per day is in more like a month's time based on the plot, and the issue is publishing that sort of timescale.

Unless I’m missing something the timeframe goes to about 8th November on figure 11.

ETA the report itself says 7th November.

Edited October 25, 2021 by Left Back

[Frankie S]

12 hours ago, Wee Bully said:

That’s the impression the article writer is trying to put across, but there is nothing in the quote to justify that.  The quote specifically lays the blame for them shutting early at a different door - that of staff recruitment and welfare.  

In essence, the article says:

1. 550 people knocked back over the weekend.  Given the number of venues, that doesn’t sound a lot to me

2. Footfall is down “up to 40%”, with no idea what that is comparing it to, and also on the same weekend as a widely publicised boycott of nightclubs by women, and

3. Some venues choose to close early due to lack of staff (nothing to do with the vaccine passport).

People complain on here all the time about the press exaggerating the risks of Covid, long Covid etc.  The article here is exactly the same - pure clickbait, and reading past the headline and the first 2 paragraphs shows that.  

 

As an alternative to the ill-informed twaddle being peddled by people with absolutely no involvement in the nightclub sector, I’ll provide some actual data from the front line.

Here are the stats from the nightclub I own:

Friday 22nd Oct - combined door and bar take down 30.45% on the equivalent Friday last month (Fri 24.09.21). Down 28.78% on the average Friday take this month (October).

Saturday 23rd Oct - combined door and bar take down 35.61% on the equivalent Saturday last month (Sat 25.09.21). Down 35.17% on the average Saturday take this month (October).

Btw, 35% down translates to over 150 people on a Saturday night for us alone, rather than the ‘1 or 2’ that has been speculated upthread. And bear in mind, the 35% drop isn’t wholly attributable to people actually knocked back at the door for not having proper certification, it’s also comprised of those who didn’t bother going out as they knew they wouldn’t get in (the vaccine passport scheme is hardly a well kept secret), and those who simply went somewhere they knew the enforcement would be laxer. 

So, broadly in line with the figures reported (albeit at the lower end) by the Music Venues Trust survey of nightclubs, live music venues (and other hospitality outlets affected by vaccine passport regulations), which estimates the average drop in trade across the industry as 39% (with 59% of membership reporting so far). A similar survey by the NTIA (Night-Time Industries Association), the one that has been widely reported in the media, found a 40% reduction in trade this weekend, remarkably consistent with MVT’s figures.

So, for an industry that has been decimated by closure for the majority of the last 19 months, and is now just trying to find its feet again, with the withdrawal of furlough and the termination of all other forms of government support, in the context of catastrophic staffing and supply issues (greatly exacerbated by Brexit), losing almost 40% of their trade overnight due to the Scottish government’s introduction of the Covid Passport scheme is, as you can imagine, the very last thing the sector needs right now. Unlike football clubs, who seem to have secured governmental approval of spot checks for vaccine passports, nightclubs are expected to check ALL customers for proof of double vaccination, a hugely onerous burden.

As ever, it is Scottish businesses that are picking up the economic cost of the Scottish Government’s draconian restrictions, and not the Scottish government. It is Scottish businesses that are picking up the tab for the Scottish government’s avowed policy of incentivising the younger generation to get vaccinated, even as the evidence suggests that cases are actually falling among the club-age demographic (despite nightclubs, live music venues etc. operating without Covid passports for 2 and half months now) and recent U.K. spikes are mainly attributable to school age children and their immediate families. There is, as it stands, no financial assistance whatsoever for those sectors adversely impacted by the Covid passport scheme, and as ever, those outlets that are most diligent in enforcing the policy will suffer the most, with custom inevitably gravitating towards outlets that enforce the regulations less diligently. This is the paradox of the scheme - the Scottish government want the sector to buy into, and strictly enforce, a regulatory regime that will dramatically reduce their footfall and completely eliminate their profit margins, without any financial support whatsoever. The only incentive to enforce the scheme is the fear of legal sanctions, with Sturgeon’s oft-stated threat of the closure of the entire sector hovering above our heads like the sword of Damocles.

The Scottish government hasn’t even bothered to hide its absolute contempt for the nighttime economy throughout the last nineteen months, and it has emphatically failed to engage with the sector at every turn. We can safely assume that, irrespective of the cost to businesses and jobs, Scot Gov will continue to punish, penalise, scapegoat and arbitrarily regulate the sector to within an inch of its life, as that has been its modus operandi throughout the pandemic.

Edited October 26, 2021 by Frankie S

[Lyle Lanley]

35 minutes ago, Frankie S said:

As an alternative to the ill-informed twaddle being peddled by people with absolutely no involvement in the nightclub sector, I’ll provide some actual data from the front line.

Here are the stats from the nightclub I own:

Friday 22nd Oct - combined door and bar take down 30.45% on the equivalent Friday last month (Fri 24.09.21). Down 28.78% on the average Friday take this month (October).

Saturday 23rd Oct - combined door and bar take down 35.61% on the equivalent Saturday last month (Sat 25.09.21). Down 35.17% on the average Saturday take this month (October).

Btw, 35% down translates to over 150 people on a Saturday night for us alone, rather than the ‘1 or 2’ that has been speculated upthread.

So, broadly in line with the figures reported (albeit at the lower end) by the Music Venues Trust survey of nightclubs, live music venues (and other hospitality outlets affected by vaccine passport regulations), which estimates the average drop in trade across the industry as 39% (with 59% of membership reporting so far). A similar survey by the NTIA (Night-Time Industries Association), the one that has been widely reported in the media, found a 40% reduction in trade this weekend, remarkably consistent with MVT’s figures.

So, for an industry that has been decimated by closure for the majority of the last 19 months, and is now just trying to find its feet again, with the withdrawal of furlough and the termination of all other forms of government support, in the context of catastrophic staffing and supply issues (greatly exacerbated by Brexit), losing almost 40% of their trade overnight due to the Scottish government’s introduction of the Covid Passport scheme is, as you can imagine, the very last thing the sector needs right now. Unlike football clubs, who seem to have secured governmental approval of spot checks for vaccine passports, nightclubs are expected to check ALL customers for proof of double vaccination, a hugely onerous burden.

As ever, it is Scottish businesses that are picking up the economic cost of the Scottish Government’s draconian restrictions, and not the Scottish government. It is Scottish businesses that are picking up the tab for the Scottish government’s avowed policy of incentivising the younger generation to get vaccinated, even as the evidence suggests that cases are actually falling among the club-age demographic (despite nightclubs, live music venues etc. operating without Covid passports for 2 and half months now) and recent U.K. spikes are mainly attributable to school age children and their immediate families. There is, as it stands, no financial assistance whatsoever for those sectors adversely impacted by the Covid passport scheme, and as ever, those outlets that are most diligent in enforcing the policy will suffer the most, with custom inevitably gravitating towards outlets that enforce the regulations less diligently. This is the paradox of the scheme - the Scottish government want the sector to buy into, and strictly enforce, a regulatory regime that will dramatically reduce their footfall and completely eliminate their profit margins, without any financial support whatsoever. The only incentive to enforce the scheme is the fear of legal sanctions, with Sturgeon’s oft-stated threat of the closure of the entire sector hovering above our heads like the sword of Damocles.

The Scottish government hasn’t even bothered to hide its absolute contempt for the nighttime economy throughout the last nineteen months, and it has emphatically failed to engage with the sector at every turn. We can safely assume that, irrespective of the cost to businesses and jobs, Scot Gov will continue to punish, penalise, scapegoat and arbitrarily regulate the sector to within an inch of its life, as that has been its modus operandi throughout the pandemic.

Fantastic post. 

[Todd_is_God]

"Covid risky pubs"

[Todd_is_God]

3 hours ago, craigkillie said:

While it's literally true that Figure 11 in the report stretches as high as 44,000, it would be misleading to suggest that the Scottish Government were seriously expecting or believe it's at all likely that this is possible. Instead, it's basically a perfect example of extending an extrapolated prediction too far into the future for it to have any value. The models shown are generally fairly suitable for predicting a small way into the future, say a week or even two, but are completely inappropriate for trying to predict cases in a month's time. You can see that the range of possible cases basically goes from 0-44,000, which the text describes as being the result of a large amount of uncertainty relating to schools going back and the effects of COP26.

The real problem here is the decision to display this projection so far into the future, clearly the model presented is not suitable for that and it's just confusing for people.

 

Except, as has already been pointed out, the end date of that graph is 7th November - 12 days away.

[Bairnardo]

Regarding the 44k, persoablly I think the govt knows what they are doing there.

By virute of reading/posting in this thread most us us have a better view on covid numbers than most folk id say. For me in general, whenever I speak to anyone about cpvid for the most part they just chirp on about whatever is the headline at the time. If you say to someone at your work today "aye but cases are actually falling" 9/10 times you will get a "no they arent they are flying up" type response.

We get a lot of echo chamber talk in here but as far as actually paying attention to covid, I think its sort of true. There are a lot of differing opinions in here, but one thing that holds true for me is that you are likely in possession of more data than most if you are in here rather than just swatching the odd bit of news here and there.

I think if a headline figure of 44k makes it to the news, a very very significant number of people will read no further into it and accept it as a possibility or even an inevitability. And thats before you consider the political battleground landscape where people will see it and immediately seek political capital over it by demanding Nicola keeps us safe.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

As an alternative to the ill-informed twaddle being peddled by people with absolutely no involvement in the nightclub sector, I’ll provide some actual data from the front line.
Here are the stats from the nightclub I own:
Friday 22nd Oct - combined door and bar take down 30.45% on the equivalent Friday last month (Fri 24.09.21). Down 28.78% on the average Friday take this month (October).
Saturday 23rd Oct - combined door and bar take down 35.61% on the equivalent Saturday last month (Sat 25.09.21). Down 35.17% on the average Saturday take this month (October).
Btw, 35% down translates to over 150 people on a Saturday night for us alone, rather than the ‘1 or 2’ that has been speculated upthread. And bear in mind, the 35% drop isn’t wholly attributable to people actually knocked back at the door for not having proper certification, it’s also comprised of those who didn’t bother going out as they knew they wouldn’t get in (the vaccine passport scheme is hardly a well kept secret), and those who simply went somewhere they knew the enforcement would be laxer. 
So, broadly in line with the figures reported (albeit at the lower end) by the Music Venues Trust survey of nightclubs, live music venues (and other hospitality outlets affected by vaccine passport regulations), which estimates the average drop in trade across the industry as 39% (with 59% of membership reporting so far). A similar survey by the NTIA (Night-Time Industries Association), the one that has been widely reported in the media, found a 40% reduction in trade this weekend, remarkably consistent with MVT’s figures.
So, for an industry that has been decimated by closure for the majority of the last 19 months, and is now just trying to find its feet again, with the withdrawal of furlough and the termination of all other forms of government support, in the context of catastrophic staffing and supply issues (greatly exacerbated by Brexit), losing almost 40% of their trade overnight due to the Scottish government’s introduction of the Covid Passport scheme is, as you can imagine, the very last thing the sector needs right now. Unlike football clubs, who seem to have secured governmental approval of spot checks for vaccine passports, nightclubs are expected to check ALL customers for proof of double vaccination, a hugely onerous burden.
As ever, it is Scottish businesses that are picking up the economic cost of the Scottish Government’s draconian restrictions, and not the Scottish government. It is Scottish businesses that are picking up the tab for the Scottish government’s avowed policy of incentivising the younger generation to get vaccinated, even as the evidence suggests that cases are actually falling among the club-age demographic (despite nightclubs, live music venues etc. operating without Covid passports for 2 and half months now) and recent U.K. spikes are mainly attributable to school age children and their immediate families. There is, as it stands, no financial assistance whatsoever for those sectors adversely impacted by the Covid passport scheme, and as ever, those outlets that are most diligent in enforcing the policy will suffer the most, with custom inevitably gravitating towards outlets that enforce the regulations less diligently. This is the paradox of the scheme - the Scottish government want the sector to buy into, and strictly enforce, a regulatory regime that will dramatically reduce their footfall and completely eliminate their profit margins, without any financial support whatsoever. The only incentive to enforce the scheme is the fear of legal sanctions, with Sturgeon’s oft-stated threat of the closure of the entire sector hovering above our heads like the sword of Damocles.
The Scottish government hasn’t even bothered to hide its absolute contempt for the nighttime economy throughout the last nineteen months, and it has emphatically failed to engage with the sector at every turn. We can safely assume that, irrespective of the cost to businesses and jobs, Scot Gov will continue to punish, penalise, scapegoat and arbitrarily regulate the sector to within an inch of its life, as that has been its modus operandi throughout the pandemic.

I've seen several claims made that one reason for the fall was the campaign around date rape drugs.

Did you see any difference in terms of gender?

Or is it just being used as an excuse?