Those who fancy a bit of 'herd immunity' can apparently get paid £3,500 for it by the University of London, which wants vaccine-testing guinea pigs, or so I read on here.
Presumably the PB Herders will be signing up??
I'd be interested in doing this, if they accept people with asthma. [I've got a big pile of books I've been meaning to read for ages]. But the last thing I read was that they already have 10 times the number of volunteers they need.
I am sceptical of the idea people can't stay in their homes for 3 months. But they have now made it clear today, the policy is herd immunity, they want people to catch it.
This is the call. Get it now, get herd immunity or in their opinion all that happens is you put a lid on it for 2-3 months, then it pops up and by next winter we are in worse position.
That is massive call. You are literally saying we are going to have 10,000s of deaths now, because it is better in the long run. They are clearly convinced that there is no vaccine coming, there is no treatments that will really work and so the only future is that the population is naturally hardened.
I think it's probably also driven by the belief that there are a lot more cases out there, and that the fatality rate will be towards the lower end of the predictions. The CMO has said several times he thinks it will be below 1%.
It's just as massive a call to do it the other way, because if the science is that it can't be eradicated it will come back as soon as it can and you go through the same thing again. Courage in political leadership is when there aren't any good options and to govern is to choose.
FWIW Having reflected on it overnight I think the government's strategy is the right one long term HOWEVER once our infections/deaths go past several countries the pressure on the government will be to reverse ferret and I'm not sure Boris Johnson has the ability to stay unpopular in his locker.
So we'll get the worst of all worlds on our pandemic response.
Unfortunately I think that might be a reasonable assessment of Boris. I hope for all our sakes we are both wrong.
I have more hope. I think if Boris was going to go populist he would have done it already. He seems to have grown a spine.
If the CMO advice works, traditional, civil service expertise, what relevance does Cummings retain. This is the moment for quiet competence to reassert itself in British public life. I hope we're in good hands.
On herd immunity, surely they must have a strong indication of many, many mild and, as yet, undetected cases, because scaling up to anything like the level to provide herd immunity purely on the basis of detected cases, i.e. something like 50-100x the current detected infection rates of Italy's worst hit communities. I don't need to spell out what that would entail.
Surely some random testing must be going on? At some point we need to know how many, if any, non-symptomatic cases there are.
Well the government have made a huge call, they clearly don't think a vaccine is possible in the next few years (if at all) and that this will now be seasonal.
The UK will be either held up as the example of how it should have been done or exactly the opposite and on a political level the Tories will be finished.
what gets me is Boris's insistence that he's using the science.....or is he just lying like he is naturally prone to do because the science I am reading is that you need to reduce social contact as much as possible
The thing is, if we were just talking about Boris and Cummings lying - or even the whole cabinet - then you would be absolutely right.
But I struggle with the concept that the CMO and CSO are also lying. They are the ones who are at the forefront of promoting this scheme and you are asking us to accept that they are purposefully ignoring their medical and scientific beliefs and misleading the country for some ulterior motive.
I do find that harder to believe.
You are very bright so I don't understand why you don't understand this. There are a range of different strategies, the outcomes are extremely uncertain and there are trade-offs to be made.
It is very similar to a judgement on how you manage an economy, are you a Keynesian or a supply-sider?
This is not hard science this is about modelling and judgement of trade-offs with uncertainty.
We've made a big call, we can only all hope it is the correct one.
That wasn't really my point. The point made by Tyson was that he doesn't trust Boris. I agree with that. But we are not talking about Boris, we are talking about the CMO, CSO and their teams. The only way that Boris could be lying about all of this is if they are as well.
China is not the only country taking a different approach to us.
Erhhh, that is the point I was making. I don't believe this herd immunity policy is driven by NHS underfunding. If they thought it was a 3 month thing and done, we could lock everybody down, let it pass and then build some new capacity.
The call the government have made is that isn't their prediction. They clearly believe this is here to stay for years, there will be no vaccine and therefore the optimal approach is herd immunity.
That is just giant call.
Using herd immunity as a weapon against this lurgi when no other is available is a no-brainer imo. Since it is inevitable that the lurgi will spread to ~80% of the population, managing it by propaganda and suasion so that the most vulnerable are preponderantly in the 20% is also a no-brainer. I feel sure that Boris and the boffins have made the right decision.
FWIW Having reflected on it overnight I think the government's strategy is the right one long term HOWEVER once our infections/deaths go past several countries the pressure on the government will be to reverse ferret and I'm not sure Boris Johnson has the ability to stay unpopular in his locker.
So we'll get the worst of all worlds on our pandemic response.
Unfortunately I think that might be a reasonable assessment of Boris. I hope for all our sakes we are both wrong.
I have more hope. I think if Boris was going to go populist he would have done it already. He seems to have grown a spine.
If the CMO advice works, traditional, civil service expertise, what relevance does Cummings retain. This is the moment for quiet competence to reassert itself in British public life. I hope we're in good hands.
On herd immunity, surely they must have a strong indication of many, many mild and, as yet, undetected cases.....
I don't think anyone has that. The widest scale testing has been in South Korea, and it does not suggest anything of the sort.
There are, of course, uncertainties, and without large scale random serology testing (to look for antibodies to the virus) it's impossible to be certain. But no one has conducted that.
Those who fancy a bit of 'herd immunity' can apparently get paid £3,500 for it by the University of London, which wants vaccine-testing guinea pigs, or so I read on here.
Presumably the PB Herders will be signing up??
I have an acquaintance who did this kind of thing throughout their undergrad and post-grad studies...
I don't see the point of the Prem rescheduling to April 4th if that's the plan, nothing will have changed for the better at that point.
I think they are waiting for UEFA to postpone the Euros to 2021 on Tuesday, once that's confirmed, it gives the PL the the option of extending the season in to June/July/August.
With 8/9 games left, the PL can conclude the PL in 3/4 weeks with 2/3 games a week.
What's going to happen then to the Club World Cup 2021 that Liverpool have already qualified for? Can't be pushed back to 2022 (real World Cup) so will either have to be cancelled or pushed back to 2023.
Just give all the qualifiers a wee plastic trophy and say "you were all winners...."
My concerns are: (1) the assumption that any attempt to eradicate the virus is doomed to fail and simply postpones misery. (2) the Iceberg assumption on which the current model is built. (3) the possibility of effective anti-virals being found or a vaccine being developed with the result pain deferred is pain saved. (4) The risk that mutation of the virus means that our very hard won herd immunity has limited effectiveness.
None of these means that the government is wrong. I have absolute respect for their dedication and focus on this. But it is frankly foolish not to worry when the price we are being asked to pay is so high.
The Chinese are now bobbling along at roughly 20 new cases a day. They have 13.5k active cases with a very high percentage of critical so there are more deaths to come. But their total infections (recorded) are 81K, less than 0.1% of their population. Does that not make you pause? Our assumption is that somewhere between 60 and 80% will get this. They are less than 0.1%. How is that possible?
Spot on. My Chinese clients tell me their world is starting to return to normal. Of course, the virus could come back, but the lockdown seems to have stemmed its passage significantly.
The thing I can't get my head around with this herd immunity policy and a point Hunt made is why aren't we telling people you can't go and visit Granny every week like usual. Over 60s need to be told a lot more than don't go on an Easter holiday, it should be don't go out if you don't have to.
If they think the risk to under 40s is minimal, sure lets get it through that population, but why are not making it clear the vulnerable need to be out the way for the next 3-4 months, especially if the policy is to get 60% of the population to contract it.
We know from Seattle and Australia, you get this in a care home and you will be raking up the body count.
Slowly slowly catchy monkey perhaps? It's going to be a long period of lock-down, so it might be worth allowing people to see relatives a few times now before they go into full hermit-mode. Of course that has its own risks but again that is the trade-off being made. Ideally the mental preparation would have started 2-3 weeks ago but we are where we are.
Those who fancy a bit of 'herd immunity' can apparently get paid £3,500 for it by the University of London, which wants vaccine-testing guinea pigs, or so I read on here.
Presumably the PB Herders will be signing up??
Being hit on the head, vs being hit on the head but being given £3500 and guaranteed priority access to specialist being hit on the head medical resources.
My concerns are: (1) the assumption that any attempt to eradicate the virus is doomed to fail and simply postpones misery. (2) the Iceberg assumption on which the current model is built. (3) the possibility of effective anti-virals being found or a vaccine being developed with the result pain deferred is pain saved. (4) The risk that mutation of the virus means that our very hard won herd immunity has limited effectiveness.
None of these means that the government is wrong. I have absolute respect for their dedication and focus on this. But it is frankly foolish not to worry when the price we are being asked to pay is so high.
The Chinese are now bobbling along at roughly 20 new cases a day. They have 13.5k active cases with a very high percentage of critical so there are more deaths to come. But their total infections (recorded) are 81K, less than 0.1% of their population. Does that not make you pause? Our assumption is that somewhere between 60 and 80% will get this. They are less than 0.1%. How is that possible?
It is clear the British don't believe the Chinese figures.
Plus, the Chinese have paused but not ended the outbreak; once they relax restrictions rates are likely to pick up again.
FWIW Having reflected on it overnight I think the government's strategy is the right one long term HOWEVER once our infections/deaths go past several countries the pressure on the government will be to reverse ferret and I'm not sure Boris Johnson has the ability to stay unpopular in his locker.
So we'll get the worst of all worlds on our pandemic response.
Unfortunately I think that might be a reasonable assessment of Boris. I hope for all our sakes we are both wrong.
I have more hope. I think if Boris was going to go populist he would have done it already. He seems to have grown a spine.
If the CMO advice works, traditional, civil service expertise, what relevance does Cummings retain. This is the moment for quiet competence to reassert itself in British public life. I hope we're in good hands.
On herd immunity, surely they must have a strong indication of many, many mild and, as yet, undetected cases, because scaling up to anything like the level to provide herd immunity purely on the basis of detected cases, i.e. something like 50-100x the current detected infection rates of Italy's worst hit communities. I don't need to spell out what that would entail.
Surely some random testing must be going on? At some point we need to know how many, if any, non-symptomatic cases there are.
That was the other very confusing point. 3 days they briefed the media, 10,000 tests a day, South Korea style, then yesterday they said no testing at all unless in hospital i.e. you are 99% certain you have it.
Those who fancy a bit of 'herd immunity' can apparently get paid £3,500 for it by the University of London, which wants vaccine-testing guinea pigs, or so I read on here.
Presumably the PB Herders will be signing up??
I'd be interested in doing this, if they accept people with asthma. [I've got a big pile of books I've been meaning to read for ages]. But the last thing I read was that they already have 10 times the number of volunteers they need.
Well the government have made a huge call, they clearly don't think a vaccine is possible in the next few years (if at all) and that this will now be seasonal.
The UK will be either held up as the example of how it should have been done or exactly the opposite and on a political level the Tories will be finished.
what gets me is Boris's insistence that he's using the science.....or is he just lying like he is naturally prone to do because the science I am reading is that you need to reduce social contact as much as possible
The thing is, if we were just talking about Boris and Cummings lying - or even the whole cabinet - then you would be absolutely right.
But I struggle with the concept that the CMO and CSO are also lying. They are the ones who are at the forefront of promoting this scheme and you are asking us to accept that they are purposefully ignoring their medical and scientific beliefs and misleading the country for some ulterior motive.
I do find that harder to believe.
You are very bright so I don't understand why you don't understand this. There are a range of different strategies, the outcomes are extremely uncertain and there are trade-offs to be made.
It is very similar to a judgement on how you manage an economy, are you a Keynesian or a supply-sider?
This is not hard science this is about modelling and judgement of trade-offs with uncertainty.
We've made a big call, we can only all hope it is the correct one.
That wasn't really my point. The point made by Tyson was that he doesn't trust Boris. I agree with that. But we are not talking about Boris, we are talking about the CMO, CSO and their teams. The only way that Boris could be lying about all of this is if they are as well.
FWIW Having reflected on it overnight I think the government's strategy is the right one long term HOWEVER once our infections/deaths go past several countries the pressure on the government will be to reverse ferret and I'm not sure Boris Johnson has the ability to stay unpopular in his locker.
So we'll get the worst of all worlds on our pandemic response.
Unfortunately I think that might be a reasonable assessment of Boris. I hope for all our sakes we are both wrong.
I have more hope. I think if Boris was going to go populist he would have done it already. He seems to have grown a spine.
If the CMO advice works, traditional, civil service expertise, what relevance does Cummings retain. This is the moment for quiet competence to reassert itself in British public life. I hope we're in good hands.
On herd immunity, surely they must have a strong indication of many, many mild and, as yet, undetected cases, because scaling up to anything like the level to provide herd immunity purely on the basis of detected cases, i.e. something like 50-100x the current detected infection rates of Italy's worst hit communities. I don't need to spell out what that would entail.
Surely some random testing must be going on? At some point we need to know how many, if any, non-symptomatic cases there are.
The RNA test captures active cases only AIUI, and antibody testing post-outbreak which would determine who was exposed is not in the public domain.
The thing I can't get my head around with this herd immunity policy and a point Hunt made is why aren't we telling people you can't go and visit Granny every week like usual. Over 60s need to be told a lot more than don't go on an Easter holiday, it should be don't go out if you don't have to.
If they think the risk to under 40s is minimal, sure lets get it through that population, but why are not making it clear the vulnerable need to be out the way for the next 3-4 months, especially if the policy is to get 60% of the population to contract it.
We know from Seattle and Australia, you get this in a care home and you will be raking up the body count.
That's a fair criticism. The elderly and those with underlying conditions should be given stronger advice. Some are undoubtedly going further than the official advice, which will help mitigate things.
Government is relying, for now, on a good deal of personal decision making with cumulative nudge effects to lessen the spread and slow it down. This obviously is happening.
Mike's last point - shopping, is a big one. If you know someone in your neighborhood who is old enough to be in the high risk group and you want to do something altruistic for them, offer to do their shopping.
The other one is, for these high risk groups who do self-isolate, think of how you can mitigate the adverse social effects of their isolation, particularly your own elderly relatives. Spend time with them virtually, so that they don't feel the social isolation and know that people both care and are thinking of them.
Those who fancy a bit of 'herd immunity' can apparently get paid £3,500 for it by the University of London, which wants vaccine-testing guinea pigs, or so I read on here.
Presumably the PB Herders will be signing up??
Being hit on the head, vs being hit on the head but being given £3500 and guaranteed priority access to specialist being hit on the head medical resources.
If I lived in London...
Well yes, I'll admit I have pondered that logic myself!
As I understand it there is no vaccine for SARS (2003) MERS (2012) or indeed HIV (1980s), despite people looking for them. Why is it not magical thinking to be discussing which quarter of 2021 is going to bring us a Covid vaccine?
Development on SARS/MERS vaccines effectively stopped when the epidemics stopped. There are at least 40 separate vaccine efforts ongoing for Covid.
MERS hasn't stopped. It is still endemic in the Arabian Peninsular Not many people catch it every year but of those that do 30% at least die. I would be surprised if there is no research going on into a vaccine.
Those who fancy a bit of 'herd immunity' can apparently get paid £3,500 for it by the University of London, which wants vaccine-testing guinea pigs, or so I read on here.
Presumably the PB Herders will be signing up??
I have an acquaintance who did this kind of thing throughout their undergrad and post-grad studies...
Glad you didn't say: "I have a late acquaintance who did this kind of thing throughout their undergrad and post-grad studies..."
My concerns are: (1) the assumption that any attempt to eradicate the virus is doomed to fail and simply postpones misery. (2) the Iceberg assumption on which the current model is built. (3) the possibility of effective anti-virals being found or a vaccine being developed with the result pain deferred is pain saved. (4) The risk that mutation of the virus means that our very hard won herd immunity has limited effectiveness.
None of these means that the government is wrong. I have absolute respect for their dedication and focus on this. But it is frankly foolish not to worry when the price we are being asked to pay is so high.
The Chinese are now bobbling along at roughly 20 new cases a day. They have 13.5k active cases with a very high percentage of critical so there are more deaths to come. But their total infections (recorded) are 81K, less than 0.1% of their population. Does that not make you pause? Our assumption is that somewhere between 60 and 80% will get this. They are less than 0.1%. How is that possible?
It is clear the British don't believe the Chinese figures.
Plus, the Chinese have paused but not ended the outbreak; once they relax restrictions rates are likely to pick up again.
The Chinese believe that by using their massive state surveillance they will be able to monitor all its citizens. They already have an app that citizens have to use, which tracks if they have been in close contact with somebody who has tested positive and then using AI to determine how long they need to self isolate for (and it is enforced by the fact they won't be able to get into work, travel the public transport etc).
Also, they will clearly rush a vaccine through a lot quicker than the west. They will be willing to take a risk on it being better than waiting.
FWIW Having reflected on it overnight I think the government's strategy is the right one long term HOWEVER once our infections/deaths go past several countries the pressure on the government will be to reverse ferret and I'm not sure Boris Johnson has the ability to stay unpopular in his locker.
So we'll get the worst of all worlds on our pandemic response.
Unfortunately I think that might be a reasonable assessment of Boris. I hope for all our sakes we are both wrong.
I have more hope. I think if Boris was going to go populist he would have done it already. He seems to have grown a spine.
If the CMO advice works, traditional, civil service expertise, what relevance does Cummings retain. This is the moment for quiet competence to reassert itself in British public life. I hope we're in good hands.
On herd immunity, surely they must have a strong indication of many, many mild and, as yet, undetected cases, because scaling up to anything like the level to provide herd immunity purely on the basis of detected cases, i.e. something like 50-100x the current detected infection rates of Italy's worst hit communities. I don't need to spell out what that would entail.
Surely some random testing must be going on? At some point we need to know how many, if any, non-symptomatic cases there are.
The RNA test captures active cases only AIUI, and antibody testing post-outbreak which would determine who was exposed is not in the public domain.
Covid-19 is very concerning for us all and I hope all of you and your loved ones stay fit and healthy. I have a dilemma, my Mum who is 70 years old with underlying health issues is coming back from her Sri Lanka vacation next Wednesday. Do you think it would be wise for her to stay on there? She wants to come back to be with her family (kids and grandkids) but I think it may be safer for her to stay in Sri Lanka (where she has a comfortable apartment) in the knowledge that this virus has failed to take a hold (according to official numbers).
Those who fancy a bit of 'herd immunity' can apparently get paid £3,500 for it by the University of London, which wants vaccine-testing guinea pigs, or so I read on here.
Presumably the PB Herders will be signing up??
I have an acquaintance who did this kind of thing throughout their undergrad and post-grad studies...
Glad you didn't say: "I have a late acquaintance who did this kind of thing throughout their undergrad and post-grad studies..."
Well...he did have to give it up after he had "a bit of a heart issue" on one trial....
I am sceptical of the idea people can't stay in their homes for 3 months. But they have now made it clear today, the policy is herd immunity, they want people to catch it.
This is the call. Get it now, get herd immunity or in their opinion all that happens is you put a lid on it for 2-3 months, then it pops up and by next winter we are in worse position.
That is massive call. You are literally saying we are going to have 10,000s of deaths now, because it is better in the long run. They are clearly convinced that there is no vaccine coming, there is no treatments that will really work and so the only future is that the population is naturally hardened.
I think it's probably also driven by the belief that there are a lot more cases out there, and that the fatality rate will be towards the lower end of the predictions. The CMO has said several times he thinks it will be below 1%.
It's just as massive a call to do it the other way, because if the science is that it can't be eradicated it will come back as soon as it can and you go through the same thing again. Courage in political leadership is when there aren't any good options and to govern is to choose.
At least when it comes back again, some people will be immune, with more people becoming immune on each recurrence and hence recurrences becoming successively easier to handle. The only logical reason I can see for failing to make a serious attempt to curtail the virus now is because we don't think the NHS would be able to handle the first recurrence this winter. The fact that we are forced to pursue this strategy is really an indictment of the state of the NHS.
The thing I can't get my head around with this herd immunity policy and a point Hunt made is why aren't we telling people you can't go and visit Granny every week like usual. Over 60s need to be told a lot more than don't go on an Easter holiday, it should be don't go out if you don't have to.
If they think the risk to under 40s is minimal, sure lets get it through that population, but why are not making it clear the vulnerable need to be out the way for the next 3-4 months, especially if the policy is to get 60% of the population to contract it.
We know from Seattle and Australia, you get this in a care home and you will be raking up the body count.
That's a fair criticism. The elderly and those with underlying conditions should be given stronger advice. Some are undoubtedly going further than the official advice, which will help mitigate things.
Although residential / care homes tend to be warm and dry, which isn't considered to be the ideal conditions for proliferation of the virus.
My concerns are: (1) the assumption that any attempt to eradicate the virus is doomed to fail and simply postpones misery. (2) the Iceberg assumption on which the current model is built. (3) the possibility of effective anti-virals being found or a vaccine being developed with the result pain deferred is pain saved. (4) The risk that mutation of the virus means that our very hard won herd immunity has limited effectiveness.
None of these means that the government is wrong. I have absolute respect for their dedication and focus on this. But it is frankly foolish not to worry when the price we are being asked to pay is so high.
The Chinese are now bobbling along at roughly 20 new cases a day. They have 13.5k active cases with a very high percentage of critical so there are more deaths to come. But their total infections (recorded) are 81K, less than 0.1% of their population. Does that not make you pause? Our assumption is that somewhere between 60 and 80% will get this. They are less than 0.1%. How is that possible?
Yes these are my worries too.
As you know, I have been extremely upset with the government's policy for the last few weeks.
But I see the overall strategy now and that means I understand the micro-decisions better.
I firmly believe they have been wavering between going for the South Korean model versus going for the textbook pandemic plan from 2011.
The signs were there that we were going to do a South Korea (with the usual incompetence of being slow on things like flights to Italy and back).
But now I think they have spotted that this virus is popping up again in Korea even with all that they have been doing. Consequently, they've decided it would be impossible to do that strategy here in perpetuity.
I am sceptical but I am coming round to the plan. I just think they need to be far faster now in issuing guidance so people can start modifying their own behaviour appropriately.
I don't see the point of the Prem rescheduling to April 4th if that's the plan, nothing will have changed for the better at that point.
I think they are waiting for UEFA to postpone the Euros to 2021 on Tuesday, once that's confirmed, it gives the PL the the option of extending the season in to June/July/August.
With 8/9 games left, the PL can conclude the PL in 3/4 weeks with 2/3 games a week.
What's going to happen then to the Club World Cup 2021 that Liverpool have already qualified for? Can't be pushed back to 2022 (real World Cup) so will either have to be cancelled or pushed back to 2023.
Just give all the qualifiers a wee plastic trophy and say "you were all winners...."
Prizes for all.
Did you see that Hugo Lloris has been given special dispensation to shake hands with the opposition at Spurs' next match as the likelihood of him catching anything is minimal.
The thing I can't get my head around with this herd immunity policy and a point Hunt made is why aren't we telling people you can't go and visit Granny every week like usual. Over 60s need to be told a lot more than don't go on an Easter holiday, it should be don't go out if you don't have to.
If they think the risk to under 40s is minimal, sure lets get it through that population, but why are not making it clear the vulnerable need to be out the way for the next 3-4 months, especially if the policy is to get 60% of the population to contract it.
We know from Seattle and Australia, you get this in a care home and you will be raking up the body count.
That's a fair criticism. The elderly and those with underlying conditions should be given stronger advice. Some are undoubtedly going further than the official advice, which will help mitigate things.
Government is relying, for now, on a good deal of personal decision making with cumulative nudge effects to lessen the spread and slow it down. This obviously is happening.
The problem is that that it looks as if the low risk groups are rapidly taking precautions to protect themselves (not just their at risk relatives). This will fundamentally undermine Govt policy.
The govt even said yesterday that they actually didn’t want to shut down sport yet because it was counterproductive to their plan. But it is now happening anyway.
The Basingstoke Gazette reports that it was told by an employee of Basingstoke and North Hampshire hospital that the woman, who was showing coronavirus symptoms, was moved into a ward with critically unwell women.
According to the paper:
The unwell patient remained on the ward around critically ill people for hours until results revealed she had coronavirus. Nurses in normal uniform and without protective gear moved her.
The member of staff contacted this newspaper after being appalled by the practice which they claim will lead to a ‘dangerous spread’ of the disease and warns the hospital is on the brink of an outbreak.
Now a patient who was forced to temporarily share the ward with the Covid-19 sufferer is displaying symptoms of the disease.
You can read more on the Basingstoke Gazette website.
I’m currently on my way to the hospital. They are in semi lock down. Unfortunately my Dad is on the inside.
My concerns are: (1) the assumption that any attempt to eradicate the virus is doomed to fail and simply postpones misery. (2) the Iceberg assumption on which the current model is built. (3) the possibility of effective anti-virals being found or a vaccine being developed with the result pain deferred is pain saved. (4) The risk that mutation of the virus means that our very hard won herd immunity has limited effectiveness.
None of these means that the government is wrong. I have absolute respect for their dedication and focus on this. But it is frankly foolish not to worry when the price we are being asked to pay is so high.
The Chinese are now bobbling along at roughly 20 new cases a day. They have 13.5k active cases with a very high percentage of critical so there are more deaths to come. But their total infections (recorded) are 81K, less than 0.1% of their population. Does that not make you pause? Our assumption is that somewhere between 60 and 80% will get this. They are less than 0.1%. How is that possible?
Yes these are my worries too.
As you know, I have been extremely upset with the government's policy for the last few weeks.
But I see the overall strategy now and that means I understand the micro-decisions better.
I firmly believe they have been wavering between going for the South Korean model versus going for the textbook pandemic plan from 2011.
The signs were there that we were going to do a South Korea (with the usual incompetence of being slow on things like flights to Italy and back).
But now I think they have spotted that this virus is popping up again in Korea even with all that they have been doing. Consequently, they've decided it would be impossible to do that strategy here in perpetuity.
I am sceptical but I am coming round to the plan. I just think they need to be far faster now in issuing guidance so people can start modifying their own behaviour appropriately.
I am wondering if the apparent slow action is to make people think that more action is necessary, so that when the draconian stuff hits there won't be as much resistance to it.
Anyone who is old or has any heart or lung condition needs to go and do a big shop right now. Get a freezer like I did. It will come in two days. Get the pasta, the rice the pet food. Get a load of frozen veg , fruit and meat.
Then prepare to lock yourself away for 6 months. Dont let people in. If they have something they drop it off outside.
Buy some books, some paints and a Netflix subscription. Start being kind to your spouse. Get a bread maker too, they are ace.
Any recommendations for books, films, mini series very welcome!
Aside from the obvious, Better Call Saul, The Sinner, Money Heist, Ozarks, Occupied, Nobel, Victim Number 8.
Choose your viewing with care. A few years ago I went out on my own to my place in rural Hungary in the depths of winter to check everything was ok. All was fine, so I settled down on the Saturday night in my front room in front of my wood fire, with the lights low. The village is a small one with minimal street lighting and it was dark outside.
The satellite TV had nothing worth watching on so I looked through the pile of DVDs to see what I hadn't seen. I found 28 Days Later, which had excellent reviews. Great, I thought, and put it on.
It turns out that 28 Days Later is not a great film to watch on your own in a darkened room with a flickering fire in a dark remote village. I lasted about 30 minutes.
I am halfway through the second series of The Detectorists. Very good in my opinion, I am really enjoying it.
Focusing on a group of nerds with an out of proportion interest in their hobby - might be a bit close to home for some!
For me, Detectorists is the best TV show of the last 10 years that I've seen.
The guy who did the theme music for Detectorists - Johnny Flynn - stars in Lovesick. Which is far from the subtle genius of Detectorists, but still an enjoyable sitcom which treats its main characters sympathetically.
The Basingstoke Gazette reports that it was told by an employee of Basingstoke and North Hampshire hospital that the woman, who was showing coronavirus symptoms, was moved into a ward with critically unwell women.
According to the paper:
The unwell patient remained on the ward around critically ill people for hours until results revealed she had coronavirus. Nurses in normal uniform and without protective gear moved her.
The member of staff contacted this newspaper after being appalled by the practice which they claim will lead to a ‘dangerous spread’ of the disease and warns the hospital is on the brink of an outbreak.
Now a patient who was forced to temporarily share the ward with the Covid-19 sufferer is displaying symptoms of the disease.
You can read more on the Basingstoke Gazette website.
I’m currently on my way to the hospital. They are in semi lock down. Unfortunately my Dad is on the inside.
My concerns are: (1) the assumption that any attempt to eradicate the virus is doomed to fail and simply postpones misery. (2) the Iceberg assumption on which the current model is built. (3) the possibility of effective anti-virals being found or a vaccine being developed with the result pain deferred is pain saved. (4) The risk that mutation of the virus means that our very hard won herd immunity has limited effectiveness.
None of these means that the government is wrong. I have absolute respect for their dedication and focus on this. But it is frankly foolish not to worry when the price we are being asked to pay is so high.
The Chinese are now bobbling along at roughly 20 new cases a day. They have 13.5k active cases with a very high percentage of critical so there are more deaths to come. But their total infections (recorded) are 81K, less than 0.1% of their population. Does that not make you pause? Our assumption is that somewhere between 60 and 80% will get this. They are less than 0.1%. How is that possible?
It is clear the British don't believe the Chinese figures.
I agree the people clearly don't believe the Chinese figures tell the whole story.
But even if they did, it means that China will have another outbreak sometime after the current restrictions are lifted until such time as either herd immunity is achieved, a vaccine is developed and sufficient of the population inoculated, or a cure is developed, tested and distributed in sufficient quantities.
Note, both the vaccine and cure once developed are likely to have adverse side effects for at least a small percentage of the population, which means given the numbers were are talking about in a pandemic, that adequate deployment of either or both will of themselves result in a significant number of deaths too. If they have not been tested adequately, that will come back to bite authorities too, given that some of these deaths will undoubtedly be in populations that could have expected to survive COVID very well.
In short, medical authorities and governments are somewhat damned if they do and damned if they don't.
The Basingstoke Gazette reports that it was told by an employee of Basingstoke and North Hampshire hospital that the woman, who was showing coronavirus symptoms, was moved into a ward with critically unwell women.
According to the paper:
The unwell patient remained on the ward around critically ill people for hours until results revealed she had coronavirus. Nurses in normal uniform and without protective gear moved her.
The member of staff contacted this newspaper after being appalled by the practice which they claim will lead to a ‘dangerous spread’ of the disease and warns the hospital is on the brink of an outbreak.
Now a patient who was forced to temporarily share the ward with the Covid-19 sufferer is displaying symptoms of the disease.
You can read more on the Basingstoke Gazette website.
I’m currently on my way to the hospital. They are in semi lock down. Unfortunately my Dad is on the inside.
Hmm. Hope all works out well for him. We have just cancelled my mother's 90th birthday party at her old Cambridge college.
I'm rather puzzled by the sudden alarmism. My mum is in her 70s with COPD so would be particularly vulnerable but but was reassured on a hospital visit yesterday by a Doctor who even shook hands with her. Her GP also told her not to worry. It might just be that there are few cases yet locally or is this being hyped?
Another thing is that any hoarding/panic buying seems to be in supermarkets, no shortages in smaller local shops I've seen so far.
Covid-19 is very concerning for us all and I hope all of you and your loved ones stay fit and healthy. I have a dilemma, my Mum who is 70 years old with underlying health issues is coming back from her Sri Lanka vacation next Wednesday. Do you think it would be wise for her to stay on there? She wants to come back to be with her family (kids and grandkids) but I think it may be safer for her to stay in Sri Lanka (where she has a comfortable apartment) in the knowledge that this virus has failed to take a hold (according to official numbers).
I'm not an expert, but I think staying put is safer than Airports and planes.
It would be useful to have some clarification on whether age in itself or having underlying health conditions is the most important consideration. For example a 75 year old in excellent health might be less at risk than a 60 year old with underlying health conditions.
The thing I can't get my head around with this herd immunity policy and a point Hunt made is why aren't we telling people you can't go and visit Granny every week like usual. Over 60s need to be told a lot more than don't go on an Easter holiday, it should be don't go out if you don't have to.
If they think the risk to under 40s is minimal, sure lets get it through that population, but why are not making it clear the vulnerable need to be out the way for the next 3-4 months, especially if the policy is to get 60% of the population to contract it.
We know from Seattle and Australia, you get this in a care home and you will be raking up the body count.
That's a fair criticism. The elderly and those with underlying conditions should be given stronger advice. Some are undoubtedly going further than the official advice, which will help mitigate things.
Although residential / care homes tend to be warm and dry, which isn't considered to be the ideal conditions for proliferation of the virus.
Was the care home in washington state warm and dry?
FWIW Having reflected on it overnight I think the government's strategy is the right one long term HOWEVER once our infections/deaths go past several countries the pressure on the government will be to reverse ferret and I'm not sure Boris Johnson has the ability to stay unpopular in his locker.
So we'll get the worst of all worlds on our pandemic response.
Unfortunately I think that might be a reasonable assessment of Boris. I hope for all our sakes we are both wrong.
I have more hope. I think if Boris was going to go populist he would have done it already. He seems to have grown a spine.
If the CMO advice works, traditional, civil service expertise, what relevance does Cummings retain. This is the moment for quiet competence to reassert itself in British public life. I hope we're in good hands.
On herd immunity, surely they must have a strong indication of many, many mild and, as yet, undetected cases, because scaling up to anything like the level to provide herd immunity purely on the basis of detected cases, i.e. something like 50-100x the current detected infection rates of Italy's worst hit communities: I don't need to spell out what that would entail.
Cummings believes in data and evidence. In this area I am sure he, Boris and all the decision makers in government are going "We do what the CMO and CSO say". If they didn't then someone would leak the fact, and they would be toast.
The people having a go at the government know no better that the CMO and CSO - probably worse as they don't have the internal information to hand. There is a lot of confirmation bias going on - if you don't like Boris then you don't like government policy.
As OGH says, make your own plans and be sensible. At the end of the day it's our life and we are responsible for doing the best we can for our families and friends. Hopefully see you on the other side.
It's ridiculous. Of course they should cancel the rest of the season and revert to the placings and therefore determine the champions as they do at the beginning, ie alphabetically.
My concerns are: (1) the assumption that any attempt to eradicate the virus is doomed to fail and simply postpones misery. (2) the Iceberg assumption on which the current model is built. (3) the possibility of effective anti-virals being found or a vaccine being developed with the result pain deferred is pain saved. (4) The risk that mutation of the virus means that our very hard won herd immunity has limited effectiveness.
None of these means that the government is wrong. I have absolute respect for their dedication and focus on this. But it is frankly foolish not to worry when the price we are being asked to pay is so high.
The Chinese are now bobbling along at roughly 20 new cases a day. They have 13.5k active cases with a very high percentage of critical so there are more deaths to come. But their total infections (recorded) are 81K, less than 0.1% of their population. Does that not make you pause? Our assumption is that somewhere between 60 and 80% will get this. They are less than 0.1%. How is that possible?
It is clear the British don't believe the Chinese figures.
I agree the people clearly don't believe the Chinese figures tell the whole story.
But even if they did, it means that China will have another outbreak sometime after the current restrictions are lifted until such time as either herd immunity is achieved, a vaccine is developed and sufficient of the population inoculated, or a cure is developed, tested and distributed in sufficient quantities.
Note, both the vaccine and cure once developed are likely to have adverse side effects for at least a small percentage of the population, which means given the numbers were are talking about in a pandemic, that adequate deployment of either or both will of themselves result in a significant number of deaths too. If they have not been tested adequately, that will come back to bite authorities too, given that some of these deaths will undoubtedly be in populations that could have expected to survive COVID very well.
In short, medical authorities and governments are somewhat damned if they do and damned if they don't.
Excellent points. TimT: do you still believe the mortality rate will be on the low end? You suggested something around 0.6% or so yesterday I think. If so, what gives you confidence in the number of asymptomatic cases? Just curious to hear your reasoning.
My belief is based on three things: first how much this spread before being detected in Western countries; testing bias towards those with the more severe symptoms because of testing capacity limits; and the fact we have no serological data. When we do, I think we'll find the virus in places we didn't even know it existed.
Sorry, GTGN. Taking a cat to a cardiologist - something I'd never thought I'd do when I was a kid!
Well the government have made a huge call, they clearly don't think a vaccine is possible in the near term and that this will now be seasonal.
The UK will be either held up as the example of how it should have been done or exactly the opposite and on a political level the Tories will be finished.
If the other way didn't work the Tories would be equally finished - there is no right or wrong way here, it's just a matter of determining which computer model looks most plausible.
This Slowly, slowly catchy monkey approach makes sense to me as I suspect current lock downs for 2-4 weeks will actually be 2-4 months minimum.
I don't think they would be finished if they had taken the politically easier path of following the herd. If it turned out bad, they would be able to say unfortunately this was a horrific once in a century event and we followed the rest of the world.
Which implies they have a high level of conviction they are doing the right thing
As I understand it there is no vaccine for SARS (2003) MERS (2012) or indeed HIV (1980s), despite people looking for them. Why is it not magical thinking to be discussing which quarter of 2021 is going to bring us a Covid vaccine?
Because SARS and MERS were a lack of funding while HIV has an atypical rate of mutagenicty
It’s not a dead cert we will have a vaccine but you work for the best outcome and plan for the worst
My concerns are: (1) the assumption that any attempt to eradicate the virus is doomed to fail and simply postpones misery. (2) the Iceberg assumption on which the current model is built. (3) the possibility of effective anti-virals being found or a vaccine being developed with the result pain deferred is pain saved. (4) The risk that mutation of the virus means that our very hard won herd immunity has limited effectiveness.
None of these means that the government is wrong. I have absolute respect for their dedication and focus on this. But it is frankly foolish not to worry when the price we are being asked to pay is so high.
The Chinese are now bobbling along at roughly 20 new cases a day. They have 13.5k active cases with a very high percentage of critical so there are more deaths to come. But their total infections (recorded) are 81K, less than 0.1% of their population. Does that not make you pause? Our assumption is that somewhere between 60 and 80% will get this. They are less than 0.1%. How is that possible?
It is clear the British don't believe the Chinese figures.
Plus, the Chinese have paused but not ended the outbreak; once they relax restrictions rates are likely to pick up again.
That is really the key point I think. If we are right it will. If we are wrong it won't.
Today's trend is for hotel chains and all manner of online retailers sending round robins to every customer with news of what they are doing about the virus. Packages are safe, hotel rooms are safe, etc
Been getting those ball week including the fact I can get refunds on prepaid bookings.
Yeah, Cunard have generously offered me a 'Future Cruise Credit' rather than a refund... but they'll have to refund me when they're not actually sailing in May.
(Er, provided Carnival don't go bust of course )
The government advice given yesterday on avoiding cruise ships, should be enough to trigger your insurance company to pay out if Carnival don’t. It should also cover Carvinal going bust.
The big football argument is going to be at the other end of the table. What's going to be done about promotion and relegation? That's where the real money questions lie.
It's ridiculous. Of course they should cancel the rest of the season and revert to the placings and therefore determine the champions as they do at the beginning, ie alphabetically.
And I expect on the 4th April the season will be declared over as this crisis will still be rampaging across the world
The big question is what happens to Liverpool and the rest of promotion and relegation and european qualification
It's a tricky question but hard to see this season not being written off and start again in August, or whenever it is safe to do so, with the leagues as they were at the beginning of this season.
I cannot see anything but this season is over, and of course the new season may be delayed as well
I have no idea how promotion, relegation and Liverpool are resolved. I can see lots of clubs litigating and frankly a legal minefield
I am sure the Court of Appeal and the QBD have nothing more useful to do than hear endless litigation about kicking a ball around. Maybe we should give them jurisdiction over LBW decisions during Ashes series as well.
All those contracts signed by the clubs with the leagues and sponsors etc are generally governed under English law.
I'm not sure LBW decisions are governed under English law.
Really? There's prolly a contract for a test series which says 5 matches shall be played under the Laws of Cricket - incorporation by reference.
Our entire lives are governed by English law; and the entire practice of normal people is to keep well out of English law and litigation's way. This is mostly done by playing nicely, reaching sensible agreements and keeping a sense of proportion.
You don't understand, some clubs will go out of business if the season is cancelled/postponed.
You'll be damn sure they'll try every legal route to stop that happening.
I suspect lots of businesses will go bust before this over, what is so special about football clubs? Are you saying that we should ignore the health risks in order for a handful of clubs to survive?
The Basingstoke Gazette reports that it was told by an employee of Basingstoke and North Hampshire hospital that the woman, who was showing coronavirus symptoms, was moved into a ward with critically unwell women.
According to the paper:
The unwell patient remained on the ward around critically ill people for hours until results revealed she had coronavirus. Nurses in normal uniform and without protective gear moved her.
The member of staff contacted this newspaper after being appalled by the practice which they claim will lead to a ‘dangerous spread’ of the disease and warns the hospital is on the brink of an outbreak.
Now a patient who was forced to temporarily share the ward with the Covid-19 sufferer is displaying symptoms of the disease.
You can read more on the Basingstoke Gazette website.
I’m currently on my way to the hospital. They are in semi lock down. Unfortunately my Dad is on the inside.
The big football argument is going to be at the other end of the table. What's going to be done about promotion and relegation? That's where the real money questions lie.
Bundesliga considering no relegation but allowing promotion
As I understand it there is no vaccine for SARS (2003) MERS (2012) or indeed HIV (1980s), despite people looking for them. Why is it not magical thinking to be discussing which quarter of 2021 is going to bring us a Covid vaccine?
Because SARS and MERS were a lack of funding while HIV has an atypical rate of mutagenicty
It’s not a dead cert we will have a vaccine but you work for the best outcome and plan for the worst
Of course you do, but you don't treat the best outcome as priced in, nor best estimates as upper bounds.
"Steven Hoffman, the director of the Global Strategy Lab and a professor of global health, law and political science at York University, said the best estimates indicate a vaccine is still another year away from being fully deployed.
Canada should be preparing for a scenario where there is no vaccine in the short or medium term, he said, noting that in 17 years a vaccine for SARS was never fully developed.
“There’s extraordinary resources, scientific attention and focus on trying to get a vaccine for this strain of coronavirus,” said Steven Hoffman. “We should be doing everything we can to give science the best chance it has at developing something as quickly as possible.” "
My concerns are: (1) the assumption that any attempt to eradicate the virus is doomed to fail and simply postpones misery. (2) the Iceberg assumption on which the current model is built. (3) the possibility of effective anti-virals being found or a vaccine being developed with the result pain deferred is pain saved. (4) The risk that mutation of the virus means that our very hard won herd immunity has limited effectiveness.
None of these means that the government is wrong. I have absolute respect for their dedication and focus on this. But it is frankly foolish not to worry when the price we are being asked to pay is so high.
The Chinese are now bobbling along at roughly 20 new cases a day. They have 13.5k active cases with a very high percentage of critical so there are more deaths to come. But their total infections (recorded) are 81K, less than 0.1% of their population. Does that not make you pause? Our assumption is that somewhere between 60 and 80% will get this. They are less than 0.1%. How is that possible?
Yes these are my worries too.
As you know, I have been extremely upset with the government's policy for the last few weeks.
But I see the overall strategy now and that means I understand the micro-decisions better.
I firmly believe they have been wavering between going for the South Korean model versus going for the textbook pandemic plan from 2011.
The signs were there that we were going to do a South Korea (with the usual incompetence of being slow on things like flights to Italy and back).
But now I think they have spotted that this virus is popping up again in Korea even with all that they have been doing. Consequently, they've decided it would be impossible to do that strategy here in perpetuity.
I am sceptical but I am coming round to the plan. I just think they need to be far faster now in issuing guidance so people can start modifying their own behaviour appropriately.
I am wondering if the apparent slow action is to make people think that more action is necessary, so that when the draconian stuff hits there won't be as much resistance to it.
Slowly slowly catchy monkey is the only approach that will work, get people used to things over time.
The big football argument is going to be at the other end of the table. What's going to be done about promotion and relegation? That's where the real money questions lie.
Bundesliga considering no relegation but allowing promotion
I think that would self-evidently be a completely fair solution. This is in no way influenced by my being a supporter of a team that is marooned at the bottom of the Premiership.
The thing I can't get my head around with this herd immunity policy and a point Hunt made is why aren't we telling people you can't go and visit Granny every week like usual. Over 60s need to be told a lot more than don't go on an Easter holiday, it should be don't go out if you don't have to.
If they think the risk to under 40s is minimal, sure lets get it through that population, but why are not making it clear the vulnerable need to be out the way for the next 3-4 months, especially if the policy is to get 60% of the population to contract it.
We know from Seattle and Australia, you get this in a care home and you will be raking up the body count.
That's a fair criticism. The elderly and those with underlying conditions should be given stronger advice. Some are undoubtedly going further than the official advice, which will help mitigate things.
Government is relying, for now, on a good deal of personal decision making with cumulative nudge effects to lessen the spread and slow it down. This obviously is happening.
The problem is that that it looks as if the low risk groups are rapidly taking precautions to protect themselves (not just their at risk relatives). This will fundamentally undermine Govt policy.
The govt even said yesterday that they actually didn’t want to shut down sport yet because it was counterproductive to their plan. But it is now happening anyway.
But it's not their fault is it. Sport has chosen its course.
It would be useful to have some clarification on whether age in itself or having underlying health conditions is the most important consideration. For example a 75 year old in excellent health might be less at risk than a 60 year old with underlying health conditions.
At the moment, all these things are unknown. We only have one large data set from China. Given a huge number of men in China smoke, so will have damaged lungs. Furthermore, few people over 60 don't have some sort of underlying condition, even if in "excellent health" i.e. condition is perfectly managed by medication.
The only thing that seems to be certain is under 20s don't seem to suffer at all. 20-40 more likely to suffer a very nasty flu, of which a small percentage get serious pneumonia. Then after that it ramps up very quickly the percentage of people who will be in serious trouble.
Comments
The widest scale testing has been in South Korea, and it does not suggest anything of the sort.
There are, of course, uncertainties, and without large scale random serology testing (to look for antibodies to the virus) it's impossible to be certain. But no one has conducted that.
Prizes for all.
If I lived in London...
Plus, the Chinese have paused but not ended the outbreak; once they relax restrictions rates are likely to pick up again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaoVg6ejgRQ&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR1ZFDdCCVLd5Orih8yisxT2XNZOxV8yPWNfAYLblGBVkuIbANTDYdW0zLM
The other one is, for these high risk groups who do self-isolate, think of how you can mitigate the adverse social effects of their isolation, particularly your own elderly relatives. Spend time with them virtually, so that they don't feel the social isolation and know that people both care and are thinking of them.
Well yes, I'll admit I have pondered that logic myself!
Also, they will clearly rush a vaccine through a lot quicker than the west. They will be willing to take a risk on it being better than waiting.
Covid-19 is very concerning for us all and I hope all of you and your loved ones stay fit and healthy. I have a dilemma, my Mum who is 70 years old with underlying health issues is coming back from her Sri Lanka vacation next Wednesday. Do you think it would be wise for her to stay on there? She wants to come back to be with her family (kids and grandkids) but I think it may be safer for her to stay in Sri Lanka (where she has a comfortable apartment) in the knowledge that this virus has failed to take a hold (according to official numbers).
As you know, I have been extremely upset with the government's policy for the last few weeks.
But I see the overall strategy now and that means I understand the micro-decisions better.
I firmly believe they have been wavering between going for the South Korean model versus going for the textbook pandemic plan from 2011.
The signs were there that we were going to do a South Korea (with the usual incompetence of being slow on things like flights to Italy and back).
But now I think they have spotted that this virus is popping up again in Korea even with all that they have been doing. Consequently, they've decided it would be impossible to do that strategy here in perpetuity.
I am sceptical but I am coming round to the plan. I just think they need to be far faster now in issuing guidance so people can start modifying their own behaviour appropriately.
The govt even said yesterday that they actually didn’t want to shut down sport yet because it was counterproductive to their plan. But it is now happening anyway.
Keep Your Hands off Eizouken!
The guy who did the theme music for Detectorists - Johnny Flynn - stars in Lovesick. Which is far from the subtle genius of Detectorists, but still an enjoyable sitcom which treats its main characters sympathetically.
Hope all is well with your Dad, Charles.
But even if they did, it means that China will have another outbreak sometime after the current restrictions are lifted until such time as either herd immunity is achieved, a vaccine is developed and sufficient of the population inoculated, or a cure is developed, tested and distributed in sufficient quantities.
Note, both the vaccine and cure once developed are likely to have adverse side effects for at least a small percentage of the population, which means given the numbers were are talking about in a pandemic, that adequate deployment of either or both will of themselves result in a significant number of deaths too. If they have not been tested adequately, that will come back to bite authorities too, given that some of these deaths will undoubtedly be in populations that could have expected to survive COVID very well.
In short, medical authorities and governments are somewhat damned if they do and damned if they don't.
Spain: 3,921 +775
Germany: 3,116 +371
Another thing is that any hoarding/panic buying seems to be in supermarkets, no shortages in smaller local shops I've seen so far.
Anecdotal - Meadowhall deserted last night. End times.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
The people having a go at the government know no better that the CMO and CSO - probably worse as they don't have the internal information to hand. There is a lot of confirmation bias going on - if you don't like Boris then you don't like government policy.
As OGH says, make your own plans and be sensible. At the end of the day it's our life and we are responsible for doing the best we can for our families and friends. Hopefully see you on the other side.
Sorry, GTGN. Taking a cat to a cardiologist - something I'd never thought I'd do when I was a kid!
Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes.
That ending, oh boy.
It’s not a dead cert we will have a vaccine but you work for the best outcome and plan for the worst
Singapore-on-Thames doesn't seem a bad idea at all.
Does this mean that Arsenal and Burnley are still playing?
FCO advise against all but essential travel to parts of Spain including Madrid
"Steven Hoffman, the director of the Global Strategy Lab and a professor of global health, law and political science at York University, said the best estimates indicate a vaccine is still another year away from being fully deployed.
Canada should be preparing for a scenario where there is no vaccine in the short or medium term, he said, noting that in 17 years a vaccine for SARS was never fully developed.
“There’s extraordinary resources, scientific attention and focus on trying to get a vaccine for this strain of coronavirus,” said Steven Hoffman. “We should be doing everything we can to give science the best chance it has at developing something as quickly as possible.” "
https://globalnews.ca/news/6666876/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine/
The only thing that seems to be certain is under 20s don't seem to suffer at all. 20-40 more likely to suffer a very nasty flu, of which a small percentage get serious pneumonia. Then after that it ramps up very quickly the percentage of people who will be in serious trouble.