Ditto

Last 3 boxes of LFD's are the old style tickle the tonsils sort. The OCON nasal only ones are far less uncomfortable.

I use a small cycle rucksack - I carry a puncture repair kit, snack bars, plasters(!) and room to carry the waterproofs for when the weather makes a sudden improvement. Oh, and the phone and wallet for those oh so important cafe stops!

I'm normally wary of early predications but I'm going to and I reckon case numbers will be rising before the weeks out. I'd be delighted to be proved to be wrong. I suspect it's not the data point that will drive policy, I think that's firmly on hospital capacity.

Any more details/links on this? TBH, given the product the original product was dropped in 2012, they had kept it free for best part of a decade as a courtesy. Now, I'm not a fan of subscription software, but it's the way of things nowadays and as some have pointed out here, it's been a great deal for a long time, but you have the choice to go elsewhere. It'd be pretty surprising a class action could be successful, but perhaps it depends on the original contract. Even if it said something like 'free for ever', I would be surprised if there isn't a get out clause somewhere. However, I would guess the numbers that subscribed back then are so small, Google could absorb the costs and might decide it's not worth the expense of pursuing through the courts. In hindsight, wish I signed up then, even if I had to consider paying now! *** Edit - https://workspace.google.com/terms/standard_terms.html suggests under section 3 they can cancel the original deal. However, it doesn't fully look like an original copy of the agreement give it uses the term 'Workspace' throughout. I'd like to see the original, but I expect it's water-tight ***

Thought I'd try again in case anyone was lucky enough to get a PS5 from Santa. I think my neighbour might be in a small minority!

Wordle 215 5/6 Just the one go, perhaps I should quite whilst ahead!

That's an interesting observation and I will, time permitting and subject to the data being available have another look. You could be right and me completely wrong. However, on the graph the @mavhc produced there are a few things that need considering. A few points to note. Are the cases figures specimen date or date reported? Omicron is a big factor here and it was only mid December that it became dominant UK. The number of ONS data points are few, so I'd be wary of drawing too much of a conclusion from the single last figure comparing with cases. Yes, it looks like a close correlation on the graph before then, but the scales are very different and if the percentages were convert to case numbers, the difference would not show so starkly. The percentage number ONS talk about equate to case numbers that are massively higher than the cases reported data. The case numbers around Christmas and New Year were very volatile due to a number of factors. Often they would have England but not other devolved countries but there were other factors impacting published numbers around holiday periods. I don't know if the data set is a 'fixed' set because of this, but the very 'spiky' graph suggests it's not. Perhaps a 7 day average would paint a clearly picture or using a trendline might help. I would think in a couple more weeks the picture will be clearer. I would note however that the last few days of cases (date reported) are not dropping as dramatically as the previous week. With a 7 day average at around 90,00 0 per day, that is a worry. In terms of government decision making, I believe they are now much more focussed on hospitalisation rates than case rates and even deaths, but that's due to the vaccines and other treatments.

With the latest ONS studies released https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/19january2022 it does indeed appear the case numbers did genuinely fall. From this, for me, it does dismiss the view it was to do with unavailability of tests or other factors. What is additionally interesting is the ONS decided to publish earlier than usual with normal updates on Friday as usual.

Fundamentally, this all links back to the GDPR Principle of Data Minimisation. If you can show a genuine need for holding the data, then you should be fine. What you shouldn't be doing is holding data 'just in case' it's needed. ICO cover this at https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/principles/storage-limitation/ I'd suggest include your DPO in the discussion to advise on the decision.

I'm not doubting they said this at all, but where was it stated - was it in an email or elsewhere?

The true figure is widely understood to be much higher though. I've not seen a figure that is really reliably convincing, but a Cambridge Uni study suggested 30-40% and that was before Omicron took off. In terms of immunity levels, it wouldn't provide much insight though, I think you need to consider both those who have had covid and those with varying degrees immunisation. ONS suggest over 96% of all adults in all UK countries have antibodies (source). With current infection numbers in adults, whilst it has a significant impact on severe disease, case numbers are clearly very high. In terms of the broad concept of herd immunity, I don't think covid is comparable with some other diseases, in part due to the frequency of breakthrough infection. I think care needs to be taken when comparing R naught values too. Historically R0 would have related to a diseases 'spreadability' without other actions, including societal behaviour changes. For much of the time Covid has been we us, a good chunk of society has changed it's behaviour. I suspect Omicron is way up there with other highly contagious diseases. I'm remain interested in your thoughts on percentages of covid infections though. Is it inevitable that over time it will sweep through the majority of the population, or can it be dodged?

Like you, we collected this and I was unconvinced it was necessary. Some said it might be to contact the GP in the case where a child carries an epipen or suffers from epilepsy. But with 111 and 999, I really don't think that stance has sway in today's world. Besides, if ringing my local GP surgery is anything to go by, the speed of response is such that it's no use for urgent situations. From my time as a Data Manager, I don't think we ever used the details and it certainly wasn't needed for any of the census submissions. Good job on getting it removed. The data you don't have is the easiest manage from a GDPR perspective!

For my interest what is the source for the 22% figure. As it's known cases, I guess the true figure is much higher. I find it tricky to decide how to interpret the figure - is it a bad thing that suggests we have not had the virus under some sort of control. Or is it not so bad thing, meaning we will move to some kind of herd immunity sooner. I guess ones view could depend on whether you believe, with a mixture of science and behavioural change, we can dodge the virus indefinitely, or whether we believe we will move to 'living with it' like we do with the common flu. Personally I'm torn between the two viewpoints.

I do understand the apprehension, but a few things in relation to the graph. Assuming positivity is as a result of a LFT, that'll be Day 3 already so the 5 day rule would get you to Day 8. Whilst not as low as Day 10, or more depending on the start of counting, that's a viral load of what is shown for Day 5 on the chart. Is the chart to scale - I've no idea? Also, the chart is pre-Omicron variant, indeed probably pre-Delta as the chart I believe comes from an article written in November 2020. For a more scientific understanding on why 5 days is now thought appropriate, it's worth reading the CDC article https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s1227-isolation-quarantine-guidance.html So whilst initial the 5 day proposal sounds counter-intuitive there really is science behind it and I don't think it is right to just assume it driven by political desire 'to send the masses back to work'. If I were to be critical of YNW, I would suggest there should be much more emphasis on 'strict mask wearing' post 5 days for a period as suggested in the CDC paper.

After the latest news, I guess I must ... "What a return!"

Bit of a balls up all round really. I expect he's lost a lot of love. I think he'll be served notice to leave, but perhaps he'll have a slice of luck and get to stay and could even come out on top. Spin it around though, maybe not. Either way, I'm sure the tournament will be ace.

Yes, yes, silence in court - he could end up in the wrong one!

I Ain't Stupid, the statement doesn't Stand Up logically - those lateral flow immunoassay's are different to each other, of course the results could differ.:) Besides, wasn't water sampling 'a thing' to detect infection levels?!

On the topic on whether case numbers are truly falling, there's an interesting set of views shared. In time, the regular ONS random sampling will provide an indication of what has really happened in the time period in question. It'd be great if, when that time comes, we all post to say if each our expectations was right, wrong or somewhere in the middle.

It's now been explained to me as to how the confusion for Novak occurred. He read "No one allowed in to Australia without a vaccine". He read "No one" as his tennis ranking - i.e. Number one!

Case rates are dropping almost as rapidly as they rose. I hope the trend continues but then stays down. It's clearer than ever that the correlation between cases and hospitalisations is very different to a year ago and before. On anti-virals, I'm looking forward to seeing the impact of those in the field and hopeful about there ability to have a significant impact. I'm wary of of being overly optimistic and troublesome new variants remain a concern, but I do see light at the end of what has been a long and dark tunnel.

I read it this way too - there are two containers, one is full, they other is nearly full. I could be completely wrong though!

One thing that has really struck me, and perhaps @Koldov captured it with "but she's not stupid, just not very IT literate", it shows our education system as a whole is lacking. The fact that use of technology is an issue for some post-graduates and some post teacher trained staff is quite frankly worrying. As others have pointed out, perhaps this has set up a vicious circle. Perhaps my view is slightly extreme, but in today's world the basic level of IT skills that should allow everyone coming out of school with the ability to save work is as fundamental as reading and writing. Like others, one of the sentence's that drive me insane is "I'm not good with computers" as a start point. They are an important, but not exclusive. tool in modern education. Trying my own JVT - how many teachers drive in to school? A lot, especially when you consider rural schools. Driving involves a lot of skills, and usual requires coordinating all four limbs! Imagine getting in to a car as a passenger and the driver says "I'm not good with driving" - not reassuring!

I think the wiper metaphor is fantastic. Deserving of a JVT award! https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av-embeds/59979504/vpid/p0bh0trh

Number 1 - this is NOT a teacher bashing post so please don't make it one. The vast majority are extremely dedicated, work hard and deserve respect. As a spin off from another thread that discussed the fact a teacher wasn't able to teach pupils how to store documents, I pondered whether some of the issues lie in teacher training. It then got me thinking what are the minimum skills that we should expect from teachers. I'm no expert on teacher training, but I believe you require a degree nowadays to teach. I know there a a few options then to achieve QTS. I had a very brief look for teacher training curricula to see if it give insight - here's one for Initial Teacher Training https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/974307/ITT_core_content_framework_.pdf It doesn't give me assurance that IT skills are covered, but wouldn't it be required for a degree anyway? A search of this document for "computing", "technology" or "internet" give no meaningful results - in fact "technology" and "internet" are complete absent. Maybe that's fine, or perhaps it shows it's not current with the world in which we operate today? For me, I would expect all teachers to have: basic IT skills, in much the same way a reading, writing and numeracy skills high levels of knowledge around safe-guarding basic health and safety skills The remainder I would expect to be about the methods of teaching(pedagogy if you prefer), classroom management and subject knowledge. Is that too simplistic? What would you add?