Planet Rugby Forum

message #2527204 wrote:

not_english wrote:

message #2527204 wrote:
I must have misunderstood. As far as I knew, the Google/Apple API was just for secure comms and compatibility. The info is stored on the phone whatever the app. It's only uploaded if someone tests positive and uploads it.
The ozzie app was the same and needed changes to use the api once it was released.
I must have had some preconceptions, I guess?

Not totally sure how the UK government one is working, but with the apple/google model the phones ping each other with ids, you record other peoples ids on your phone. These ids change all the time, but they do so according to a formula.
Then, if you go to a lab and get tested for coronavirus, they can publish that this id is positive for corona, and send a message so that anyone who has an id that can be generated from that id in their list of close contacts gets notified to go and get tested for coronavirus.
Note that apple and google have only designed an api, and a lot of this process is the app that runs on top of these apis.

That's how I understood it.
Raggs and Saint are saying otherwise, I think.

It's effectively the same in terms of understanding. The point is that under the Google model, there is no centrally accessible record of where positive infections occur. So it's all perfectly automated, but you get no intelligence of what is actually happening.

The French/UK model shows where the infections are occuring, with a marginal increase in security risk i.e.there is an accessible database that analysts can see. The promise is that all identifiable data (which is limited to begin with) gets wiped after 28 days, and it does allow for manual follow ups to check that people are actually isolating, or to see if they can trace people who don't have the app

The difference is subtle but genuine, and very closely related to other security and communications concepts that I sell i.e. Microsoft Teams vs Webex Teams.

Boobs not Moobs wrote:Moron, I don't believe his Dr has prescribed it one bit.

President Donald Trump on Monday said he has been taking hydroxychloroquine, an unproven treatment for COVID-19 that he has vigorously promoted.

“A lot of good things have come out about the hydroxy. A lot of good things have come out. You’d be surprised at how many people are taking it,” Trump said at the White House. “I happen to be taking it, I happen to be taking it… I’m taking it hydroxychloroquine, right now.”

The president said he has been taking the drug for “a couple weeks” and that it was prescribed by the White House doctor. The FDA has warned against its use for COVID-19 outside of a hospital setting due to a risk of serious heart problems.

With any luck, it'll cause him heart complications and they'll have to remove him from office.

Boobs not Moobs wrote:Moron, I don't believe his Dr has prescribed it one bit.

President Donald Trump on Monday said he has been taking hydroxychloroquine, an unproven treatment for COVID-19 that he has vigorously promoted.

“A lot of good things have come out about the hydroxy. A lot of good things have come out. You’d be surprised at how many people are taking it,” Trump said at the White House. “I happen to be taking it, I happen to be taking it… I’m taking it hydroxychloroquine, right now.”

The president said he has been taking the drug for “a couple weeks” and that it was prescribed by the White House doctor. The FDA has warned against its use for COVID-19 outside of a hospital setting due to a risk of serious heart problems.

On the same day that Sanofi, the drugs original developers, issued an alert to Irish doctors saying there was no evidence the drug had any affect on covid-19 but did cause heart problems.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/hea ... -1.4255709

Petty sure the Trump organization has cornered the planet's whole production of the stuff for the next five years. He'll soon be selling chocolate covered chloroquine to kids and crushing it up as Trump's genuine patent hair tonic.

Saint wrote:

message #2527204 wrote:

not_english wrote:

message #2527204 wrote:
I must have misunderstood. As far as I knew, the Google/Apple API was just for secure comms and compatibility. The info is stored on the phone whatever the app. It's only uploaded if someone tests positive and uploads it.
The ozzie app was the same and needed changes to use the api once it was released.
I must have had some preconceptions, I guess?

Not totally sure how the UK government one is working, but with the apple/google model the phones ping each other with ids, you record other peoples ids on your phone. These ids change all the time, but they do so according to a formula.
Then, if you go to a lab and get tested for coronavirus, they can publish that this id is positive for corona, and send a message so that anyone who has an id that can be generated from that id in their list of close contacts gets notified to go and get tested for coronavirus.
Note that apple and google have only designed an api, and a lot of this process is the app that runs on top of these apis.

That's how I understood it.
Raggs and Saint are saying otherwise, I think.

It's effectively the same in terms of understanding. The point is that under the Google model, there is no centrally accessible record of where positive infections occur. So it's all perfectly automated, but you get no intelligence of what is actually happening.

The French/UK model shows where the infections are occuring, with a marginal increase in security risk i.e.there is an accessible database that analysts can see. The promise is that all identifiable data (which is limited to begin with) gets wiped after 28 days, and it does allow for manual follow ups to check that people are actually isolating, or to see if they can trace people who don't have the app

The difference is subtle but genuine, and very closely related to other security and communications concepts that I sell i.e. Microsoft Teams vs Webex Teams.

Ok.

The app's been as good as killed off anyway.
Pretty stupid to say it was a key part of their strategy as the opposition were then bound to view it as their duty to try and stop it.

Nolanator wrote:

Boobs not Moobs wrote:Moron, I don't believe his Dr has prescribed it one bit.

President Donald Trump on Monday said he has been taking hydroxychloroquine, an unproven treatment for COVID-19 that he has vigorously promoted.

“A lot of good things have come out about the hydroxy. A lot of good things have come out. You’d be surprised at how many people are taking it,” Trump said at the White House. “I happen to be taking it, I happen to be taking it… I’m taking it hydroxychloroquine, right now.”

The president said he has been taking the drug for “a couple weeks” and that it was prescribed by the White House doctor. The FDA has warned against its use for COVID-19 outside of a hospital setting due to a risk of serious heart problems.

With any luck, it'll cause him heart complications and they'll have to remove him from office.

You have to have a heart before you can have complications

message #2527204 wrote:

Saint wrote:

message #2527204 wrote:

not_english wrote:

message #2527204 wrote:
I must have misunderstood. As far as I knew, the Google/Apple API was just for secure comms and compatibility. The info is stored on the phone whatever the app. It's only uploaded if someone tests positive and uploads it.
The ozzie app was the same and needed changes to use the api once it was released.
I must have had some preconceptions, I guess?

Not totally sure how the UK government one is working, but with the apple/google model the phones ping each other with ids, you record other peoples ids on your phone. These ids change all the time, but they do so according to a formula.
Then, if you go to a lab and get tested for coronavirus, they can publish that this id is positive for corona, and send a message so that anyone who has an id that can be generated from that id in their list of close contacts gets notified to go and get tested for coronavirus.
Note that apple and google have only designed an api, and a lot of this process is the app that runs on top of these apis.

That's how I understood it.
Raggs and Saint are saying otherwise, I think.

It's effectively the same in terms of understanding. The point is that under the Google model, there is no centrally accessible record of where positive infections occur. So it's all perfectly automated, but you get no intelligence of what is actually happening.

The French/UK model shows where the infections are occuring, with a marginal increase in security risk i.e.there is an accessible database that analysts can see. The promise is that all identifiable data (which is limited to begin with) gets wiped after 28 days, and it does allow for manual follow ups to check that people are actually isolating, or to see if they can trace people who don't have the app

The difference is subtle but genuine, and very closely related to other security and communications concepts that I sell i.e. Microsoft Teams vs Webex Teams.

Ok.

The app's been as good as killed off anyway.
Pretty stupid to say it was a key part of their strategy as the opposition were then bound to view it as their duty to try and stop it.

Is it?

message #2527204 wrote:

Saint wrote:

message #2527204 wrote:

not_english wrote:

message #2527204 wrote:
I must have misunderstood. As far as I knew, the Google/Apple API was just for secure comms and compatibility. The info is stored on the phone whatever the app. It's only uploaded if someone tests positive and uploads it.
The ozzie app was the same and needed changes to use the api once it was released.
I must have had some preconceptions, I guess?

Not totally sure how the UK government one is working, but with the apple/google model the phones ping each other with ids, you record other peoples ids on your phone. These ids change all the time, but they do so according to a formula.
Then, if you go to a lab and get tested for coronavirus, they can publish that this id is positive for corona, and send a message so that anyone who has an id that can be generated from that id in their list of close contacts gets notified to go and get tested for coronavirus.
Note that apple and google have only designed an api, and a lot of this process is the app that runs on top of these apis.

That's how I understood it.
Raggs and Saint are saying otherwise, I think.

It's effectively the same in terms of understanding. The point is that under the Google model, there is no centrally accessible record of where positive infections occur. So it's all perfectly automated, but you get no intelligence of what is actually happening.

The French/UK model shows where the infections are occuring, with a marginal increase in security risk i.e.there is an accessible database that analysts can see. The promise is that all identifiable data (which is limited to begin with) gets wiped after 28 days, and it does allow for manual follow ups to check that people are actually isolating, or to see if they can trace people who don't have the app

The difference is subtle but genuine, and very closely related to other security and communications concepts that I sell i.e. Microsoft Teams vs Webex Teams.

Ok.

The app's been as good as killed off anyway.
Pretty stupid to say it was a key part of their strategy as the opposition were then bound to view it as their duty to try and stop it.

It's bizarre the way they keep on giving hostages to fortune, with these stupid deadlines & goals.

It's not like the opposition is seriously pressing them, for them; it's purely pandering to the Media.

Blackrock Bullet wrote:

Gavin Duffy wrote: Teach the controversy.

Listen Gav, you went in on UnHerd and were wrong, then went and bizarrely said a medical doctor was less qualified to talk about this as someone random on the street. Maybe it's the fact that he's been on Channel 4, ITV, Sky News etc, it's a rather bizarre attempt to just sweep it away.

Muh social life!

Hellraiser wrote:

Blackrock Bullet wrote:

Gavin Duffy wrote: Teach the controversy.

Listen Gav, you went in on UnHerd and were wrong, then went and bizarrely said a medical doctor was less qualified to talk about this as someone random on the street. Maybe it's the fact that he's been on Channel 4, ITV, Sky News etc, it's a rather bizarre attempt to just sweep it away.

Muh social life!

An oncologist who thinks the NHS is the last bastion of communism and pushes made up bollocks as medicine, yeah right. You're so desperate to back up your 'the lockdown was wrong bollocks' that you're going full bimbo.

paddyor wrote:

fatcat wrote:

CM11 wrote:

DragsterDriver wrote:https://twitter.com/maxcroser/status/12 ... 62501?s=21

Sweden.

The positive argument with regards to Sweden is that they've achieved not much worse than some and better than others who have locked down. The negative, if I was a Swede, must be that they could have done aswell as their neighbours and Eastern Europe/Germany/Austria.

I still think the discrepancy of cases:deaths between countries is suspicious, such as you see between Sweden and the other Scandi countries.

Singapore is by far the most sus. 22 deaths out of 28k cases. Seems not that long ago they were being lauded for how they dealt with the outbreak.......then it turned out they didn't count migrant workers as people.

I read somewhere that Singapore and South Korea were able to shield/protect the most vulnerable (elderly) and that the infections they had measured were almost all from younger age groups. Hence less deaths. Not sure if true or accurate.

CM11 wrote:

DragsterDriver wrote:https://twitter.com/maxcroser/status/12 ... 62501?s=21

Sweden.

The positive argument with regards to Sweden is that they've achieved not much worse than some and better than others who have locked down. The negative, if I was a Swede, must be that they could have done aswell as their neighbours and Eastern Europe/Germany/Austria.

A bit too soon to call?

If Sweden is at 20-25% overall population has had the virus then they are well over the worst of it. Infections and deaths will start to (and already have) slow down. If Denmark or Norway have only hit 1% -2% infected then they have all the pain ahead of them as they emerge from lockdown. Their population is not immune because of lockdown. They have done a great job so far. But we are still very early on in this pandemic.

One thing that has not been measured yet, but I am sure in the fullness of time (and may result in many phd's) is the timing of lockdowns. New Zealand, Denmark etc went early before the virus had gotten in to their populations and were very effective. The UK, Italy etc appear to have locked down after significant spread. This effectively meant sick people were being quarantined with healthy non infected people. This could have potentially increased the infection rates.

A tried and true method for containing disease has always been to quarantine/isolate and treat those that are sick from those that are well. In some countries we seem to have done something different here.

Clogs wrote:

paddyor wrote:

fatcat wrote:

CM11 wrote:

DragsterDriver wrote:https://twitter.com/maxcroser/status/12 ... 62501?s=21

Sweden.

The positive argument with regards to Sweden is that they've achieved not much worse than some and better than others who have locked down. The negative, if I was a Swede, must be that they could have done aswell as their neighbours and Eastern Europe/Germany/Austria.

I still think the discrepancy of cases:deaths between countries is suspicious, such as you see between Sweden and the other Scandi countries.

Singapore is by far the most sus. 22 deaths out of 28k cases. Seems not that long ago they were being lauded for how they dealt with the outbreak.......then it turned out they didn't count migrant workers as people.

I read somewhere that Singapore and South Korea were able to shield/protect the most vulnerable (elderly) and that the infections they had measured were almost all from younger age groups. Hence less deaths. Not sure if true or accurate.

*fewer

Clogs wrote:

CM11 wrote:

DragsterDriver wrote:https://twitter.com/maxcroser/status/12 ... 62501?s=21

Sweden.

The positive argument with regards to Sweden is that they've achieved not much worse than some and better than others who have locked down. The negative, if I was a Swede, must be that they could have done aswell as their neighbours and Eastern Europe/Germany/Austria.

A bit too soon to call?

If Sweden is at 20-25% overall population has had the virus then they are well over the worst of it. Infections and deaths will start to (and already have) slow down. If Denmark or Norway have only hit 1% -2% infected then they have all the pain ahead of them as they emerge from lockdown. Their population is not immune because of lockdown. They have done a great job so far. But we are still very early on in this pandemic.

One thing that has not been measured yet, but I am sure in the fullness of time (and may result in many phd's) is the timing of lockdowns. New Zealand, Denmark etc went early before the virus had gotten in to their populations and were very effective. The UK, Italy etc appear to have locked down after significant spread. This effectively meant sick people were being quarantined with healthy non infected people. This could have potentially increased the infection rates.

A tried and true method for containing disease has always been to quarantine/isolate and treat those that are sick from those that are well. In some countries we seem to have done something different here.

Not really.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-52704836

fishfoodie wrote:

Clogs wrote:

CM11 wrote:

DragsterDriver wrote:https://twitter.com/maxcroser/status/12 ... 62501?s=21

Sweden.

The positive argument with regards to Sweden is that they've achieved not much worse than some and better than others who have locked down. The negative, if I was a Swede, must be that they could have done aswell as their neighbours and Eastern Europe/Germany/Austria.

A bit too soon to call?

If Sweden is at 20-25% overall population has had the virus then they are well over the worst of it. Infections and deaths will start to (and already have) slow down. If Denmark or Norway have only hit 1% -2% infected then they have all the pain ahead of them as they emerge from lockdown. Their population is not immune because of lockdown. They have done a great job so far. But we are still very early on in this pandemic.

One thing that has not been measured yet, but I am sure in the fullness of time (and may result in many phd's) is the timing of lockdowns. New Zealand, Denmark etc went early before the virus had gotten in to their populations and were very effective. The UK, Italy etc appear to have locked down after significant spread. This effectively meant sick people were being quarantined with healthy non infected people. This could have potentially increased the infection rates.

A tried and true method for containing disease has always been to quarantine/isolate and treat those that are sick from those that are well. In some countries we seem to have done something different here.

Not really.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-52704836

Sigh. My point wasn't about Sweden. It was about Denmark and Norway. They have done well. So far.

Clogs wrote:

CM11 wrote:

DragsterDriver wrote:https://twitter.com/maxcroser/status/12 ... 62501?s=21

Sweden.

The positive argument with regards to Sweden is that they've achieved not much worse than some and better than others who have locked down. The negative, if I was a Swede, must be that they could have done aswell as their neighbours and Eastern Europe/Germany/Austria.

A bit too soon to call?

If Sweden is at 20-25% overall population has had the virus then they are well over the worst of it. Infections and deaths will start to (and already have) slow down. If Denmark or Norway have only hit 1% -2% infected then they have all the pain ahead of them as they emerge from lockdown. Their population is not immune because of lockdown. They have done a great job so far. But we are still very early on in this pandemic.

One thing that has not been measured yet, but I am sure in the fullness of time (and may result in many phd's) is the timing of lockdowns. New Zealand, Denmark etc went early before the virus had gotten in to their populations and were very effective. The UK, Italy etc appear to have locked down after significant spread. This effectively meant sick people were being quarantined with healthy non infected people. This could have potentially increased the infection rates.

A tried and true method for containing disease has always been to quarantine/isolate and treat those that are sick from those that are well. In some countries we seem to have done something different here.

Well, I wasn't quite calling it and yes, I'm very much in the 'we're not even at halftime' camp alright.

Insane_Homer wrote:

Of course out of context posts are easily mocked. But their point, the UK isn't just surrounded by vast amounts of water it's next to multiple highly population dense countries that are to a high level interconnected.

paddyor wrote:

fatcat wrote:

CM11 wrote:

DragsterDriver wrote:https://twitter.com/maxcroser/status/12 ... 62501?s=21

Sweden.

The positive argument with regards to Sweden is that they've achieved not much worse than some and better than others who have locked down. The negative, if I was a Swede, must be that they could have done aswell as their neighbours and Eastern Europe/Germany/Austria.

I still think the discrepancy of cases:deaths between countries is suspicious, such as you see between Sweden and the other Scandi countries.

Singapore is by far the most sus. 22 deaths out of 28k cases. Seems not that long ago they were being lauded for how they dealt with the outbreak.......then it turned out they didn't count migrant workers as people.

Typical.

eldanielfire wrote:

Insane_Homer wrote:

Of course out of context posts are easily mocked. But their point, the UK isn't just surrounded by vast amounts of water it's next to multiple highly population dense countries that are to a high level interconnected.

NZ = 21 dead from Covid 19.

That's 21 people, not 21,000 people.

Muttonbirds wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:

Insane_Homer wrote:

Of course out of context posts are easily mocked. But their point, the UK isn't just surrounded by vast amounts of water it's next to multiple highly population dense countries that are to a high level interconnected.

NZ = 21 dead from Covid 19.

That's 21 people, not 21,000 people.

Yes we know.

Muttonbirds wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:

Insane_Homer wrote:

Of course out of context posts are easily mocked. But their point, the UK isn't just surrounded by vast amounts of water it's next to multiple highly population dense countries that are to a high level interconnected.

NZ = 21 dead from Covid 19.

That's 21 people, not 21,000 people.

Yes. NZ also gets about 4M visitors a year. The UK has about 2M come through it's ports every day (on average). That's a lot more seeds to get started with, which is the major issue when it comes to spreading a disease.

Raggs wrote:

Muttonbirds wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:

Insane_Homer wrote:

Of course out of context posts are easily mocked. But their point, the UK isn't just surrounded by vast amounts of water it's next to multiple highly population dense countries that are to a high level interconnected.

NZ = 21 dead from Covid 19.

That's 21 people, not 21,000 people.

Yes. NZ also gets about 4M visitors a year. The UK has about 2M come through it's ports every day (on average). That's a lot more seeds to get started with, which is the major issue when it comes to spreading a disease.

And even when those seeds enter, in NZ, with it's low population density it will have fewer opportunities to spread anyway.

eldanielfire wrote:
And even when those seeds enter, in NZ, with it's low population density it will have fewer opportunities to spread anyway.

Low population density? A quarter of the population live in just one city.

bimboman wrote:

Saint wrote:

bimboman wrote:

Saint wrote:

brero wrote:hard to believe we are not relaxing some of the restrictions yet in the UK. No second wave in anywhere that has started opening up - but also clear that activity only gradually increases again once formal restrictions are removed.

We are still running at 400 ish deaths per day (weekend numbers notwithstanding). The extremely limited lifting so far has already created enough controversy as it is

That’s deaths over up to 10 days before the report date. For example of the change Essex had one death reported today.

Sure - and we won't know the true number for yoday till the middle of next week. At this point though after going through the hard work, relaxing the rules 1 or 2 weeks early and risk a restart would be foolhardy. We won't really know the effects of Europe's loosening of the lockdown for another 1-2 weeks.

There’s nothing planned till first week June. Fingers crossed distances and sun do their job.

That;s my point isn;t it?

Raggs wrote:

Muttonbirds wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:

Insane_Homer wrote:

Of course out of context posts are easily mocked. But their point, the UK isn't just surrounded by vast amounts of water it's next to multiple highly population dense countries that are to a high level interconnected.

NZ = 21 dead from Covid 19.

That's 21 people, not 21,000 people.

Yes. NZ also gets about 4M visitors a year. The UK has about 2M come through it's ports every day (on average). That's a lot more seeds to get started with, which is the major issue when it comes to spreading a disease.

Finding this stat hard to verify. What does it mean - 1M in and 1M out each day?

Muttonbirds wrote:Finding this stat hard to verify. What does it mean - 1M in and 1M out each day?

Don't know. But if you add up all the passengers going through the airports and channel tunnel, ignoring cruise ships, you get to about 750M visitors a year.

not_english wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:
And even when those seeds enter, in NZ, with it's low population density it will have fewer opportunities to spread anyway.

Low population density? A quarter of the population live in just one city.

A quarter of 5m... not exactly comparable to the likes of London with 10m.

Muttonbirds wrote:

Raggs wrote:

Muttonbirds wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:

Insane_Homer wrote:

Of course out of context posts are easily mocked. But their point, the UK isn't just surrounded by vast amounts of water it's next to multiple highly population dense countries that are to a high level interconnected.

NZ = 21 dead from Covid 19.

That's 21 people, not 21,000 people.

Yes. NZ also gets about 4M visitors a year. The UK has about 2M come through it's ports every day (on average). That's a lot more seeds to get started with, which is the major issue when it comes to spreading a disease.

Finding this stat hard to verify. What does it mean - 1M in and 1M out each day?

I'm not entirely sure where he got that from, but a quick total of UK airports show that from airports alone you see nearly 1 million passengers a day. Dover is good for another 10 million a year, you can probably add another 10 million a year through other ports.

Whatever the actual number is, it's an order of magnitude larger that NZ

Edit

Didn't even think about the tunnel, which carries another 20 million or so a year

Auckland over half the density of London apparently. Even significantly less dense than Dublin if wiki is to be believed.

I think it is difficult in the context of the modern world and with the Channel Tunnel to describe Great Britain as an island in the sense that say the North Island is. NZ had policy options we simply didn't and don't.
Fair play to them but our comparator countries are France, Spain, Italy and Germany - where Germany comes out by far the best and otherwise we come out OK given our previously mentioned inability to put the fork down and our population density.

Insane_Homer wrote:

Not sure if there's a whoosh going on here but the UK does share a land border with another country.

not_english wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:
And even when those seeds enter, in NZ, with it's low population density it will have fewer opportunities to spread anyway.

Low population density? A quarter of the population live in just one city.

Which has a population density of 2,418.1 per km. That wouldn't even get into the UKs most dense 75 cities.

eldanielfire wrote:

not_english wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:
And even when those seeds enter, in NZ, with it's low population density it will have fewer opportunities to spread anyway.

Low population density? A quarter of the population live in just one city.

Which has a population density of 2,418.1 per km. That wouldn't even get into the UKs most dense 75 cities.

And as there are only 69 cities in the uk, that's saying something

happyhooker wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:

not_english wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:
And even when those seeds enter, in NZ, with it's low population density it will have fewer opportunities to spread anyway.

Low population density? A quarter of the population live in just one city.

Which has a population density of 2,418.1 per km. That wouldn't even get into the UKs most dense 75 cities.

And as there are only 69 cities in the uk, that's saying something

I think he;s using the Wikipedia district page, but the general point stands

happyhooker wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:

not_english wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:
And even when those seeds enter, in NZ, with it's low population density it will have fewer opportunities to spread anyway.

Low population density? A quarter of the population live in just one city.

Which has a population density of 2,418.1 per km. That wouldn't even get into the UKs most dense 75 cities.

And as there are only 69 cities in the uk, that's saying something

We have villages that are more densely populated... Hamlets...

message #2527204 wrote:

happyhooker wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:

not_english wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:
And even when those seeds enter, in NZ, with it's low population density it will have fewer opportunities to spread anyway.

Low population density? A quarter of the population live in just one city.

Which has a population density of 2,418.1 per km. That wouldn't even get into the UKs most dense 75 cities.

And as there are only 69 cities in the uk, that's saying something

We have villages that are more densely populated... Hamlets...

The UK has recorded 1657 times the number of deaths NZ has. The UK population is 13.3 times that of NZ. The UK population density is 14.4 times that of NZ.

Clearly there is something else going on. I suspect it is leadership.

sorCrer wrote:

CM11 wrote:

sorCrer wrote:

Lorthern Nights wrote:What has been the longest lockdown a country has had before it started loosening even the smallest of measures?

Sturgeon now saying that she wont let up until at least 28th May, am i wrong or would this make us the longest lockdown, I know some countries have been stricter in terms of the lockdown(kids not outside etc) but would this make it the longest with no let up?

It's f**king depressing we have another 10 day so this shit, f**king police state.

We're at 52 Days 18 Hours and 52 Minutes with no FARKING BOOZE allowed!

Yeah, you guys win!

How's it working out? Is there a lot of prohibition style underground stuff going on?

Everyone is making their own. Cost of pineapples has skyrocketed. You can get underground but it's getting very expensive. Had to pay ZAR600 (GBP27) for a Jameson Special Reserve over the weekend nearly. Also hard to find. Illegal cigarettes can be found at ZAR10 each.

Thats about uk cost price.
Welcome to the big world.

Saint wrote:

happyhooker wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:

not_english wrote:

eldanielfire wrote:
And even when those seeds enter, in NZ, with it's low population density it will have fewer opportunities to spread anyway.

Low population density? A quarter of the population live in just one city.

Which has a population density of 2,418.1 per km. That wouldn't even get into the UKs most dense 75 cities.

And as there are only 69 cities in the uk, that's saying something

I think he;s using the Wikipedia district page, but the general point stands

Yup.

Muttonbirds wrote:The UK has recorded 1657 times the number of deaths NZ has. The UK population is 13.3 times that of NZ. The UK population density is 14.4 times that of NZ.

Clearly there is something else going on. I suspect it is leadership.

The UK has 750 million people coming into and out of it to NZs 4 million. The 2 countries don't have the same pre-pandemic variables. Geography matters.

Muttonbirds wrote: The UK has recorded 1657 times the number of deaths NZ has. The UK population is 13.3 times that of NZ. The UK population density is 14.4 times that of NZ.

Clearly there is something else going on. I suspect it is leadership.

New Zealand is fortunate in terms of this pandemic to be pretty remote from the rest of the world and largely self sufficient. As mentioned we have a land border, are 16 miles from another nation of 65 million people, have one of the world's largest international airports and are very much not self sufficient.

Good luck to NZ and I'm not suggesting the government are faultless here, but I haven't seen many realistic UK specific plans that would see our death numbers drop appreciably.