Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
LOL sorry I need to break my don't respond directly to twats rule.
So have I got this right, people are going into lockdown and quarantine. So why are they buying handwash if they aren't going to go anywhere?
I think the logic is people are doing it before it reaches that point.
The problem with these "10% of the world's population are going to die of this virus" predictions isn't just that they are wrong. I know lots of people who were saying the same kind of thing for the last 3 viruses. Now people have been complacent, and perhaps as a result we've lost the chance to contain this one. Part of the fault lies with the hysterical doom-mongers.
We might actually get a wake-up call with this pandemic, as the next one could be a lot worse and we need to have better systems in place around the world.
You know how it is - the bit when you catch sight of the monster in a horror film and you finally know it's real.
As I said, catastrophising.
Well, no, because if it's real it ain't catastrophising - unless you are making an "it's only a movie" point. Even in real life, the ship does sometimes hit the iceberg. I am not panicking, because I don't think a good clear out of the age >50 biomass is something to worry about long term, but it takes anti-vaxxer levels of ascientism to be able to believe that we are not in for a seriously shit time.
Biomass !!!!
I'm over 50, as are many of my peers.
Is it good we may die due to this ?
Really ?
I am well over 50.
My question did not relate to your age.
OK if you want it spelled out: I am fine with it in my own case, and, much as I wish you well, not going to lose whole night times of sleep about yours.
The problem with these "10% of the world's population are going to die of this virus" predictions isn't just that they are wrong. I know lots of people who were saying the same kind of thing for the last 3 viruses. Now people have been complacent, and perhaps as a result we've lost the chance to contain this one. Part of the fault lies with the hysterical doom-mongers.
We might actually get a wake-up call with this pandemic, as the next one could be a lot worse and we need to have better systems in place around the world.
You know how it is - the bit when you catch sight of the monster in a horror film and you finally know it's real.
As I said, catastrophising.
Well, no, because if it's real it ain't catastrophising - unless you are making an "it's only a movie" point. Even in real life, the ship does sometimes hit the iceberg. I am not panicking, because I don't think a good clear out of the age >50 biomass is something to worry about long term, but it takes anti-vaxxer levels of ascientism to be able to believe that we are not in for a seriously shit time.
Biomass !!!!
I'm over 50, as are many of my peers.
Is it good we may die due to this ?
Really ?
I am well over 50.
Do you form a huddle at the meet and despair at your prospects given the forthcoming 5ft hedges?
Well ... yes, actually. It's a huddle of one, though, and the despair is silent and internalised.
Also these days I go through gates, if there is one.
Biden had a 4.9% chance of winning a while ago, and has a 25% chance of not winning at the time of the thread header being written. People were backing the 25s so is anyone laying the 1/3? The mood seems to be he cant lose yet he is 5 times more likely to than he was to win when people were backing that
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
The problem with these "10% of the world's population are going to die of this virus" predictions isn't just that they are wrong. I know lots of people who were saying the same kind of thing for the last 3 viruses. Now people have been complacent, and perhaps as a result we've lost the chance to contain this one. Part of the fault lies with the hysterical doom-mongers.
We might actually get a wake-up call with this pandemic, as the next one could be a lot worse and we need to have better systems in place around the world.
You know how it is - the bit when you catch sight of the monster in a horror film and you finally know it's real.
As I said, catastrophising.
Well, no, because if it's real it ain't catastrophising - unless you are making an "it's only a movie" point. Even in real life, the ship does sometimes hit the iceberg. I am not panicking, because I don't think a good clear out of the age >50 biomass is something to worry about long term, but it takes anti-vaxxer levels of ascientism to be able to believe that we are not in for a seriously shit time.
Biomass !!!!
I'm over 50, as are many of my peers.
Is it good we may die due to this ?
Really ?
I am well over 50.
Then it could well be argued you're taking an artificially over-distanced approach.
As I've posted before, my wife and I are well over 50. Indeed we are closer to 100 than 50! And I was identified as asthmatic nearly 80 years ago, although it's never been necessary to hospitalise me for it. So it's sensible precautions. As of 4/3/20 there have been NO cases, or, so far as we know, tests, in our part of Essex. Therefore we have turned down the chance of a theatre trip to London, somewhat to our regret, but we shall otherwise will carry on living life as normal, albeit with more, and more thorough, hand-washing. We will meet with our friends, go the local clubs and societies to which we belong and, as we did yesterday, go to the cinema and to a restaurant locally. If things become more serious we shall cut back on the cinema. What we are not doing is panicking. We are of course, concerned for our family, spread as they are across the world.
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
LOL sorry I need to break my don't respond directly to twats rule.
So have I got this right, people are going into lockdown and quarantine. So why are they buying handwash if they aren't going to go anywhere?
I think the logic is people are doing it before it reaches that point.
LOL. So at what point do those people retreat into quarantine? There are cases in the UK already. Our man was in Essex and I believe the Central Line reaches as far as Ongar. So is it brinksmanship? I'll wait until there is a confirmed case at the Kings Arms on the High Street and then that's it I'm off.
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
What do you think panic buying is? It isnt someone randomly panicking when everything hunky dory but people mass buying because of their fear of a serious situation. This is precisely panic buying, fair or not.
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
LOL sorry I need to break my don't respond directly to twats rule.
So have I got this right, people are going into lockdown and quarantine. So why are they buying handwash if they aren't going to go anywhere?
I think the logic is people are doing it before it reaches that point.
LOL. So at what point do those people retreat into quarantine? There are cases in the UK already. Our man was in Essex and I believe the Central Line reaches as far as Ongar. So is it brinksmanship? I'll wait until there is a confirmed case at the Kings Arms on the High Street and then that's it I'm off.
This is hardly unsurprising. We can reasonably assume that it will eventually reach 95%+. All the day-to-day increase shows is that the outbreak has been going on for quite a while and that new cases are not overwhelming resolved ones.
That said, once the Chinese bulge starts to drop off the figures and/or the outbreak in the rest of the world begins to overtake the China Phase I outbreak, the recovery rate may start dropping again. Not that that will be any more meaningful by itself.
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
LOL sorry I need to break my don't respond directly to twats rule.
So have I got this right, people are going into lockdown and quarantine. So why are they buying handwash if they aren't going to go anywhere?
I think the logic is people are doing it before it reaches that point.
LOL. So at what point do those people retreat into quarantine? There are cases in the UK already. Our man was in Essex and I believe the Central Line reaches as far as Ongar. So is it brinksmanship? I'll wait until there is a confirmed case at the Kings Arms on the High Street and then that's it I'm off.
After the panic buying, I suppose.
So they will use the hand sanitiser when they move from the sitting room to the kitchen for a re-up on Pringles?
Bloomberg is 78 and his net worth is estimated at $55 billion. So what if he dropped half a billion on a one-off gamble for the presidency? It affects his lifestyle not one bit. For you or me, it's eye-watering. For him, it's chump change.
He'll be far more concerned about the reputational side. $500 million is nothing. Sneers from Trump, and cheap laughs on TV shows are probably infinitely more important to him.
Even that he can rationalize away - telling himself he gave the Dems a backstop when it looked like they needed it, but now they don't. And he can now use the infrastructure he has created for this run and his other causes (gun control, education) to support Biden's fight against Trump.
He'll be disappointed, but he'll rationalize it and move on to the next challenge because that is the mindset of someone as genuinely successful (i.e. not Trumpian successful) as Bloomberg.
I'm not even certain he'll be that disappointed. He's made it clear he wants Trump out and will put his money where his mouth is in an attempt to get a Democrat elected.
Bloomberg is 78 and his net worth is estimated at $55 billion. So what if he dropped half a billion on a one-off gamble for the presidency? It affects his lifestyle not one bit. For you or me, it's eye-watering. For him, it's chump change.
He'll be far more concerned about the reputational side. $500 million is nothing. Sneers from Trump, and cheap laughs on TV shows are probably infinitely more important to him.
Even that he can rationalize away - telling himself he gave the Dems a backstop when it looked like they needed it, but now they don't. And he can now use the infrastructure he has created for this run and his other causes (gun control, education) to support Biden's fight against Trump.
He'll be disappointed, but he'll rationalize it and move on to the next challenge because that is the mindset of someone as genuinely successful (i.e. not Trumpian successful) as Bloomberg.
There are five and a half months from now until the Republican convention which will determine who Betfair pay out on as the Republican nominee. What could possibly go wrong? Trump can be laid at 1.06. He has already asked whether he could nuke a hurricane and use a flu vaccine against the coronavirus. He is the most iconic president since JFK, in a country where the median age is 38. "The President and the Land are One" is what he will have to go for, and it won't work.
My best model (logistic) predicts near-universal infection by early May, ~11 million deaths in the US by the summer. Can they hold e-conventions?
Would you mind posting your projections for what numbers in the UK might look like, please?
I haven't looked at any one country individually yet. I'm using figures for the world outside of China, starting when the number was 697 on 15 Feb.
sure you've got a perfectly good reason for excluding China (though I note you include every single human on the planet in your predictions??)
China have taken measures that no other country is able to do,
Henrietta2's model L is looking very good (at this early stage). It predicts very widespread infection, and the associated social desolation, pretty damn soon.
It all depends what the mortality rate turns out to be in countries like the UK and Germany. Hopefully it'll be significantly lower than South Korea and Italy.
This is hardly unsurprising. We can reasonably assume that it will eventually reach 95%+. All the day-to-day increase shows is that the outbreak has been going on for quite a while and that new cases are not overwhelming resolved ones.
That said, once the Chinese bulge starts to drop off the figures and/or the outbreak in the rest of the world begins to overtake the China Phase I outbreak, the recovery rate may start dropping again. Not that that will be any more meaningful by itself.
And we will probably never know how many people had asymptomatic cases, or had minor cold like symptoms and recovered without even knowing they had it.
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
What do you think panic buying is? It isnt someone randomly panicking when everything hunky dory but people mass buying because of their fear of a serious situation. This is precisely panic buying, fair or not.
It depends on whether you consider "panic buying" implies irrationality or not.
If your definition requires that it's irrational, then preparing for the eventuality that you'll need to self-isolate isn't panic buying. If not, then it is.
This is hardly unsurprising. We can reasonably assume that it will eventually reach 95%+. All the day-to-day increase shows is that the outbreak has been going on for quite a while and that new cases are not overwhelming resolved ones.
That said, once the Chinese bulge starts to drop off the figures and/or the outbreak in the rest of the world begins to overtake the China Phase I outbreak, the recovery rate may start dropping again. Not that that will be any more meaningful by itself.
Yes, all it reflects is the lag time between new cases and recovery in the early stage of an outbreak when the daily level of new cases is still increasing.
The region of Lombardy is the epicenter of Italy’s outbreak, registering the first positive test of the northern cluster and now counting at least 1,254 of Italy’s 2,036 cases. Alarmingly, 10% of Lombardy’s doctors and nurses cannot work because they tested positive for the virus and are in quarantine, the region’s top health official, Giulio Gallera, said Monday.
Some 9% of people diagnosed with the COVID-19 need intensive care, Borrelli said.
“We’ll take anyone: old, young. We need personnel, especially qualified doctors,” Gallera told reporters.
Regional authorities have asked Lombardy’s hospitals to reduce by 70 percent their planned or elective surgeries, to free up ICU beds for virus patients.
I have a lovely job in Nicaragua coming up, a private island in a lake etc. Until recently I was thinking cautiously - cancel everything, hide out, etc. As many will do. And as many will be forced to do. There will be lockdowns, I expect.
Are there direct flights between London and Nicaragua? Or are you going to have to make a stop in the USA somewhere, change planes, pick up the virus, and go on to infect the poor old Nicaraguans?
Extrapolation a la Henrietta should not be described as analysis. It is like claiming that if amoebae split every minute then before the year is out they will occupy all known space. More interesting and moot is the 80% limit that the epidemiologists use (as referenced by the Chief Medical Officer on the radio this morning). Whether policies can shift that would be worth pursuing.
As to @eadric's so called headless chicken act, I have certainly learned more from his effusions than can be gleaned from the mainstream media and wouldn't want to discourage him. The court jester was valuable to the king as for truly speaking truth to power, even if hidden in a cloak of gibberish.
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
What do you think panic buying is? It isnt someone randomly panicking when everything hunky dory but people mass buying because of their fear of a serious situation. This is precisely panic buying, fair or not.
It depends on whether you consider "panic buying" implies irrationality or not.
If your definition requires that it's irrational, then preparing for the eventuality that you'll need to self-isolate isn't panic buying. If not, then it is.
Please give examples of panic buying where people were not preparing for eventualities where they might need the stuff they are panicking to get.
Bloomberg is 78 and his net worth is estimated at $55 billion. So what if he dropped half a billion on a one-off gamble for the presidency? It affects his lifestyle not one bit. For you or me, it's eye-watering. For him, it's chump change.
He'll be far more concerned about the reputational side. $500 million is nothing. Sneers from Trump, and cheap laughs on TV shows are probably infinitely more important to him.
Even that he can rationalize away - telling himself he gave the Dems a backstop when it looked like they needed it, but now they don't. And he can now use the infrastructure he has created for this run and his other causes (gun control, education) to support Biden's fight against Trump.
He'll be disappointed, but he'll rationalize it and move on to the next challenge because that is the mindset of someone as genuinely successful (i.e. not Trumpian successful) as Bloomberg.
I expect him to be next Treasury Secretary.
Does that presuppose the Dems win the White House in November?
There are five and a half months from now until the Republican convention which will determine who Betfair pay out on as the Republican nominee. What could possibly go wrong? Trump can be laid at 1.06. He has already asked whether he could nuke a hurricane and use a flu vaccine against the coronavirus. He is the most iconic president since JFK, in a country where the median age is 38. "The President and the Land are One" is what he will have to go for, and it won't work.
My best model (logistic) predicts near-universal infection by early May, ~11 million deaths in the US by the summer. Can they hold e-conventions?
Would you mind posting your projections for what numbers in the UK might look like, please?
I haven't looked at any one country individually yet. I'm using figures for the world outside of China, starting when the number was 697 on 15 Feb.
sure you've got a perfectly good reason for excluding China (though I note you include every single human on the planet in your predictions??)
China have taken measures that no other country is able to do,
Henrietta2's model L is looking very good (at this early stage). It predicts very widespread infection, and the associated social desolation, pretty damn soon.
It doesn’t predict anything. She has just drawn a line (curve) through some dots. As new dots come in, she’ll keep moving the line. At the end, she’ll still have a line through some dots, and have predicted nothing.
This attitude is just insane.
This is why I (and others) are the adults, and you and Topping etc are the snotty nosed toddlers.
You don't like what the big bad older person is saying, because it is scary, and makes you wet yourself, so you wail at them and hit them with tiny fists.
Behaviourally, it is interesting. On a forum, it becomes boring.
It's not insane it's just pointing one of the flaws in the "model".
I seem to remember 3 different lines through the dots though.
I don't understand what value the model by Henrietta is adding though? If you want a rough idea of numbers then just take some of the headlines and do a back of the fag paper calculation. But writing it out here every few days as if it is telling us something *useful* seems a bit callous.
Can you imagine someone screaming in the town hall during WW1 about the fatality rates and that they have done some forward calculations of what that meant for next week/month/year? I don't think it would go down well.
If it is someone who really understands how to put infectious disease models together and that information is being put to some useful purpose, then fair enough.
But for us I think it is sufficient to know that this is going to be bad. That's just me though.
This is PB. We are data geeks. We analyse numbers, and bet on them.
More importantly, if a mid range scenario for coronavirus is that, say, "X million will die", then this has an enormous impact on almost any political or economic forecasting
So if we DON'T discuss this (out of what, politeness? deference to the faint hearted?) then the site's intrinsic purpose is nullified.
Nah not for me. No-one is going to make any decisions based on Henrietta's model. I think we need to conduct ourselves in a proper way as much as possible. We have all got a part to play.
Yes, there is a big difference between models that simply fit curves to historical data (which have little if any explicative or predictive value) and models based on observed critical factors, such as transmission and morbidity rates, which may still be grossly wrong, but develop greater understanding of the outbreak.
I have to say I have now entered the concerned phase and although no panic buying am making sure I have a supply of things like paracetamol, Rehydration tablets, etc i.e. all the sorts of things you are advised to take if you start to run a fever.
In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, on which day will the patch cover half of the lake?
The "lot of fuss about nothing" claim depends heavily on not knowing the right answer to that.
The "shut down the country and airports and cancel all sports and gatherings now" hysteria depends upon not knowing the answer too.
Quite. Because 15/16 of the lake's surface is still ABSOLUTELY CLEAR, do you hear me? And there is *nothing* more irrational than taking steps now, to prevent undesirable consequences in future.
I'm hearing the suggestions you refer to mainly from the government's scientific advisors, and they don't sound that hysterical to me.
Actually the government's scientific advisors have made it abundantly that this is the wrong time to shut everything down, precisely because it would be ineffectual now and very damaging now. They also say quite rightly that it may be necessary in the future and that they will announce when its appropriate based upon science - but if it is prematurely done then it will be ineffectual in the future as sustained containment of that level isn't possible. So you need to do the containment of that level in the right window of opportunity.
To extend the lake analogy we are just one small part of the lake, we aren't the entire lake. We're trying to worry about our section of the lake and are trying to prevent lily pad growth on our section of it. However whatever we do they will continue to grow exponentially in the rest of the lake and those lily pads growing around our section of the lake (which we can't control) can infect our part of the lake when the lily pads outside grow.
To use your analogy let us say we have some very toxic poison that we can pour onto our section of the pond. It will be quite damaging but will dramatically slow lily pad growth in our section of the pond for 21 days and could halt infections from outside during that period. However after that lily pad growth will resume and we will be able to be reinfected from the rest of the pond again. Because the poison is so toxic it can only effectively be used once.
We're currently on day 5 of the 48 day outbreak. At the minute our section of the pond is 99.999% clear of lily pads, some arrive each day from the rest of the pond (exponentially growing) but we're individually trying to remove them from the pond manually at the minute. Ultimately we won't be able to do that now.
So the question is do we waste our poison now? Or do we use it later? If we use it now, we will be reinfected afterwards and incapable of using it again later.
JFC, I had actually backed Warren when she went odds on favourite last year.
Was I high?
What was the reasoning behind that move ? I think even if she was ahead now that would have been a poor move. No way she'd have sailed through without going odds against with Sanders and Biden in the race too.
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
The region of Lombardy is the epicenter of Italy’s outbreak, registering the first positive test of the northern cluster and now counting at least 1,254 of Italy’s 2,036 cases. Alarmingly, 10% of Lombardy’s doctors and nurses cannot work because they tested positive for the virus and are in quarantine, the region’s top health official, Giulio Gallera, said Monday.
Some 9% of people diagnosed with the COVID-19 need intensive care, Borrelli said.
“We’ll take anyone: old, young. We need personnel, especially qualified doctors,” Gallera told reporters.
Regional authorities have asked Lombardy’s hospitals to reduce by 70 percent their planned or elective surgeries, to free up ICU beds for virus patients.
Who in their right mind would want elective surgery at this time in those areas of Italy?
I have a lovely job in Nicaragua coming up, a private island in a lake etc. Until recently I was thinking cautiously - cancel everything, hide out, etc. As many will do. And as many will be forced to do. There will be lockdowns, I expect.
Are there direct flights between London and Nicaragua? Or are you going to have to make a stop in the USA somewhere, change planes, pick up the virus, and go on to infect the poor old Nicaraguans?
Almost all change in MIA - only two cases in FL so far, but with US testing that's probably out by a factor of 10 at least...
Iran now admitting to nearly 3,000 cases with Italy on 2,500.
The US's CDC have stopped publishing the number of tests they have conducted.....so when they miss the "One Million" (probably by orders of magnitude) no one will know....
Bloomberg is 78 and his net worth is estimated at $55 billion. So what if he dropped half a billion on a one-off gamble for the presidency? It affects his lifestyle not one bit. For you or me, it's eye-watering. For him, it's chump change.
He'll be far more concerned about the reputational side. $500 million is nothing. Sneers from Trump, and cheap laughs on TV shows are probably infinitely more important to him.
Even that he can rationalize away - telling himself he gave the Dems a backstop when it looked like they needed it, but now they don't. And he can now use the infrastructure he has created for this run and his other causes (gun control, education) to support Biden's fight against Trump.
He'll be disappointed, but he'll rationalize it and move on to the next challenge because that is the mindset of someone as genuinely successful (i.e. not Trumpian successful) as Bloomberg.
I expect him to be next Treasury Secretary.
Does that presuppose the Dems win the White House in November?
Well, it would be an odd prediction for a Trump nomination?
JFC, I had actually backed Warren when she went odds on favourite last year.
Was I high?
What was the reasoning behind that move ? I think even if she was ahead now that would have been a poor move. No way she'd have sailed through without going odds against with Sanders and Biden in the race too.
Honestly cannot remeber, it was a bit of shock to see that reviewing my bets? Maybe I was assuming more momentum and the price dropping further? I hadn't backed her beneath @6 until that moment.
There are five and a half months from now until the Republican convention which will determine who Betfair pay out on as the Republican nominee. What could possibly go wrong? Trump can be laid at 1.06. He has already asked whether he could nuke a hurricane and use a flu vaccine against the coronavirus. He is the most iconic president since JFK, in a country where the median age is 38. "The President and the Land are One" is what he will have to go for, and it won't work.
My best model (logistic) predicts near-universal infection by early May, ~11 million deaths in the US by the summer. Can they hold e-conventions?
Would you mind posting your projections for what numbers in the UK might look like, please?
I haven't looked at any one country individually yet. I'm using figures for the world outside of China, starting when the number was 697 on 15 Feb.
sure you've got a perfectly good reason for excluding China (though I note you include every single human on the planet in your predictions??)
China have taken measures that no other country is able to do,
Henrietta2's model L is looking very good (at this early stage). It predicts very widespread infection, and the associated social desolation, pretty damn soon.
It doesn’t predict anything. She has just drawn a line (curve) through some dots. As new dots come in, she’ll keep moving the line. At the end, she’ll still have a line through some dots, and have predicted nothing.
This attitude is just insane.
This is why I (and others) are the adults, and you and Topping etc are the snotty nosed toddlers.
You don't like what the big bad older person is saying, because it is scary, and makes you wet yourself, so you wail at them and hit them with tiny fists.
Behaviourally, it is interesting. On a forum, it becomes boring.
It's not insane it's just pointing one of the flaws in the "model".
I seem to remember 3 different lines through the dots though.
I don't understand what value the model by Henrietta is adding though? If you want a rough idea of numbers then just take some of the headlines and do a back of the fag paper calculation. But writing it out here every few days as if it is telling us something *useful* seems a bit callous.
Can you imagine someone screaming in the town hall during WW1 about the fatality rates and that they have done some forward calculations of what that meant for next week/month/year? I don't think it would go down well.
If it is someone who really understands how to put infectious disease models together and that information is being put to some useful purpose, then fair enough.
But for us I think it is sufficient to know that this is going to be bad. That's just me though.
This is PB. We are data geeks. We analyse numbers, and bet on them.
More importantly, if a mid range scenario for coronavirus is that, say, "X million will die", then this has an enormous impact on almost any political or economic forecasting
So if we DON'T discuss this (out of what, politeness? deference to the faint hearted?) then the site's intrinsic purpose is nullified.
Nah not for me. No-one is going to make any decisions based on Henrietta's model. I think we need to conduct ourselves in a proper way as much as possible. We have all got a part to play.
Yes, there is a big difference between models that simply fit curves to historical data (which have little if any explicative or predictive value) and models based on observed critical factors, such as transmission and morbidity rates, which may still be grossly wrong, but develop greater understanding of the outbreak.
Exactly. Some information about the key parameters in the epidemiological models and discussion of them would be really useful - e.g. how do they vary across countries? How are they affected by population density?
The region of Lombardy is the epicenter of Italy’s outbreak, registering the first positive test of the northern cluster and now counting at least 1,254 of Italy’s 2,036 cases. Alarmingly, 10% of Lombardy’s doctors and nurses cannot work because they tested positive for the virus and are in quarantine, the region’s top health official, Giulio Gallera, said Monday.
Some 9% of people diagnosed with the COVID-19 need intensive care, Borrelli said.
“We’ll take anyone: old, young. We need personnel, especially qualified doctors,” Gallera told reporters.
Regional authorities have asked Lombardy’s hospitals to reduce by 70 percent their planned or elective surgeries, to free up ICU beds for virus patients.
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
What do you think panic buying is? It isnt someone randomly panicking when everything hunky dory but people mass buying because of their fear of a serious situation. This is precisely panic buying, fair or not.
I like the German term "Hamsterkäufe", with its implication of buying to hoard, and its slightly comical inclusion of the word "hamster".
Bloomberg is 78 and his net worth is estimated at $55 billion. So what if he dropped half a billion on a one-off gamble for the presidency? It affects his lifestyle not one bit. For you or me, it's eye-watering. For him, it's chump change.
He'll be far more concerned about the reputational side. $500 million is nothing. Sneers from Trump, and cheap laughs on TV shows are probably infinitely more important to him.
Even that he can rationalize away - telling himself he gave the Dems a backstop when it looked like they needed it, but now they don't. And he can now use the infrastructure he has created for this run and his other causes (gun control, education) to support Biden's fight against Trump.
He'll be disappointed, but he'll rationalize it and move on to the next challenge because that is the mindset of someone as genuinely successful (i.e. not Trumpian successful) as Bloomberg.
I expect him to be next Treasury Secretary.
Does that presuppose the Dems win the White House in November?
Well, it would be an odd prediction for a Trump nomination?
He could be thinking Mnuchin lasts another 5 years...
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
What are you doing in Essex.
More to he point, if he is quarentened in Essex, what is he doing back in London?
The region of Lombardy is the epicenter of Italy’s outbreak, registering the first positive test of the northern cluster and now counting at least 1,254 of Italy’s 2,036 cases. Alarmingly, 10% of Lombardy’s doctors and nurses cannot work because they tested positive for the virus and are in quarantine, the region’s top health official, Giulio Gallera, said Monday.
Some 9% of people diagnosed with the COVID-19 need intensive care, Borrelli said.
“We’ll take anyone: old, young. We need personnel, especially qualified doctors,” Gallera told reporters.
Regional authorities have asked Lombardy’s hospitals to reduce by 70 percent their planned or elective surgeries, to free up ICU beds for virus patients.
Who in their right mind would want elective surgery at this time in those areas of Italy?
Elective just means planned admission, so nearly all cardiac, thoracic, neurosurgery etc, much of it for urgent, though not strictly emergency.
The region of Lombardy is the epicenter of Italy’s outbreak, registering the first positive test of the northern cluster and now counting at least 1,254 of Italy’s 2,036 cases. Alarmingly, 10% of Lombardy’s doctors and nurses cannot work because they tested positive for the virus and are in quarantine, the region’s top health official, Giulio Gallera, said Monday.
Some 9% of people diagnosed with the COVID-19 need intensive care, Borrelli said.
“We’ll take anyone: old, young. We need personnel, especially qualified doctors,” Gallera told reporters.
Regional authorities have asked Lombardy’s hospitals to reduce by 70 percent their planned or elective surgeries, to free up ICU beds for virus patients.
9% need intensive care?
Christ we are utter shit aren't we?
Yep. Bear in mind that they're casting the net very wide, so are catching even asymptomatic cases. What percentage of people requiring intensive care would die if there was no healthcare available to them? 50%, 60%, 75%?
That's what makes this scary, it's not particularly deadly until healthcare breaks, at which point it becomes pretty deadly.
I have to say I have now entered the concerned phase and although no panic buying am making sure I have a supply of things like paracetamol, Rehydration tablets, etc i.e. all the sorts of things you are advised to take if you start to run a fever.
On the assumption we will all get it and you will want things to alleviate symptoms I noted that all generic ibuprofen was gone from the local supermarket on Monday, whereas normally there must be hundreds of packets available. My pet theory is some enterprising corner shop owner had bought the lot to sell at a healthy profit as things progress.
Strangely, now people I know are getting coronavirus, I'm feeling rather more sanguine about it. It's here. I'll almost certainly get it, and almost certainly get through it. I'll probably miss out on a nice family holiday in the New Forest that I was looking forward to this spring, and perhaps also a trip to the Peak District with friends. Written down like that, it doesn't look apocalyptic. I'm expecting everyone I know to get it, and recover, and the economy to suffer no lasting damage.
I have to say I have now entered the concerned phase and although no panic buying am making sure I have a supply of things like paracetamol, Rehydration tablets, etc i.e. all the sorts of things you are advised to take if you start to run a fever.
On the assumption we will all get it and you will want things to alleviate symptoms I noted that all generic ibuprofen was gone from the local supermarket on Monday, whereas normally there must be hundreds of packets available. My pet theory is some enterprising corner shop owner had bought the lot to sell at a healthy profit as things progress.
I had no problem in my local supermarket, rather surprisingly when I tried to buy a 3 packets I was told I could only have that many if I went to the pharmacy counter...which I thought well they don't want me getting too many for overdose reasons and to stop panic buying...I went there and they said how many do you want, I said how many can I have, to which I was told as many as you like !!!!
The region of Lombardy is the epicenter of Italy’s outbreak, registering the first positive test of the northern cluster and now counting at least 1,254 of Italy’s 2,036 cases. Alarmingly, 10% of Lombardy’s doctors and nurses cannot work because they tested positive for the virus and are in quarantine, the region’s top health official, Giulio Gallera, said Monday.
Some 9% of people diagnosed with the COVID-19 need intensive care, Borrelli said.
“We’ll take anyone: old, young. We need personnel, especially qualified doctors,” Gallera told reporters.
Regional authorities have asked Lombardy’s hospitals to reduce by 70 percent their planned or elective surgeries, to free up ICU beds for virus patients.
9% need intensive care?
Christ we are utter shit aren't we?
Yep. Bear in mind that they're casting the net very wide, so are catching even asymptomatic cases. What percentage of people requiring intensive care would die if there is no healthcare available to them? 50%, 60%, 75%?
The good news is that that figure of 9% includes the very at risk groups - the over 80s and those with co-morbidities (such as compromised immune systems, already stressed lungs, or pre-existing organ failure), which in turn allows us to focus our preventative measures on those communities, particularly where they are highly concentrated, such as old people's homes.
Armed with that knowledge, we might be able nationally to push the figure lower than the 9% by protecting those most likely otherwise to become part of that 9%.
In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, on which day will the patch cover half of the lake?
The "lot of fuss about nothing" claim depends heavily on not knowing the right answer to that.
The "shut down the country and airports and cancel all sports and gatherings now" hysteria depends upon not knowing the answer too.
Quite. Because 15/16 of the lake's surface is still ABSOLUTELY CLEAR, do you hear me? And there is *nothing* more irrational than taking steps now, to prevent undesirable consequences in future.
I'm hearing the suggestions you refer to mainly from the government's scientific advisors, and they don't sound that hysterical to me.
Actually the government's scientific advisors have made it abundantly that this is the wrong time to shut everything down, precisely because it would be ineffectual now and very damaging now. They also say quite rightly that it may be necessary in the future and that they will announce when its appropriate based upon science - but if it is prematurely done then it will be ineffectual in the future as sustained containment of that level isn't possible. So you need to do the containment of that level in the right window of opportunity.
To extend the lake analogy we are just one small part of the lake, we aren't the entire lake. We're trying to worry about our section of the lake and are trying to prevent lily pad growth on our section of it. However whatever we do they will continue to grow exponentially in the rest of the lake and those lily pads growing around our section of the lake (which we can't control) can infect our part of the lake when the lily pads outside grow.
To use your analogy let us say we have some very toxic poison that we can pour onto our section of the pond. It will be quite damaging but will dramatically slow lily pad growth in our section of the pond for 21 days and could halt infections from outside during that period. However after that lily pad growth will resume and we will be able to be reinfected from the rest of the pond again. Because the poison is so toxic it can only effectively be used once.
We're currently on day 5 of the 48 day outbreak. At the minute our section of the pond is 99.999% clear of lily pads, some arrive each day from the rest of the pond (exponentially growing) but we're individually trying to remove them from the pond manually at the minute. Ultimately we won't be able to do that now.
So the question is do we waste our poison now? Or do we use it later? If we use it now, we will be reinfected afterwards and incapable of using it again later.
Have they? I thought the consensus was the opposite - spend our ammunition now, to buy time to get us to summer weather - and the debate is about whether cancelling things is proportionate, not whether it's correctly timed.
There's been a request that I try to do more facts and less insight in my offerings on here. I think it's fair, so a new leaf will be turned going forwards -
Strangely, now people I know are getting coronavirus, I'm feeling rather more sanguine about it. It's here. I'll almost certainly get it, and almost certainly get through it. I'll probably miss out on a nice family holiday in the New Forest that I was looking forward to this spring, and perhaps also a trip to the Peak District with friends. Written down like that, it doesn't look apocalyptic. I'm expecting everyone I know to get it, and recover, and the economy to suffer no lasting damage.
"people"?
There are 85 cases in the UK or are you talking about globally?
The region of Lombardy is the epicenter of Italy’s outbreak, registering the first positive test of the northern cluster and now counting at least 1,254 of Italy’s 2,036 cases. Alarmingly, 10% of Lombardy’s doctors and nurses cannot work because they tested positive for the virus and are in quarantine, the region’s top health official, Giulio Gallera, said Monday.
Some 9% of people diagnosed with the COVID-19 need intensive care, Borrelli said.
“We’ll take anyone: old, young. We need personnel, especially qualified doctors,” Gallera told reporters.
Regional authorities have asked Lombardy’s hospitals to reduce by 70 percent their planned or elective surgeries, to free up ICU beds for virus patients.
Who in their right mind would want elective surgery at this time in those areas of Italy?
Elective just means planned admission, so nearly all cardiac, thoracic, neurosurgery etc, much of it for urgent, though not strictly emergency.
Thanks, Foxy. Who in their right minds would want non-urgent elective surgery? Surely eliminating the non-urgent elective surgery would get you down by 70% or even more?
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
LOL sorry I need to break my don't respond directly to twats rule.
So have I got this right, people are going into lockdown and quarantine. So why are they buying handwash if they aren't going to go anywhere?
I think the logic is people are doing it before it reaches that point.
LOL. So at what point do those people retreat into quarantine? There are cases in the UK already. Our man was in Essex and I believe the Central Line reaches as far as Ongar. So is it brinksmanship? I'll wait until there is a confirmed case at the Kings Arms on the High Street and then that's it I'm off.
Nice pub, great pizza (although it's the King's HEAD). But not on the Central Line for many years!
Strangely, now people I know are getting coronavirus, I'm feeling rather more sanguine about it. It's here. I'll almost certainly get it, and almost certainly get through it. I'll probably miss out on a nice family holiday in the New Forest that I was looking forward to this spring, and perhaps also a trip to the Peak District with friends. Written down like that, it doesn't look apocalyptic. I'm expecting everyone I know to get it, and recover, and the economy to suffer no lasting damage.
"people"?
There are 85 cases in the UK or are you talking about globally?
Other than that, commendable attitude.
Worth remembering that of the 85 cases many (most?) will have recovered fine, some having only mild symptoms or none at all. The tally of confirmed cases is bound to rise because they are not deducting from the number those that no longer have it.
There's been a request that I try to do more facts and less insight in my offerings on here. I think it's fair, so a new leaf will be turned going forwards -
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I was in the only Chinese supermarket in Loughborough on Saturday. The owners and staff were all in the surgical type masks, as were a number of shoppers. The town has a high number of students from China and I suppose there will be a fair bit of travelling to and from home so I can understand their caution /paranoia. Apart from that, I've barely seen a mask out in the wild.
Have they? I thought the consensus was the opposite - spend our ammunition now, to buy time to get us to summer weather - and the debate is about whether cancelling things is proportionate, not whether it's correctly timed.
As I understand it timing is key, you want to "shut down everything" at the time it can do the most good. If you do it early you will simply end up having to "shut down everything" twice, and second time around people might not be so willing to do so.
Of course I wouldn't want the job of deciding when the time is optimal.
Strangely, now people I know are getting coronavirus, I'm feeling rather more sanguine about it. It's here. I'll almost certainly get it, and almost certainly get through it. I'll probably miss out on a nice family holiday in the New Forest that I was looking forward to this spring, and perhaps also a trip to the Peak District with friends. Written down like that, it doesn't look apocalyptic. I'm expecting everyone I know to get it, and recover, and the economy to suffer no lasting damage.
"people"?
There are 85 cases in the UK or are you talking about globally?
Other than that, commendable attitude.
Worth remembering that of the 85 cases many (most?) will have recovered fine, some having only mild symptoms or none at all. The tally of confirmed cases is bound to rise because they are not deducting from the number those that no longer have it.
8 recovered at the moment. It takes quite a while to get over this.
There's been a request that I try to do more facts and less insight in my offerings on here. I think it's fair, so a new leaf will be turned going forwards -
One in 15 US citizens live in trailer parks.
You know I am going to have to fact check that! That would mean over 20m in trailer parks.
There's been a request that I try to do more facts and less insight in my offerings on here. I think it's fair, so a new leaf will be turned going forwards -
One in 15 US citizens live in trailer parks.
I don`t believe that fact.
It is true.
Trailer parks are big and profitable business – particularly after hundreds of thousands of Americans who lost their homes in the financial crisis created a huge demand for affordable housing. According to US Census figures, more than 20 million people, or 6% of the population, live in trailer parks.
Been in London today. Saw a grand total of 3 people with face masks. And one of them had taken it off to make a phone call. And yet the media always seem to find someone in a mask for their photos. Funny that.
I've been to several supermarkets today (for different reasons) across north London and Essex
Saw my first real "panic buying". Large queues, huge purchases, handwash sold out, signs saying "Sorry we don't have X or X"
I actually don't think this can be fairly labelled panic buying. It is a rational response to the likelihood that we are following Italy into a serious situation with closed schools, quarantines, lockdowns
What are you doing in Essex.
More to the point, who visits several supermarkets in one day, spread 25 miles apart?
There's been a request that I try to do more facts and less insight in my offerings on here. I think it's fair, so a new leaf will be turned going forwards -
One in 15 US citizens live in trailer parks.
You know I am going to have to fact check that! That would mean over 20m in trailer parks.
LOLs. And the google response:
"How many people in America live in trailer parks?
20 million people
“Trailer parks are big and profitable business – particularly after hundreds of thousands of Americans who lost their homes in the financial crisis created a huge demand for affordable housing. According to US Census figures, more than 20 million people, or 6% of the population, live in trailer parks.”
Jon Oliver did a segment on "trailer parks", they include probably what you might not think of a trailer park i.e. a load of static caravans.
Apparently it is used in the official figures to denote a particular category of building / living arrangement, so there are loads of dwellings that class as a "trailer" and it is more like a prefab house.
There's been a request that I try to do more facts and less insight in my offerings on here. I think it's fair, so a new leaf will be turned going forwards -
One in 15 US citizens live in trailer parks.
I don`t believe that fact.
It is true.
Trailer parks are big and profitable business – particularly after hundreds of thousands of Americans who lost their homes in the financial crisis created a huge demand for affordable housing. According to US Census figures, more than 20 million people, or 6% of the population, live in trailer parks.
Jon Oliver did a segment on "trailer parks", they include probably what you might not think of a trailer park i.e. a load of static caravans.
Apparently it is used in the official figures to denote a particular category of building / living arrangement, so there are loads of dwellings that class as a "trailer" and it is more like a prefab house.
Indeed, a large number of trailer parks are one or two unit prefabs dropped down onto either a slab or blocks. They look like cheap housing, not the British idea of a 'trailer'.
Strangely, now people I know are getting coronavirus, I'm feeling rather more sanguine about it. It's here. I'll almost certainly get it, and almost certainly get through it. I'll probably miss out on a nice family holiday in the New Forest that I was looking forward to this spring, and perhaps also a trip to the Peak District with friends. Written down like that, it doesn't look apocalyptic. I'm expecting everyone I know to get it, and recover, and the economy to suffer no lasting damage.
"people"?
There are 85 cases in the UK or are you talking about globally?
Other than that, commendable attitude.
Worth remembering that of the 85 cases many (most?) will have recovered fine, some having only mild symptoms or none at all. The tally of confirmed cases is bound to rise because they are not deducting from the number those that no longer have it.
8 recovered at the moment. It takes quite a while to get over this.
Strangely, now people I know are getting coronavirus, I'm feeling rather more sanguine about it. It's here. I'll almost certainly get it, and almost certainly get through it. I'll probably miss out on a nice family holiday in the New Forest that I was looking forward to this spring, and perhaps also a trip to the Peak District with friends. Written down like that, it doesn't look apocalyptic. I'm expecting everyone I know to get it, and recover, and the economy to suffer no lasting damage.
"people"?
There are 85 cases in the UK or are you talking about globally?
Other than that, commendable attitude.
Worth remembering that of the 85 cases many (most?) will have recovered fine, some having only mild symptoms or none at all. The tally of confirmed cases is bound to rise because they are not deducting from the number those that no longer have it.
8 recovered at the moment. It takes quite a while to get over this.
The region of Lombardy is the epicenter of Italy’s outbreak, registering the first positive test of the northern cluster and now counting at least 1,254 of Italy’s 2,036 cases. Alarmingly, 10% of Lombardy’s doctors and nurses cannot work because they tested positive for the virus and are in quarantine, the region’s top health official, Giulio Gallera, said Monday.
Some 9% of people diagnosed with the COVID-19 need intensive care, Borrelli said.
“We’ll take anyone: old, young. We need personnel, especially qualified doctors,” Gallera told reporters.
Regional authorities have asked Lombardy’s hospitals to reduce by 70 percent their planned or elective surgeries, to free up ICU beds for virus patients.
Who in their right mind would want elective surgery at this time in those areas of Italy?
Elective just means planned admission, so nearly all cardiac, thoracic, neurosurgery etc, much of it for urgent, though not strictly emergency.
Thanks, Foxy. Who in their right minds would want non-urgent elective surgery? Surely eliminating the non-urgent elective surgery would get you down by 70% or even more?
Stopping elective surgery has two effects apart from the obvious one on waiting times.
It frees up hospital beds and ICU space.
It allows the usage of anaesthetists, theatre teams operating theatres and recovery areas to be used as over flow ICU. In Leicester this doubles us from 50 odd ICU beds to 100.
Once we get past 1000 simultaneous cases in Leics, there is no more room at the inn, and it gets pretty brutal.
Strangely, now people I know are getting coronavirus, I'm feeling rather more sanguine about it. It's here. I'll almost certainly get it, and almost certainly get through it. I'll probably miss out on a nice family holiday in the New Forest that I was looking forward to this spring, and perhaps also a trip to the Peak District with friends. Written down like that, it doesn't look apocalyptic. I'm expecting everyone I know to get it, and recover, and the economy to suffer no lasting damage.
"people"?
There are 85 cases in the UK or are you talking about globally?
Other than that, commendable attitude.
Worth remembering that of the 85 cases many (most?) will have recovered fine, some having only mild symptoms or none at all. The tally of confirmed cases is bound to rise because they are not deducting from the number those that no longer have it.
8 recovered at the moment. It takes quite a while to get over this.
There's been a request that I try to do more facts and less insight in my offerings on here. I think it's fair, so a new leaf will be turned going forwards -
One in 15 US citizens live in trailer parks.
You know I am going to have to fact check that! That would mean over 20m in trailer parks.
LOLs. And the google response:
"How many people in America live in trailer parks?
20 million people
“Trailer parks are big and profitable business – particularly after hundreds of thousands of Americans who lost their homes in the financial crisis created a huge demand for affordable housing. According to US Census figures, more than 20 million people, or 6% of the population, live in trailer parks.”
18% of housing units in South Carolina are trailers. The states with high percentages (12.5% plus) are the carolinas, four in the Deep South, Wyoming, W Virginia and New Mexico. Highest geographical density of parks is Delaware.
The (probably) largest trailer park in Nevada has a population of over 20,000
The shortest distance between a trailer park and the White House is 11 miles
Comments
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Total recovery rate up to 54% from 50%.
That further narrows Clinton's path to the nom.
Nothing wrong with going through gates either.
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1235099240420061184?s=19
Yet Trumpton will be 74 in June. He is only three and half years' Biden's junior.
So it's sensible precautions. As of 4/3/20 there have been NO cases, or, so far as we know, tests, in our part of Essex.
Therefore we have turned down the chance of a theatre trip to London, somewhat to our regret, but we shall otherwise will carry on living life as normal, albeit with more, and more thorough, hand-washing. We will meet with our friends, go the local clubs and societies to which we belong and, as we did yesterday, go to the cinema and to a restaurant locally.
If things become more serious we shall cut back on the cinema.
What we are not doing is panicking.
We are of course, concerned for our family, spread as they are across the world.
That said, once the Chinese bulge starts to drop off the figures and/or the outbreak in the rest of the world begins to overtake the China Phase I outbreak, the recovery rate may start dropping again. Not that that will be any more meaningful by itself.
Was I high?
If your definition requires that it's irrational, then preparing for the eventuality that you'll need to self-isolate isn't panic buying. If not, then it is.
Really worrying article.
The region of Lombardy is the epicenter of Italy’s outbreak, registering the first positive test of the northern cluster and now counting at least 1,254 of Italy’s 2,036 cases. Alarmingly, 10% of Lombardy’s doctors and nurses cannot work because they tested positive for the virus and are in quarantine, the region’s top health official, Giulio Gallera, said Monday.
Some 9% of people diagnosed with the COVID-19 need intensive care, Borrelli said.
“We’ll take anyone: old, young. We need personnel, especially qualified doctors,” Gallera told reporters.
Regional authorities have asked Lombardy’s hospitals to reduce by 70 percent their planned or elective surgeries, to free up ICU beds for virus patients.
Just wondering....
More interesting and moot is the 80% limit that the epidemiologists use (as referenced by the Chief Medical Officer on the radio this morning). Whether policies can shift that would be worth pursuing.
As to @eadric's so called headless chicken act, I have certainly learned more from his effusions than can be gleaned from the mainstream media and wouldn't want to discourage him. The court jester was valuable to the king as for truly speaking truth to power, even if hidden in a cloak of gibberish.
To extend the lake analogy we are just one small part of the lake, we aren't the entire lake. We're trying to worry about our section of the lake and are trying to prevent lily pad growth on our section of it. However whatever we do they will continue to grow exponentially in the rest of the lake and those lily pads growing around our section of the lake (which we can't control) can infect our part of the lake when the lily pads outside grow.
To use your analogy let us say we have some very toxic poison that we can pour onto our section of the pond. It will be quite damaging but will dramatically slow lily pad growth in our section of the pond for 21 days and could halt infections from outside during that period. However after that lily pad growth will resume and we will be able to be reinfected from the rest of the pond again. Because the poison is so toxic it can only effectively be used once.
We're currently on day 5 of the 48 day outbreak. At the minute our section of the pond is 99.999% clear of lily pads, some arrive each day from the rest of the pond (exponentially growing) but we're individually trying to remove them from the pond manually at the minute. Ultimately we won't be able to do that now.
So the question is do we waste our poison now? Or do we use it later? If we use it now, we will be reinfected afterwards and incapable of using it again later.
I don't think it's an issue Trump can realistically make much out of without crowding out better attack lines.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcHkxP9adiM
* Just joking, it still isn't really very good when you get past a paragraph or two, certainly not a consistent story narrative.
Iran now admitting to nearly 3,000 cases with Italy on 2,500.
The US's CDC have stopped publishing the number of tests they have conducted.....so when they miss the "One Million" (probably by orders of magnitude) no one will know....
Woah, livin' on a prayer...
Christ we are utter shit aren't we?
I think there are quite a few in there late 50s and 60s and some older than that.
I very much doubt that it will overturn 80 seats.
That's what makes this scary, it's not particularly deadly until healthcare breaks, at which point it becomes pretty deadly.
Any ideas?
https://twitter.com/skydavidblevins/status/1235243209447571456
Armed with that knowledge, we might be able nationally to push the figure lower than the 9% by protecting those most likely otherwise to become part of that 9%.
One in 15 US citizens live in trailer parks.
There are 85 cases in the UK or are you talking about globally?
Other than that, commendable attitude.
That didn't turn out well.
Thanks, Foxy. Who in their right minds would want non-urgent elective surgery? Surely eliminating the non-urgent elective surgery would get you down by 70% or even more?
94,250 confirmed cases. 51,038 recovered. 3,214 deaths.
That's global.
Of course I wouldn't want the job of deciding when the time is optimal.
Trailer parks are big and profitable business – particularly after hundreds of thousands of Americans who lost their homes in the financial crisis created a huge demand for affordable housing. According to US Census figures, more than 20 million people, or 6% of the population, live in trailer parks.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/may/03/owning-trailer-parks-mobile-home-university-investment
More to the point, who visits several supermarkets in one day, spread 25 miles apart?
"How many people in America live in trailer parks?
20 million people
“Trailer parks are big and profitable business – particularly after hundreds of thousands of Americans who lost their homes in the financial crisis created a huge demand for affordable housing. According to US Census figures, more than 20 million people, or 6% of the population, live in trailer parks.”
Apparently it is used in the official figures to denote a particular category of building / living arrangement, so there are loads of dwellings that class as a "trailer" and it is more like a prefab house.
He's clear second favourite but if Warren drops out and he faces Biden one on one on a debate stage 7.2 could look like a gift. £25 it is for me.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
(Italy about to release its official numbers for today)
LOL. What is the average occupancy of a trailer park unit? How many did you count and how long did it take you?
Both show 8 recovered.
It frees up hospital beds and ICU space.
It allows the usage of anaesthetists, theatre teams operating theatres and recovery areas to be used as over flow ICU. In Leicester this doubles us from 50 odd ICU beds to 100.
Once we get past 1000 simultaneous cases in Leics, there is no more room at the inn, and it gets pretty brutal.
The (probably) largest trailer park in Nevada has a population of over 20,000
The shortest distance between a trailer park and the White House is 11 miles
I watched the BT Sport film on him last week, quality stuff