Author Topic: Coronavirus and Audax  (Read 92093 times)

Cudzoziemiec

  • Ride adventurously and stop for a brew.
Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #725 on: 17 April, 2020, 04:36:38 pm »
Did you guys not live through the HIV era?

That was stressful: no cure and not many chances of survival even for perfectly healthy individuals... and that lasted for years, before a drug became available... a vaccine never did, as far as I am aware. Yes, getting it wasn't as easy, but the outcome was far more dire.
It's completely different. The chance of getting HIV was almost entirely behaviour-based. The chance of getting Covid is random. Yes, there are things you can do to lessen the risk, but it's only a minor reduction particularly if there are others in your household who take less care. I don't think anyone got HIV from a parcel, a door handle or by shaking hands. Just as importantly for the perception of stress is the information gap; too little then, almost too much now.
Riding a concrete path through the nebulous and chaotic future.

S2L

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #726 on: 17 April, 2020, 04:50:42 pm »
Did you guys not live through the HIV era?

That was stressful: no cure and not many chances of survival even for perfectly healthy individuals... and that lasted for years, before a drug became available... a vaccine never did, as far as I am aware. Yes, getting it wasn't as easy, but the outcome was far more dire.
It's completely different. The chance of getting HIV was almost entirely behaviour-based. The chance of getting Covid is random. Yes, there are things you can do to lessen the risk, but it's only a minor reduction particularly if there are others in your household who take less care. I don't think anyone got HIV from a parcel, a door handle or by shaking hands. Just as importantly for the perception of stress is the information gap; too little then, almost too much now.

Agree on the information... as for the mode, hard to say, nobody knows whether you can get it from a letter through the door, I think not.
Back then, we didn't know to which extent there needed to be exchange of bodily fluids... besides, I was a teenager rearing to get involved with the opposite sex and AIDS was a big big scare for me, much more so than COVID-19 is now...

And how about the bomb? Did you guys not live through the nuclear bomb paranoia? At the time we lived with this constant feeling that the world was going to end overnight, because someone pressed a button in USSR... at least here nobody is talking about the end of the world.

Moral: yes, it's big, but it's not as black as it was back then and if you suck up the news in moderation, then you can live with a mild anxiety and can sleep at night

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #727 on: 17 April, 2020, 05:00:12 pm »
It's completely different. The chance of getting HIV was almost entirely behaviour-based.

Many people who died of aids contracted it through what were fairly normal lifestyle choices (among their community), which until then had been relatively low risk. That's not really so different to why Covid-19 has spread so quickly.

It occurred to me the other day that we're very lucky Covid-19 isn't nearly as deadly as other viral illnesses like aids or ebola. Or that those illnesses aren't nearly as contagious as Covid-19.

Ebola doesn't become contagious until you develop symptoms, by which time people really don't need to be told to keep at least 2m away from you.
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #728 on: 17 April, 2020, 05:23:22 pm »
Given recent comments regarding stress /anxiety perhaps this is the right thread to share this from my Zwift Team mate Hannah, if anyone would care to assist?



Quote

Hi!
We–that’s Ege, Oskar and Hannah–are students of psychology at Lund University (Sweden).
We would like to find out how people around Europe are feeling during the SARS-CoV-2 (coronavirus) pandemic and what influences their wellbeing during these special times.
To support us, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this quick survey: https://lundpsychology.eu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_38d4ODPwLMoJCip
If you
- are at least 18 years old
- understand English at an intermediate level (you don’t have to be a native speaker)
- currently live in Europe (EU and non-EU countries)
you are eligible to be part of our research!
It will only take about 15 minutes for you and will help us a lot.

Best wishes from
Ege, Oskar and Hannah

Cudzoziemiec

  • Ride adventurously and stop for a brew.
Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #729 on: 17 April, 2020, 07:32:50 pm »
It's completely different. The chance of getting HIV was almost entirely behaviour-based.

Many people who died of aids contracted it through what were fairly normal lifestyle choices (among their community), which until then had been relatively low risk. That's not really so different to why Covid-19 has spread so quickly.
Absolutely. They just didn't happen to be my lifestyle. And I wouldn't claim these are facts in any case – stress is about perception not real risks and consequences.

Quote
It occurred to me the other day that we're very lucky Covid-19 isn't nearly as deadly as other viral illnesses like aids or ebola. Or that those illnesses aren't nearly as contagious as Covid-19.

Ebola doesn't become contagious until you develop symptoms, by which time people really don't need to be told to keep at least 2m away from you.
I believe ian has made various allusions to the likelihood that the pandemic we were due would have been worse, though I don't think he's elaborated in what ways.
Riding a concrete path through the nebulous and chaotic future.

Cudzoziemiec

  • Ride adventurously and stop for a brew.
Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #730 on: 17 April, 2020, 07:35:36 pm »
Getting back to traffic: I've just been for a run (no bike involved!) and there were around three times as many cars on the same streets as when I did this on Wednesday. I reckon the main difference is that today it's raining. But there were still slightly more cyclists than normal. Stoop-sitters totally absent, of course. I don't think this bodes well for any proclaimed traffic rebalancing.
Riding a concrete path through the nebulous and chaotic future.

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #731 on: 17 April, 2020, 07:40:46 pm »
I think the traffic reappeared here yesterday.  I was out for a ride on Wednesday, and while it was slightly busier than the weekend, there was still very little.  Yesterday there were proper queues at traffic lights.  Today I didn't go far enough to really tell, but it seems quieter.

Cudzoziemiec

  • Ride adventurously and stop for a brew.
Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #732 on: 17 April, 2020, 07:42:49 pm »
On Wednesday it was quieter than Easter weekend here. I didn't notice a huge amount yesterday but that was earlier in the morning. What, if anything, is your theory as to the reason for the reappearance?
Riding a concrete path through the nebulous and chaotic future.

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #733 on: 17 April, 2020, 07:49:26 pm »
London roads stopped being empty on Tuesday.

My theory is that there's a lot of workers (and employers) who were kind of ok with skipping work if it was only for three weeks, but have now decided they can't be bothered / can't afford to. There's also a lot of people who have realised there are no police roadblocks and are going to see their mates (or whatever).

Cars being as space inefficient as they are, it only takes a fraction of the population to get back in theirs for the roads to seem busy.

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #734 on: 17 April, 2020, 08:42:53 pm »
Easter (school) holidays would have had an effect too. Many people had booked time off work so they were at home with the family. Some Holiday plans would have changed and some people would be going back to work earlier.

I expect it will be even busier next week as all of the schools (private and state) are scheduled to be back (even though they'll still be closed).
"Yes please" said Squirrel "biscuits are our favourite things."

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #735 on: 17 April, 2020, 11:00:38 pm »
The more major (as far as that goes in rural Suffolk) roads were most certainly busier today than I've seen them since the lockdown started. However, the supermarket car parks were as empty as is now normal, and the one industrial estate I rode through was as dead as it's been  throughout the last 4 weeks. So where did all the traffic come from and where was it going? Most of the vehicles I saw were commercial, from WVM up to the 44-tonners that use our roads as a cut-through to avoid the A14, A12 and A120. There really weren't very many private cars. So I guess a lot of builders, plumbers, electricians etc have decided that earning a living is more important than staying home, and the big distributors feeding Amazon and the like have got themselves organised and are back on-speed. The lanes (my usual haunt) were as quiet as I've become used to, and there were lots of dog-emptiers out, most of whom were decidedly not expecting any kind of wheeled traffic, including bicycles!

S2L

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #736 on: 18 April, 2020, 07:08:17 am »
London roads stopped being empty on Tuesday.

My theory is that there's a lot of workers (and employers) who were kind of ok with skipping work if it was only for three weeks, but have now decided they can't be bothered / can't afford to. There's also a lot of people who have realised there are no police roadblocks and are going to see their mates (or whatever).

Cars being as space inefficient as they are, it only takes a fraction of the population to get back in theirs for the roads to seem busy.

Looking at the stats, it went back to being as it was before the Easter BH... during which it was exceedingly quiet. During my ride, I cross the M40 twice and it's still very quiet, although not as deserted. I'd say 50% is lorry traffic.

I don't think people go and see their mates, it's mostly people finding any excuse to go out and buy stuff. For instance my neighbour has gone out many a times to get wood at B&Q click and collect and he's building all sorts of stuff in the garden. If they are allowed to sell, people are allowed to buy...

Personally, I don't think there is any benefit in the complete and patrolled lockdown Italian style, as opposed to a self disciplined "partial" lockdown as we are seeing here.
The numbers are the same, which shows the effect is the same, except theirs is not sustainable, as images show.
Holland seems to be doing better than Belgium, despite fewer restrictions...

Cudzoziemiec

  • Ride adventurously and stop for a brew.
Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #737 on: 20 April, 2020, 03:31:50 pm »
Traffic on that little circuit of residential streets was back to pre-Easter levels today, so I reckon for that particular locality – residential streets and a high proportion of residents being either students or old people, so not going to work even without lockdown – weather was a factor that persuaded them into their cars for shopping or whatever.
Riding a concrete path through the nebulous and chaotic future.

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #738 on: 26 April, 2020, 08:28:50 pm »
I have the impression that Jagwahs, Carreras, Q4-8 and large Beemers are exempt from the [all?] legislation ::-)

S2L

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #739 on: 29 April, 2020, 06:19:27 am »

Wycombewheeler

  • PBP-2019 LEL-2022
Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #740 on: 29 April, 2020, 08:53:25 am »
Some hope?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/52465031
I'm not sure I agree with the conclusions, while elite sport is more complicated to organise, the sheer numbers involved at grassroots means more if an impact if it is done hastily,  also better organisation at the top to mitigate the risks.

I think park run is not a good candidate for returning sport due to the close proximity and large crowds. Audax is better, particularly x rated events but political decisions are likely to consider all sports and offer consistent rules for all.

I guess it depends where we go from here,  is it to no restrictions or a new sustainable normal where people can go avignon their lives but some high risk activities will never return and I'm not sure the world knows which they should be planning for.

Eddington  127miles, 170km

S2L

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #741 on: 29 April, 2020, 08:58:07 am »
Park run can be easily made socially distant... limit the number of entries, make sure they stand apart and set some rules like they all run on the left and overtake on the right...
It's not rocket science and nobody will catch the virus by standing for a couple of seconds within 2 mt of another... otherwise the average R wouldn't be 3, but more like 30

Wycombewheeler

  • PBP-2019 LEL-2022
Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #742 on: 29 April, 2020, 09:09:49 am »
490 people competed in the my local park run when it last happened. Distancing is just not possible, yes you could limit numbers, but it is really back on if only a fifth of the usual participants can enter?

Eddington  127miles, 170km

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #743 on: 29 April, 2020, 09:12:57 am »
No idea how you would limit numbers on a Parkrun. You count people with clickers and have lots of tape, and lots of Marshalls with cattle prods  ???
It is simpler than it looks.

Davef

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #744 on: 29 April, 2020, 09:21:29 am »
You could insist on masks before the gun. You could limit entry by the final digit of park run number - eg to halve numbers evens this week odds next.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #745 on: 29 April, 2020, 09:31:12 am »
For my local parkrun (Wimbledon Common) you'd probably have to limit it to 1/10th of the usual field, probably even less, such are the width of some of the paths on the early part of the course.

[ EDIT - let's have some fun with maths... ]

600 people funnel through here: https://goo.gl/maps/xwgG5J7CHAkdwSut6 within 400m of the start. The bit at the end is easily under 2m wide so everyone would need to go through one at a time.

The fast people (~15min) will be through 400m in just over a minute. The slow people (1h) will be through 400m in just under 5 minutes.

So you have 240 seconds to get 600 people through that gap one at a time, so each person has 0.4 seconds to travel 2m through the gap to maintain distance. 2m in 0.4 seconds is 18kph. Nope.
"Yes please" said Squirrel "biscuits are our favourite things."

S2L

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #746 on: 29 April, 2020, 09:42:12 am »
You could insist on masks before the gun. You could limit entry by the final digit of park run number - eg to halve numbers evens this week odds next.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For example, yes....

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #747 on: 29 April, 2020, 09:46:08 am »
For my local parkrun (Wimbledon Common) you'd probably have to limit it to 1/10th of the usual field, probably even less, such are the width of some of the paths on the early part of the course.

There will be many Parkruns like this.
It is simpler than it looks.

Davef

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #748 on: 29 April, 2020, 09:57:14 am »
Based on covid tracker my area is now down to to 0.8% infection from a high of 5%. Give it another couple of weeks and it will half again. Only a third of them will be asymptomatic and despite not having symptoms will probably feel a bit shit. On a Park run of say 500 people there might be 1 person with the virus. I would feel safer than going to the supermarket or work. Money and food are a bigger motivator to ignore minor symptoms. The worry for massive events like London marathon is not the running it is the travel on public transport and spectators.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Re: Coronavirus and Audax
« Reply #749 on: 29 April, 2020, 10:26:32 am »
Some hope?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/52465031

The author - Laura Scott - is one of us (i.e cycles stupid distances for no apparent reason)