Contact tracing app

Will it register everyone with a bluetooth signal or only those who have downloaded the app, or even only those with the app who are contacts in your phone?

I saw an interview with a lady from the Isle of Wight and she'd received a text to say she'd been in close proximity to someone.
Her response was to try to work out who it was, eventually concluding she thought it was person X.
However, she'd been to the supermarket and, presumably, walked down the street so unless the App is accurate to within 2 metres its pointless. What if it was a complete stranger on the other side of the road or in a different aisle in the supermarket? She's probably now slightly suspicious or wary of the person she thinks it was which isn't helpful.
I think enough people are wary of just downloading apps in general, and ones that openly track you in particular, that its not going to be used enough to be of much value.

Exactly and the 2m rule is in place because people aren't great at judging distances, the WHO advice is 1m.

I like the principle of contact tracing, but it has the potential to make things worse.

Total bollocks idea. The second I step on to a tube train the app will find at least one person that's been close to someone that's been close to someone else that was close to someone that had symptoms last week. Then all the people that get on after me will see that I was close to someone that was close to someone that's been close to someone else that was close to someone that had symptoms last week. Before the end of the morning rush hour the whole of London would be in a state of panic whipped up by the media after seeing the results from the tracing app showing that 90% of us would be advised to put our affairs in order.

One other issue that will stop the app in its tracks will be how quickly its constant monitoring of bluetooth causes the battery on your phone to die. Given that most teenagers seem to get range anxiety when their battery drops below 90% most will end up turning it off!

What is not clear in the descriptions of the app that I have read is whether it registers all bluetooth contacts - i.e as said already pretty much the whole country inside 3 days - or it registers only if you are in close proximity (well 15-20 ft for bluetooth) for more than a set period of time. It looks like the apple and google apps will need to have close contact for 5+ minutes before it registers as a contact.

Whatever, I reckon either system will throw out loads of false positives.

Racing, I’m really interested in understanding your thinking. As I understand it: 

You’re a fit and healthy man of around 40 years of age.

The risk covid presents to you is tiny (the data shows circa 260 people under 60 with no underlying health issues have died in the uk. Even this low number doesn’t speak to how low risk a fit younger man is, because the 260 deaths are concentrated on the over fifties. This still doesn’t take into account weight or ethnicity) 

London cycling stats show circa 1000 killed or seriously injured each year. The risk that cycling presents to you is small but multiple times higher than covid. 

So why do you make the choices you make? I’m  not trying to be inflammatory, but I’m interested in how you perceive and manage risk. . 

First, the tube at peak times is horrible even without a pandemic afoot and I already avoid it wherever possible. Being crammed in so tight that you have to wait for three trains to pass before getting your turn to wedge in and inhale someone else's breath at a distance of about 20cms or less is deeply horrid. And, I'd remind you that a key issue seems to come around viral load. That's why younger medics have died. It's one thing to have a passing encounter with an infected person. It's quite another to have them breathe directly in your face for quarter of an hour at close range.

Secondly, I like situations I can control and particularly ones where either I can control the risk or I trust the others involved to be professional in managing the risk (eg an airliner pilot). I cannot control the situation in the tube, largely because in no way do I trust a good proportion of my fellow citizens to be acting responsibly. Walking here in London I see three main types of people - those togged up in the full masks etc, those who aren't masked but make an effort to maintain a healthy distance, and those who make no effort whatsoever. The latter type is increasingly common and presumably will later explain a second peak. And then there are the cretins. Like the two 30ish blokes with public school accents outside Homebase who were standing in the queue loudly discussing how ridiculous it all was and basically sounding like Jair Bolsanaro. Or the 20-something bloke who came out of the shop at our local petrol station while I was filling up, and who was coughing and sneezing fit to bust and generally looking and sounding very unwell. He got on a bike and cycled off still coughing. I was glad I could pay at the pump.

Thirdly, irrespective of whether or not it would give me a nasty few weeks in bed (as it did my female cousin who is fit, healthy and six months younger than me), I don't want to unwittingly spread the virus to others who might be more vulnerable, such as my elderly parents or colleagues with underlying healthy conditions. That seems the responsible approach to me.

As regards cycling, I've now been cycling to work in London for a decade and (touch wood) only had one accident, when a pedestrian stepped out in front of me on High Holborn without looking and I was going too fast to stop. In general, I take care to cycle in a prudent manner, highly mindful that I'm liable to come off worse in any accident, and it's an approach that has served me well so far. But I see significant numbers of cyclists either actively behaving like complete prats (usually men, usually being impatient and acting like they are trying to win the Tour de France en route to their office) or just displaying a complete obliviousness to other road users or the Highway Code (usually women with a wobbly riding style).

Does that mean that for every 1000 boys born, only 1 will die before 40? That seems extremely low to me.

Die between 40 and 41 is how I read that, not before 40...

Ah right, got it. Still seems reassuringly low to me.

What's it between 54 and 55? Just asking for a friend? EDIT: 1 in 279 - 1 in 114. Kind of reassuring..

I’m in the 1 in 279 group. I’m thinking of either having a sex change to almost halve my risk or perhaps shooting a random 51 year old man so he can be the 1.

Again this is sadly largely accounted for by suicide although the fact young men are likely to take more dangerous risks than young women also plays some part I imagine.