Anyway, in F1 land the BBC reported the race is off 6 hours ago, but the FIA, organisers and Liberty Media are still all sat in a mexican stand-off over liability. As such no official cancellation has been made and the gates open in 30 minutes #winning
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
I have driven the length of Canada, trying to explain to somebody you can drive for 3 days between Calgary and Winnipeg and after a day there is literally f##k all, and when I say f##k all, I mean not even fields of produce, its just brown, people think you are lying.
That been said, Vancouver and Toronto are highly packed these days.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
Fair point, little public transport use related to that as well. Think employment rights, undocumented workers and underlying health conditions from obesity and social inequality, incompetent and divided govt (national vs state, trump vs house) probably need to be added to the disadvantages.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
But it adds up to a surprisingly large proportion of the population.
What are the chances the reason for America having done so few tests is because the they are being carried out by one of Trump's donors and are completely unqualified to do the tests? Past behaviour indicates this is very likely.
We need to stop all travel from the U.S.A until they have a competent response.
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
I think this may well be another BC/AC moment in human history...
A cure is possibly years away....by that time we will have learnt how to manage it by changing our behaviour
Did anyone know they were even shifting from BC to AD? I dont think it was like Y2K with consultancy firms charging loads to sort out the abacus?
Am I wrong in thinking that we’ve effectively surrendered to this ?
Has Downing St. gamed this and decided the economy comes first, and it’s better to get it out if the way as quickly as possible ? And the excess deaths are a price to be paid ?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-as-many-as-10000-in-britain-may-already-have-it-says-pm Medical, scientific and public health experts criticised the steps outlined to tackle what the prime minister described as the “worst public health crisis for a generation”, including ending school trips abroad, stopping older and vulnerable people taking cruises and the use of self-isolation for a temperature and cough lasting four hours.
Schools are to remain open and large gatherings such as sports events and concerts will go ahead, amid concerns that moving too soon with stricter measures could bring public fatigue, though the prime minister said both measures remained under consideration....
...“I can’t see that any of these measures are going to have a big impact … none of that is really going to affect transmission in the UK,” said Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the university of East Anglia.
Prof John Ashton, former regional director of public health for northwest England, said: “This is a kind of ragbag with no particular logic to it … they are issuing some semi-directive things but they are not really doing what we need to do, which is to mobilise and encourage communities, neighbourhoods, families to form their own plans for the next period in which the local situation will influence what happens – whether it’s not going out to eat, or stopping sporting events.”...
I need to think around this, but it’s quite clear that, for now at least, there is no intention to keep the number of infections as small as possible.
The list of expendable is going to be a sizeable one. Some of us here.
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Yes, the UK SAGE seems to be predicting a peak in 10 weeks, while in South Korea it happened much sooner than that. I reckon 3-4 weeks, as it seems do most European governments.
I guess we are about to see some science in real time.
The CMO seemed quite confident that we are 3 weeks behind Italy. I think that is a massive call.
He said 4 weeks twice which really surprised me as I thought it was nearer 14 days. I think that he thinks we are a slower trajectory than Italy which may be right.
Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.
But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.
I was considering having some fun going to Waitrose and "stockpiling" some really ridiculous things. Things that there is no earthly reason to stockpile (other than toilet roll).
With added amusement that some people might turn up tomorrow to be devastated to find that their niche luxury "never sold out product" was missing due to some idiot who didn't understand the point of stockpiling
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Yes, the UK SAGE seems to be predicting a peak in 10 weeks, while in South Korea it happened much sooner than that. I reckon 3-4 weeks, as it seems do most European governments.
I guess we are about to see some science in real time.
The CMO seemed quite confident that we are 3 weeks behind Italy. I think that is a massive call.
He said 4 weeks twice which really surprised me as I thought it was nearer 14 days. I think that he thinks we are a slower trajectory than Italy which may be right.
Even a slower trajectory, I can't see it being 3-4 weeks. Obviously we don't have the full picture, but I just can't see it. A week, yes, 2 weeks, maybe, longer, gulp.
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
I think this may well be another BC/AC moment in human history...
A cure is possibly years away....by that time we will have learnt how to manage it by changing our behaviour
Nope - the 1919 epidemic is note on the history pages. At it's worst, this will be less bad, though horrible.
Humans adapt rapidly to horrible things. A great gift. Or a great curse. Maybe both.
Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.
But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.
I was considering having some fun going to Waitrose and "stockpiling" some really ridiculous things. Things that there is no earthly reason to stockpile (other than toilet roll).
With added amusement that some people might turn up tomorrow to be devastated to find that their niche luxury "never sold out product" was missing due to some idiot who didn't understand the point of stockpiling
You haven't already been to Dartmouth M&S and taken all their Parmesan have you?
Either that or they already can't get the supplies......
Am I wrong in thinking that we’ve effectively surrendered to this ?
Has Downing St. gamed this and decided the economy comes first, and it’s better to get it out if the way as quickly as possible ? And the excess deaths are a price to be paid ?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-as-many-as-10000-in-britain-may-already-have-it-says-pm Medical, scientific and public health experts criticised the steps outlined to tackle what the prime minister described as the “worst public health crisis for a generation”, including ending school trips abroad, stopping older and vulnerable people taking cruises and the use of self-isolation for a temperature and cough lasting four hours.
Schools are to remain open and large gatherings such as sports events and concerts will go ahead, amid concerns that moving too soon with stricter measures could bring public fatigue, though the prime minister said both measures remained under consideration....
...“I can’t see that any of these measures are going to have a big impact … none of that is really going to affect transmission in the UK,” said Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the university of East Anglia.
Prof John Ashton, former regional director of public health for northwest England, said: “This is a kind of ragbag with no particular logic to it … they are issuing some semi-directive things but they are not really doing what we need to do, which is to mobilise and encourage communities, neighbourhoods, families to form their own plans for the next period in which the local situation will influence what happens – whether it’s not going out to eat, or stopping sporting events.”...
I need to think around this, but it’s quite clear that, for now at least, there is no intention to keep the number of infections as small as possible.
The list of expendable is going to be a sizeable one. Some of us here.
Weren’t you listening to the CMO? We want and need more infections.
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
There's a wikipedia page with famous victims of the Spanish flu pandemic, and the deaths span from 1918-1920.
Am I wrong in thinking that we’ve effectively surrendered to this ?
Has Downing St. gamed this and decided the economy comes first, and it’s better to get it out if the way as quickly as possible ? And the excess deaths are a price to be paid ?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-as-many-as-10000-in-britain-may-already-have-it-says-pm Medical, scientific and public health experts criticised the steps outlined to tackle what the prime minister described as the “worst public health crisis for a generation”, including ending school trips abroad, stopping older and vulnerable people taking cruises and the use of self-isolation for a temperature and cough lasting four hours.
Schools are to remain open and large gatherings such as sports events and concerts will go ahead, amid concerns that moving too soon with stricter measures could bring public fatigue, though the prime minister said both measures remained under consideration....
...“I can’t see that any of these measures are going to have a big impact … none of that is really going to affect transmission in the UK,” said Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the university of East Anglia.
Prof John Ashton, former regional director of public health for northwest England, said: “This is a kind of ragbag with no particular logic to it … they are issuing some semi-directive things but they are not really doing what we need to do, which is to mobilise and encourage communities, neighbourhoods, families to form their own plans for the next period in which the local situation will influence what happens – whether it’s not going out to eat, or stopping sporting events.”...
I need to think around this, but it’s quite clear that, for now at least, there is no intention to keep the number of infections as small as possible.
The list of expendable is going to be a sizeable one. Some of us here.
Weren’t you listening to the CMO? We want and need more infections.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
Fair point, little public transport use related to that as well. Think employment rights, undocumented workers and underlying health conditions from obesity and social inequality, incompetent and divided govt (national vs state, trump vs house) probably need to be added to the disadvantages.
I would add to the disadvantages, large church congregations. We know they are a focus for spread.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
But it adds up to a surprisingly large proportion of the population.
The most densely populated part of the country, accounting for nearly 50 percent, is the Quebec City–Windsor Corridor in Southern Quebec and Southern Ontario along the Great Lakes and the Saint Lawrence River. An additional 30 percent live along the British Columbia Lower Mainland and the Calgary–Edmonton Corridor in Alberta.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
I don't buy the population density point.
Overall population density is low in the US because there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Yes, the UK SAGE seems to be predicting a peak in 10 weeks, while in South Korea it happened much sooner than that. I reckon 3-4 weeks, as it seems do most European governments.
I guess we are about to see some science in real time.
The CMO seemed quite confident that we are 3 weeks behind Italy. I think that is a massive call.
He said 4 weeks twice which really surprised me as I thought it was nearer 14 days. I think that he thinks we are a slower trajectory than Italy which may be right.
Even a slower trajectory, I can't see it being 3-4 weeks. Obviously we don't have the full picture, but I just can't see it. A week, yes, 2 weeks, maybe, longer, gulp.
If one looks at Northern Italy, not Italy as a whole, and picks any comparable area in the UK with comparable health capacity (and bearing in mind health capacity will be ramping up all the time as we move to Spring/summer) is it so far fetched. It's not just (or indeed at all) about number of absolute cases. It's about number of serious cases and, particularly, ability of health system to cope.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
I think this may well be another BC/AC moment in human history...
A cure is possibly years away....by that time we will have learnt how to manage it by changing our behaviour
Nope - the 1919 epidemic is note on the history pages. At it's worst, this will be less bad, though horrible.
Humans adapt rapidly to horrible things. A great gift. Or a great curse. Maybe both.
Not completely unrelated to it immediately following a World War...
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
I don't buy the population density point.
Overall population density is low in the US bacause there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
And if I walk five minutes down the shops and the American drives half an hour to the mall, if we both spend half an hour shopping, our net risks of picking up the virus are likely to be similar.
Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
Am I wrong in thinking that we’ve effectively surrendered to this ?
Has Downing St. gamed this and decided the economy comes first, and it’s better to get it out if the way as quickly as possible ? And the excess deaths are a price to be paid ?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-as-many-as-10000-in-britain-may-already-have-it-says-pm Medical, scientific and public health experts criticised the steps outlined to tackle what the prime minister described as the “worst public health crisis for a generation”, including ending school trips abroad, stopping older and vulnerable people taking cruises and the use of self-isolation for a temperature and cough lasting four hours.
Schools are to remain open and large gatherings such as sports events and concerts will go ahead, amid concerns that moving too soon with stricter measures could bring public fatigue, though the prime minister said both measures remained under consideration....
...“I can’t see that any of these measures are going to have a big impact … none of that is really going to affect transmission in the UK,” said Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the university of East Anglia.
Prof John Ashton, former regional director of public health for northwest England, said: “This is a kind of ragbag with no particular logic to it … they are issuing some semi-directive things but they are not really doing what we need to do, which is to mobilise and encourage communities, neighbourhoods, families to form their own plans for the next period in which the local situation will influence what happens – whether it’s not going out to eat, or stopping sporting events.”...
I need to think around this, but it’s quite clear that, for now at least, there is no intention to keep the number of infections as small as possible.
The list of expendable is going to be a sizeable one. Some of us here.
Yes, you are wrong as you were earlier when you said they had the intention of minimising the number of infections and it was nonsense to suggest otherwise.
They are reducing the chance of deaths over the long run not the next few weeks. (Or for the pedants some variant of that involving more factors than just death). Its not about surrender or protecting the economy ahead of lives.
We are clearly doing better than many of our peers so far. The team are being backed by the govt and doing the best they can. Whether they are right or not we can never know. It is difficult and uncomfortable but we need to support them.
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Are you asking the same questions of the Chinese? Or the South Koreans?
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
The pressure to do *something* is enormous. All you have to do is to take the easy option - the things the twitterati want done.
You just know that when the tough restrictions are put in place, the same people criticising the government now will complain about their loss of liberty.
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
There's a wikipedia page with famous victims of the Spanish flu pandemic, and the deaths span from 1918-1920.
Have they chosen correctly ? I guess we’ll find out.
But I can’t help but feel that the economic argument (which includes an eye on the likely effects to the future social security and welfare bills) has tipped the balance in one direction.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
But it adds up to a surprisingly large proportion of the population.
The most densely populated part of the country, accounting for nearly 50 percent, is the Quebec City–Windsor Corridor in Southern Quebec and Southern Ontario along the Great Lakes and the Saint Lawrence River. An additional 30 percent live along the British Columbia Lower Mainland and the Calgary–Edmonton Corridor in Alberta.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
I don't buy the population density point.
Overall population density is low in the US bacause there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
And if I walk five minutes down the shops and the American drives half an hour to the mall, if we both spend half an hour shopping, our net risks of picking up the virus are likely to be similar.
Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
However, Billy Bob who lives off-grid in rural Montana is probably going to be ok.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
Are you sure about that?
Are you being agreeing or disagreeing with me ?
I wouldn't want to get into a pointless argument by accident
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
You might wish to recall that a significant vector for the 1918 epidemic in the rural USA was the postal service. All those virus infested letters and packages....
Anyway, in F1 land the BBC reported the race is off 6 hours ago, but the FIA, organisers and Liberty Media are still all sat in a mexican stand-off over liability. As such no official cancellation has been made and the gates open in 30 minutes #winning
This is turning into F1's biggest fiasco since the 2005 US Grand Prix.
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
You might wish to recall that a significant vector for the 1918 epidemic in the rural USA was the postal service. All those virus infested letters and packages....
Again there doesn't seem to be any talk from the government to say especially to older people, stuff like deliveries although far less likely than touching a metal handle, could well be an issue as number of people it comes into contact with especially the driver who visits many homes every day.
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
I believe so they can test health workers as quickly as possible.
And the rules for those testing positive or negative will be similar anyway, self isolate with any symptoms and call 111/999 if it gets particularly severe/struggle to breathe. (Some negatives will have similar issues with "normal" flu).
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it. If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
You might wish to recall that a significant vector for the 1918 epidemic in the rural USA was the postal service. All those virus infested letters and packages....
It's probably the main reason for delaying the local elections. Postal votes...
Anyway, in F1 land the BBC reported the race is off 6 hours ago, but the FIA, organisers and Liberty Media are still all sat in a mexican stand-off over liability. As such no official cancellation has been made and the gates open in 30 minutes #winning
This is turning into F1's biggest fiasco since the 2005 US Grand Prix.
Sky have now deleted the practice sessions from their TV listings, but the chairman of the venue just gave an interview saying all 3 days are going ahead as planned. Gates open in 8 minutes...
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
Are you sure about that?
Are you being agreeing or disagreeing with me ?
I wouldn't want to get into a pointless argument by accident
Of all the things you can do in the early stages of a viral infection that will help you fight it off, endorphinous activities are pretty near the top of the list AIUI.
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
I believe so they can test health workers as quickly as possible.
And the rules for those testing positive or negative will be similar anyway, self isolate with any symptoms and call 111/999 if it gets particularly severe/struggle to breathe. (Some negatives will have similar issues with "normal" flu).
They have obviously dismissed the South Korea two strand testing approach, with the quicker less accurate one and the more rigorous one.
Am I wrong in thinking that we’ve effectively surrendered to this ?
Has Downing St. gamed this and decided the economy comes first, and it’s better to get it out if the way as quickly as possible ? And the excess deaths are a price to be paid ?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-as-many-as-10000-in-britain-may-already-have-it-says-pm Medical, scientific and public health experts criticised the steps outlined to tackle what the prime minister described as the “worst public health crisis for a generation”, including ending school trips abroad, stopping older and vulnerable people taking cruises and the use of self-isolation for a temperature and cough lasting four hours.
Schools are to remain open and large gatherings such as sports events and concerts will go ahead, amid concerns that moving too soon with stricter measures could bring public fatigue, though the prime minister said both measures remained under consideration....
...“I can’t see that any of these measures are going to have a big impact … none of that is really going to affect transmission in the UK,” said Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the university of East Anglia.
Prof John Ashton, former regional director of public health for northwest England, said: “This is a kind of ragbag with no particular logic to it … they are issuing some semi-directive things but they are not really doing what we need to do, which is to mobilise and encourage communities, neighbourhoods, families to form their own plans for the next period in which the local situation will influence what happens – whether it’s not going out to eat, or stopping sporting events.”...
I need to think around this, but it’s quite clear that, for now at least, there is no intention to keep the number of infections as small as possible.
The list of expendable is going to be a sizeable one. Some of us here.
Weren’t you listening to the CMO? We want and need more infections.
I am afraid there are a few people - and this is not broken down by party lines or Brexit lines at all - who simply refuse to try to understand the basic scientific reasoning behind these decisions because they have their own axes to grind or (more understandably) because they are frightened of facing reality.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
But it adds up to a surprisingly large proportion of the population.
The most densely populated part of the country, accounting for nearly 50 percent, is the Quebec City–Windsor Corridor in Southern Quebec and Southern Ontario along the Great Lakes and the Saint Lawrence River. An additional 30 percent live along the British Columbia Lower Mainland and the Calgary–Edmonton Corridor in Alberta.
Re: The markets, this is coming after a decade of QE, and SP500 at all time highs a few weeks ago. Look, I don't really know much about markets except as delusional degenerate meanderings but this must be a problem long-term, even if Covid is gone in two years. What state will the economy be in? I looked at articles about Spanish Flu and the end of that they bounced 50%, but the situation was very different. I don't know how many of you are history buffs, but there was this thing called the Great Wa.......
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
But it adds up to a surprisingly large proportion of the population.
The most densely populated part of the country, accounting for nearly 50 percent, is the Quebec City–Windsor Corridor in Southern Quebec and Southern Ontario along the Great Lakes and the Saint Lawrence River. An additional 30 percent live along the British Columbia Lower Mainland and the Calgary–Edmonton Corridor in Alberta.
Am I wrong in thinking that we’ve effectively surrendered to this ?
Has Downing St. gamed this and decided the economy comes first, and it’s better to get it out if the way as quickly as possible ? And the excess deaths are a price to be paid ?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-as-many-as-10000-in-britain-may-already-have-it-says-pm Medical, scientific and public health experts criticised the steps outlined to tackle what the prime minister described as the “worst public health crisis for a generation”, including ending school trips abroad, stopping older and vulnerable people taking cruises and the use of self-isolation for a temperature and cough lasting four hours.
Schools are to remain open and large gatherings such as sports events and concerts will go ahead, amid concerns that moving too soon with stricter measures could bring public fatigue, though the prime minister said both measures remained under consideration....
...“I can’t see that any of these measures are going to have a big impact … none of that is really going to affect transmission in the UK,” said Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the university of East Anglia.
Prof John Ashton, former regional director of public health for northwest England, said: “This is a kind of ragbag with no particular logic to it … they are issuing some semi-directive things but they are not really doing what we need to do, which is to mobilise and encourage communities, neighbourhoods, families to form their own plans for the next period in which the local situation will influence what happens – whether it’s not going out to eat, or stopping sporting events.”...
I need to think around this, but it’s quite clear that, for now at least, there is no intention to keep the number of infections as small as possible.
The list of expendable is going to be a sizeable one. Some of us here.
Yes, you are wrong as you were earlier when you said they had the intention of minimising the number of infections and it was nonsense to suggest otherwise.
They are reducing the chance of deaths over the long run not the next few weeks. (Or for the pedants some variant of that involving more factors than just death). Its not about surrender or protecting the economy ahead of lives.
We are clearly doing better than many of our peers so far. The team are being backed by the govt and doing the best they can. Whether they are right or not we can never know. It is difficult and uncomfortable but we need to support them.
Are they really reducing the number of total deaths ?
That is not at all clear from what has been announced.
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
On the BBC after the press conference their business journalist was talking almost as though it's a blip, and that the markets might recover in a few weeks or so once the worst is over. Given that the flaming press conference was talking about a peak in June or there abouts, and that's only the peak not the end, I have no idea how anyone could think we'll be back to normal even this year. As you say it will only be when an effective vaccine is available or widespread immunity has been gained by infection that it will come to an end, and even then it's going to be a persistant problem at a lower level.
They aren't saying the peak is in June, they are saying the the end of the modelled period, the one month ramp up, 9 weeks in which 95% of those who will catch it and one month ramp down is June.
That's radically different to what I am seeing in the summaries of the press conference.
Can you provide a link to your read of what they said as it would make me feel a lot happier if true.
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
Nope - there are going to be lots of tests. For people with symptoms. Lots of people.
Of all the things you can do in the early stages of a viral infection that will help you fight it off, endorphinous activities are pretty near the top of the list AIUI.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
I don't buy the population density point.
Overall population density is low in the US bacause there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
And if I walk five minutes down the shops and the American drives half an hour to the mall, if we both spend half an hour shopping, our net risks of picking up the virus are likely to be similar.
Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
However, Billy Bob who lives off-grid in rural Montana is probably going to be ok.
Except Billy-Bob doesn't believe in washing his hands much, or ever.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
I don't buy the population density point.
Overall population density is low in the US bacause there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
And if I walk five minutes down the shops and the American drives half an hour to the mall, if we both spend half an hour shopping, our net risks of picking up the virus are likely to be similar.
Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
However, Billy Bob who lives off-grid in rural Montana is probably going to be ok.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
But it adds up to a surprisingly large proportion of the population.
The most densely populated part of the country, accounting for nearly 50 percent, is the Quebec City–Windsor Corridor in Southern Quebec and Southern Ontario along the Great Lakes and the Saint Lawrence River. An additional 30 percent live along the British Columbia Lower Mainland and the Calgary–Edmonton Corridor in Alberta.
Am I wrong in thinking that we’ve effectively surrendered to this ?
Has Downing St. gamed this and decided the economy comes first, and it’s better to get it out if the way as quickly as possible ? And the excess deaths are a price to be paid ?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-as-many-as-10000-in-britain-may-already-have-it-says-pm Medical, scientific and public health experts criticised the steps outlined to tackle what the prime minister described as the “worst public health crisis for a generation”, including ending school trips abroad, stopping older and vulnerable people taking cruises and the use of self-isolation for a temperature and cough lasting four hours.
Schools are to remain open and large gatherings such as sports events and concerts will go ahead, amid concerns that moving too soon with stricter measures could bring public fatigue, though the prime minister said both measures remained under consideration....
...“I can’t see that any of these measures are going to have a big impact … none of that is really going to affect transmission in the UK,” said Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the university of East Anglia.
Prof John Ashton, former regional director of public health for northwest England, said: “This is a kind of ragbag with no particular logic to it … they are issuing some semi-directive things but they are not really doing what we need to do, which is to mobilise and encourage communities, neighbourhoods, families to form their own plans for the next period in which the local situation will influence what happens – whether it’s not going out to eat, or stopping sporting events.”...
I need to think around this, but it’s quite clear that, for now at least, there is no intention to keep the number of infections as small as possible.
The list of expendable is going to be a sizeable one. Some of us here.
Weren’t you listening to the CMO? We want and need more infections.
I am afraid there are a few people - and this is not broken down by party lines or Brexit lines at all - who simply refuse to try to understand the basic scientific reasoning behind these decisions because they have their own axes to grind or (more understandably) because they are frightened of facing reality.
Agreed. There are also a few who seem unable to understand, try as they might. It's science after all, so a complete mystery to some.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
I don't buy the population density point.
Overall population density is low in the US bacause there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
And if I walk five minutes down the shops and the American drives half an hour to the mall, if we both spend half an hour shopping, our net risks of picking up the virus are likely to be similar.
Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
However, Billy Bob who lives off-grid in rural Montana is probably going to be ok.
Except Billy-Bob doesn't believe in washing his hands much, or ever.
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it. If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.
It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
But it adds up to a surprisingly large proportion of the population.
The most densely populated part of the country, accounting for nearly 50 percent, is the Quebec City–Windsor Corridor in Southern Quebec and Southern Ontario along the Great Lakes and the Saint Lawrence River. An additional 30 percent live along the British Columbia Lower Mainland and the Calgary–Edmonton Corridor in Alberta.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
But it adds up to a surprisingly large proportion of the population.
The most densely populated part of the country, accounting for nearly 50 percent, is the Quebec City–Windsor Corridor in Southern Quebec and Southern Ontario along the Great Lakes and the Saint Lawrence River. An additional 30 percent live along the British Columbia Lower Mainland and the Calgary–Edmonton Corridor in Alberta.
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
Nope - there are going to be lots of tests. For people with symptoms. Lots of people.
No, they explicitly said, if you have symptoms stay home and we aren't going to test you. Only those in hospital will get tested, so if you have been home a week with flu, have got really ill and rushed to hospital, I think it is 99% certain you have it.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
I don't buy the population density point.
Overall population density is low in the US bacause there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
And if I walk five minutes down the shops and the American drives half an hour to the mall, if we both spend half an hour shopping, our net risks of picking up the virus are likely to be similar.
Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
However, Billy Bob who lives off-grid in rural Montana is probably going to be ok.
Except Billy-Bob doesn't believe in washing his hands much, or ever.
Yes, but he never talks to anybody.
True, the off-grid tend to be both materially and socially self-sufficient as well.
There's a significant minority of Americans who live for an event like this, with this apocalypticism shot right through their cinema and popular mythology.
In many American blockbusters, things are only genuine when there's a national crisis. This is the flip-side of America's, potentially, catastrophically ill-prepared and undernourished public and social infrastructure.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
I don't buy the population density point.
Overall population density is low in the US bacause there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
And if I walk five minutes down the shops and the American drives half an hour to the mall, if we both spend half an hour shopping, our net risks of picking up the virus are likely to be similar.
Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
However, Billy Bob who lives off-grid in rural Montana is probably going to be ok.
Except Billy-Bob doesn't believe in washing his hands much, or ever.
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it. If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.
It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
I believe it is because of the change of status from contain to delay. From what was said today the belief is that large scale testing semi random testing once the virus is wild serves little purpose and they are better off identifying the virus in patients arriving at hospital displaying symptoms. I assume for one thing this allows them to provide a better level of protection for front line health workers.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
But it adds up to a surprisingly large proportion of the population.
The most densely populated part of the country, accounting for nearly 50 percent, is the Quebec City–Windsor Corridor in Southern Quebec and Southern Ontario along the Great Lakes and the Saint Lawrence River. An additional 30 percent live along the British Columbia Lower Mainland and the Calgary–Edmonton Corridor in Alberta.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
But very few people live in the super low density areas.
But it adds up to a surprisingly large proportion of the population.
The most densely populated part of the country, accounting for nearly 50 percent, is the Quebec City–Windsor Corridor in Southern Quebec and Southern Ontario along the Great Lakes and the Saint Lawrence River. An additional 30 percent live along the British Columbia Lower Mainland and the Calgary–Edmonton Corridor in Alberta.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
I don't buy the population density point.
Overall population density is low in the US bacause there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
And if I walk five minutes down the shops and the American drives half an hour to the mall, if we both spend half an hour shopping, our net risks of picking up the virus are likely to be similar.
Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
However, Billy Bob who lives off-grid in rural Montana is probably going to be ok.
Except Billy-Bob doesn't believe in washing his hands much, or ever.
Yes, but he never talks to anybody.
He buys a lot of ammo. Does the guy who packed it wash his hands much?
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
Nope - there are going to be lots of tests. For people with symptoms. Lots of people.
No, they explicitly said, if you have symptoms stay home and we aren't going to test you. Only those in hospital will get tested, so if you have been home a week with flu, have got really ill and rushed to hospital, I think it is 99% certain you have it.
Nicola said there would be random testing so they have some idea of what is where
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
I don't buy the population density point.
Overall population density is low in the US bacause there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
And if I walk five minutes down the shops and the American drives half an hour to the mall, if we both spend half an hour shopping, our net risks of picking up the virus are likely to be similar.
Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
However, Billy Bob who lives off-grid in rural Montana is probably going to be ok.
Except Billy-Bob doesn't believe in washing his hands much, or ever.
Yes, but he never talks to anybody.
He buys a lot of ammo. Does the guy who packed it wash his hands much?
They will have had all this prepped for years. They are normally scared of the government taking their rights to buy guns / ammo, so have loads of it.
I think this analogy sums up the government's (change of) strategy.
Think of covid-19 as an airplane in the sky that has non working landing gear, the crew try and do a safe landing by fixing the problem but that's not going to happen so the crew have decided to fly a bit more to burn off more fuel whilst telling the passengers to adopt the brace position.
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
I believe it is because of the change of status from contain to delay. From what was said today the belief is that large scale testing semi random testing once the virus is wild serves little purpose and they are better off identifying the virus in patients arriving at hospital displaying symptoms. I assume for one thing this allows them to provide a better level of protection for front line health workers.
Am I wrong in thinking that we’ve effectively surrendered to this ?
Has Downing St. gamed this and decided the economy comes first, and it’s better to get it out if the way as quickly as possible ? And the excess deaths are a price to be paid ?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-as-many-as-10000-in-britain-may-already-have-it-says-pm Medical, scientific and public health experts criticised the steps outlined to tackle what the prime minister described as the “worst public health crisis for a generation”, including ending school trips abroad, stopping older and vulnerable people taking cruises and the use of self-isolation for a temperature and cough lasting four hours.
Schools are to remain open and large gatherings such as sports events and concerts will go ahead, amid concerns that moving too soon with stricter measures could bring public fatigue, though the prime minister said both measures remained under consideration....
...“I can’t see that any of these measures are going to have a big impact … none of that is really going to affect transmission in the UK,” said Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the university of East Anglia.
Prof John Ashton, former regional director of public health for northwest England, said: “This is a kind of ragbag with no particular logic to it … they are issuing some semi-directive things but they are not really doing what we need to do, which is to mobilise and encourage communities, neighbourhoods, families to form their own plans for the next period in which the local situation will influence what happens – whether it’s not going out to eat, or stopping sporting events.”...
I need to think around this, but it’s quite clear that, for now at least, there is no intention to keep the number of infections as small as possible.
The list of expendable is going to be a sizeable one. Some of us here.
Weren’t you listening to the CMO? We want and need more infections.
I am afraid there are a few people - and this is not broken down by party lines or Brexit lines at all - who simply refuse to try to understand the basic scientific reasoning behind these decisions because they have their own axes to grind or (more understandably) because they are frightened of facing reality.
Agreed. There are also a few who seem unable to understand, try as they might. It's science after all, so a complete mystery to some.
Are there laws against chicken pox parties these days? Or are they just frowned upon?
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
I believe it is because of the change of status from contain to delay. From what was said today the belief is that large scale testing semi random testing once the virus is wild serves little purpose and they are better off identifying the virus in patients arriving at hospital displaying symptoms. I assume for one thing this allows them to provide a better level of protection for front line health workers.
Your faith in Boris Johnson's Govt is really quite endearing....takes me back when I left my tooth under the pillow for the tooth fairy
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it. If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.
It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it. If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.
It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
Am I wrong in thinking that we’ve effectively surrendered to this ?
Has Downing St. gamed this and decided the economy comes first, and it’s better to get it out if the way as quickly as possible ? And the excess deaths are a price to be paid ?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-as-many-as-10000-in-britain-may-already-have-it-says-pm Medical, scientific and public health experts criticised the steps outlined to tackle what the prime minister described as the “worst public health crisis for a generation”, including ending school trips abroad, stopping older and vulnerable people taking cruises and the use of self-isolation for a temperature and cough lasting four hours.
Schools are to remain open and large gatherings such as sports events and concerts will go ahead, amid concerns that moving too soon with stricter measures could bring public fatigue, though the prime minister said both measures remained under consideration....
...“I can’t see that any of these measures are going to have a big impact … none of that is really going to affect transmission in the UK,” said Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the university of East Anglia.
Prof John Ashton, former regional director of public health for northwest England, said: “This is a kind of ragbag with no particular logic to it … they are issuing some semi-directive things but they are not really doing what we need to do, which is to mobilise and encourage communities, neighbourhoods, families to form their own plans for the next period in which the local situation will influence what happens – whether it’s not going out to eat, or stopping sporting events.”...
I need to think around this, but it’s quite clear that, for now at least, there is no intention to keep the number of infections as small as possible.
The list of expendable is going to be a sizeable one. Some of us here.
Yes, you are wrong as you were earlier when you said they had the intention of minimising the number of infections and it was nonsense to suggest otherwise.
They are reducing the chance of deaths over the long run not the next few weeks. (Or for the pedants some variant of that involving more factors than just death). Its not about surrender or protecting the economy ahead of lives.
We are clearly doing better than many of our peers so far. The team are being backed by the govt and doing the best they can. Whether they are right or not we can never know. It is difficult and uncomfortable but we need to support them.
Are they really reducing the number of total deaths ?
That is not at all clear from what has been announced.
I believe so. They are scared by this coinciding with flu next winter and the impact on the NHS. We can barely cope with flu season normally. Coping with flu in the winter and covid 19 in the summer is relatively a lot easier than both at the same time.
It is possible they are choosing to minimise the chance of >x deaths where x is a large number rather than minimising expected avg total number of deaths, or some combination of the two. Those kind of choices are what their models will be looking at. (It wont be strictly deaths alone, they will probably be looking at age profile, amount of people seriously ill, and yes the economic impact which in turn impacts future deaths thru NHS funding/quality of life etc, but it will primarily be about saving lives).
Things I am enjoying about the Plague (with apologies in advance for those who have good reasons for not enjoying anything about it at all):
- Downloading data off the internet, putting it on a log scale and drawing straight lines through it - Patiently explaining to other people why their “models”, similarly derived, are crap - Seeing references to the World Health Organisation, and deliberately mistaking the acronym for an indignant inquiry: “WHO says we should be washing our hands more?!?!?!?” - Panic buying, and pretending to panic buy - Shorting the FTSE seven ways to Sunday - Watching Boris Johnson actually look Prime Ministerial - Watching Opposition politicians (mostly) desist from political point scoring - The realisation that, if this hadn’t happened when it did, we might never have realised just how awful Donald Trump actually is as President - The hope that this list will properly piss off the Black Death LARP mob on here
I think this analogy sums up the government's (change of) strategy.
Think of covid-19 as an airplane in the sky that has non working landing gear, the crew try and do a safe landing by fixing the problem but that's not going to happen so the crew have decided to fly a bit more to burn off more fuel whilst telling the passengers to adopt the brace position.
For the general population I can see some logic in that, but for the old, I just don't understand why rather than saying don't go on that Med cruise, don't f##king go out unless you have to...and don't go visit your Granny in the care home as you probably kill them.
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it. If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.
It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
Isn't our strategy "close your eyes and think of england"?
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
I am not party to the decision making, but while screening and contact tracing make sense in the containment phase with low numbers, once those numbers reach a certain point, contact tracing is no longer viable. It is a very laborious and slow process.
Moving to the delay phase essentially means accepting contact tracing is no longer worth doing. The government has calculated that the severe lockdowns are premature, and for a while at least to take few active control measures. They calculate that fewer will die over the course of the epidemic.
Other countries are taking the "stitch in time, saves nine" approach. We are all part of a large epidemiological experiment*
*though of course the subjects are not co-operating. People are self isolating.
I think this analogy sums up the government's (change of) strategy.
Think of covid-19 as an airplane in the sky that has non working landing gear, the crew try and do a safe landing by fixing the problem but that's not going to happen so the crew have decided to fly a bit more to burn off more fuel whilst telling the passengers to adopt the brace position.
For the general population I can see some logic in that, but for the old, I just don't understand why rather than saying don't go on that Med cruise, don't f##king go out unless you have to...and don't go visit your Granny in the care home as you probably kill them.
Because they'll have to be telling them that for weeks on end.
I think this analogy sums up the government's (change of) strategy.
Think of covid-19 as an airplane in the sky that has non working landing gear, the crew try and do a safe landing by fixing the problem but that's not going to happen so the crew have decided to fly a bit more to burn off more fuel whilst telling the passengers to adopt the brace position.
For the general population I can see some logic in that, but for the old, I just don't understand why rather than saying don't go on that Med cruise, don't f##king go out unless you have to...and don't go visit your Granny in the care home as you probably kill them.
Because they'll have to be telling them that for weeks on end.
And....I genuinely think otherwise fit and healthy oldies in their 60/70s can stay inside for the next 3 months and get home deliveries.
Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.
What is the reason for this?
That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it. If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.
It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
Isn't our strategy "close your eyes and think of england"?
I think this analogy sums up the government's (change of) strategy.
Think of covid-19 as an airplane in the sky that has non working landing gear, the crew try and do a safe landing by fixing the problem but that's not going to happen so the crew have decided to fly a bit more to burn off more fuel whilst telling the passengers to adopt the brace position.
For the general population I can see some logic in that, but for the old, I just don't understand why rather than saying don't go on that Med cruise, don't f##king go out unless you have to...and don't go visit your Granny in the care home as you probably kill them.
Because they'll have to be telling them that for weeks on end.
And....I genuinely think otherwise fit and healthy oldies in their 60/70s can stay inside for the next 3 months and get home deliveries.
The fact they haven't given this advice suggests their advisors think otherwise.
I think this analogy sums up the government's (change of) strategy.
Think of covid-19 as an airplane in the sky that has non working landing gear, the crew try and do a safe landing by fixing the problem but that's not going to happen so the crew have decided to fly a bit more to burn off more fuel whilst telling the passengers to adopt the brace position.
For the general population I can see some logic in that, but for the old, I just don't understand why rather than saying don't go on that Med cruise, don't f##king go out unless you have to...and don't go visit your Granny in the care home as you probably kill them.
Because they'll have to be telling them that for weeks on end.
And....I genuinely think otherwise fit and healthy oldies in their 60/70s can stay inside for the next 3 months and get home deliveries.
Average age of Coronadeath in various countries seems to be at least 80
I think this analogy sums up the government's (change of) strategy.
Think of covid-19 as an airplane in the sky that has non working landing gear, the crew try and do a safe landing by fixing the problem but that's not going to happen so the crew have decided to fly a bit more to burn off more fuel whilst telling the passengers to adopt the brace position.
For the general population I can see some logic in that, but for the old, I just don't understand why rather than saying don't go on that Med cruise, don't f##king go out unless you have to...and don't go visit your Granny in the care home as you probably kill them.
Because they'll have to be telling them that for weeks on end.
And....I genuinely think otherwise fit and healthy oldies in their 60/70s can stay inside for the next 3 months and get home deliveries.
Average age of Coronadeath in various countries seems to be at least 80
Median in Italy in ICU is 65. Why not just try not to clog up ICU with 60/70 year olds that can manage at home and will just have to watch repeats of Escape to the Country for a few months (they do it anyway, but normally also find a reason to pop down the shops every day).
I think this analogy sums up the government's (change of) strategy.
Think of covid-19 as an airplane in the sky that has non working landing gear, the crew try and do a safe landing by fixing the problem but that's not going to happen so the crew have decided to fly a bit more to burn off more fuel whilst telling the passengers to adopt the brace position.
For the general population I can see some logic in that, but for the old, I just don't understand why rather than saying don't go on that Med cruise, don't f##king go out unless you have to...and don't go visit your Granny in the care home as you probably kill them.
Because they'll have to be telling them that for weeks on end.
And....I genuinely think otherwise fit and healthy oldies in their 60/70s can stay inside for the next 3 months and get home deliveries.
Can do so ? Possibly.
Will do so ? Not if my oldies are anything to go by.
Comments
That been said, Vancouver and Toronto are highly packed these days.
Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.
But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.
We need to stop all travel from the U.S.A until they have a competent response.
https://mobile.twitter.com/FoxReports/status/1238121576555577346
Has Downing St. gamed this and decided the economy comes first, and it’s better to get it out if the way as quickly as possible ?
And the excess deaths are a price to be paid ?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-as-many-as-10000-in-britain-may-already-have-it-says-pm
Medical, scientific and public health experts criticised the steps outlined to tackle what the prime minister described as the “worst public health crisis for a generation”, including ending school trips abroad, stopping older and vulnerable people taking cruises and the use of self-isolation for a temperature and cough lasting four hours.
Schools are to remain open and large gatherings such as sports events and concerts will go ahead, amid concerns that moving too soon with stricter measures could bring public fatigue, though the prime minister said both measures remained under consideration....
...“I can’t see that any of these measures are going to have a big impact … none of that is really going to affect transmission in the UK,” said Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the university of East Anglia.
Prof John Ashton, former regional director of public health for northwest England, said: “This is a kind of ragbag with no particular logic to it … they are issuing some semi-directive things but they are not really doing what we need to do, which is to mobilise and encourage communities, neighbourhoods, families to form their own plans for the next period in which the local situation will influence what happens – whether it’s not going out to eat, or stopping sporting events.”...
I need to think around this, but it’s quite clear that, for now at least, there is no intention to keep the number of infections as small as possible.
The list of expendable is going to be a sizeable one. Some of us here.
A rare genuinely shared global experience.
With added amusement that some people might turn up tomorrow to be devastated to find that their niche luxury "never sold out product" was missing due to some idiot who didn't understand the point of stockpiling
Humans adapt rapidly to horrible things. A great gift. Or a great curse. Maybe both.
Either that or they already can't get the supplies......
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada#Demographics
Six million people live in the Toronto area compared with 100,000 in the three northern territories.
Overall population density is low in the US because there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_by_country
What is the reason for this?
Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
They are reducing the chance of deaths over the long run not the next few weeks. (Or for the pedants some variant of that involving more factors than just death). Its not about surrender or protecting the economy ahead of lives.
We are clearly doing better than many of our peers so far. The team are being backed by the govt and doing the best they can. Whether they are right or not we can never know. It is difficult and uncomfortable but we need to support them.
Twitter 2020: Boris Johnson is evil because he won't use emergency powers to shut down the country and wall us off from the world.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/squashing-sombrero-has-government-got-coronavirus-strategy-right/
Have they chosen correctly ? I guess we’ll find out.
But I can’t help but feel that the economic argument (which includes an eye on the likely effects to the future social security and welfare bills) has tipped the balance in one direction.
I wouldn't want to get into a pointless argument by accident
And the rules for those testing positive or negative will be similar anyway, self isolate with any symptoms and call 111/999 if it gets particularly severe/struggle to breathe. (Some negatives will have similar issues with "normal" flu).
If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_by_country
That is not at all clear from what has been announced.
Can you provide a link to your read of what they said as it would make me feel a lot happier if true.
It's a classic.
It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
There's a significant minority of Americans who live for an event like this, with this apocalypticism shot right through their cinema and popular mythology.
In many American blockbusters, things are only genuine when there's a national crisis. This is the flip-side of America's, potentially, catastrophically ill-prepared and undernourished public and social infrastructure.
How far will they fall over the coming weeks, I wonder?
I was thinking DJ at 20,000 is a buy... but now I am not so sure.
Think of covid-19 as an airplane in the sky that has non working landing gear, the crew try and do a safe landing by fixing the problem but that's not going to happen so the crew have decided to fly a bit more to burn off more fuel whilst telling the passengers to adopt the brace position.
Your faith in Boris Johnson's Govt is really quite endearing....takes me back when I left my tooth under the pillow for the tooth fairy
But it depends on when, and how, the true crisis in America hits the news.
It is possible they are choosing to minimise the chance of >x deaths where x is a large number rather than minimising expected avg total number of deaths, or some combination of the two. Those kind of choices are what their models will be looking at. (It wont be strictly deaths alone, they will probably be looking at age profile, amount of people seriously ill, and yes the economic impact which in turn impacts future deaths thru NHS funding/quality of life etc, but it will primarily be about saving lives).
- Downloading data off the internet, putting it on a log scale and drawing straight lines through it
- Patiently explaining to other people why their “models”, similarly derived, are crap
- Seeing references to the World Health Organisation, and deliberately mistaking the acronym for an indignant inquiry: “WHO says we should be washing our hands more?!?!?!?”
- Panic buying, and pretending to panic buy
- Shorting the FTSE seven ways to Sunday
- Watching Boris Johnson actually look Prime Ministerial
- Watching Opposition politicians (mostly) desist from political point scoring
- The realisation that, if this hadn’t happened when it did, we might never have realised just how awful Donald Trump actually is as President
- The hope that this list will properly piss off the Black Death LARP mob on here
Moving to the delay phase essentially means accepting contact tracing is no longer worth doing. The government has calculated that the severe lockdowns are premature, and for a while at least to take few active control measures. They calculate that fewer will die over the course of the epidemic.
Other countries are taking the "stitch in time, saves nine" approach. We are all part of a large epidemiological experiment*
*though of course the subjects are not co-operating. People are self isolating.
Will do so ? Not if my oldies are anything to go by.