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?
No Idea, never visited it or seen a report on the climate in the home.
Awareness of the dangers leading to better practices within the home and from visitors combined with the environment could cumulatively lead to a reduction of the danger in those homes.
Labour is abdicating it's responsibility as an opposition at this point by not having Starmer in more quickly.
Why Starmer?
Because he's the racing cert.
Anecdotal - Meadowhall deserted last night. End times.
"Racing cert" - I hadn't realised that that was part of Labour's leadership election process. Why don't they just declare him the winner and have done with all this faffing around?
Probably the wrong time to re-watch Contagion, eh?
Likewise I highly recommend not re-reading The Stand, it's not conducive to a good night's sleep. I picked it up at the end of January and have left it well alone since getting a couple of hundred pages in.
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.
It's worth noting that one of the great coups of sporting history occurred after the end of the first world war:
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.
On Cummings - I think that, if anything, he would be behind the "pure science" approach, rather than doing the things that would be popular, but ineffective.
It is worth considering that the CMO or CSO could have Boris out in the street with 2 sentences in public.
As to the confirmation bias - I think I noted earlier the problem that idealogical opponents of the government have. So they are trying not hear the experts. Short of actually putting their fingers in their ears and shouting La-La-La...
Labour is abdicating it's responsibility as an opposition at this point by not having Starmer in more quickly.
One hopes that, when Starmer is confirmed, he will be invited to the COBR meetings and join press conferences with the PM in order to put on a united front.
40s ago 12:24 On Thursday afternoon Boris Johnson said there was “no medical reason” to ban sporting events. Less than 24 hours later, the Premier League, EFL, FA, Scottish FA and WSL take matters into their own hands and follow the lead of European leagues, with La Liga, Eredivisie and Ligue 1 among those to chop matches:
The betting companies are going to struggle if there’s not much sport on, or am I missing something really obvious?
Most of them have big verticals of things like casino games and of course poker...dusts off the old poker gloves....
I’m banned from playing poker.
In all seriousness, I wouldn't touch online poker these days. The games are infested by those who spent the past few years dedicated to studying the output from game theory simulators and increasing evidence of large scale cheating rings who use databases of these solutions to provide real time advice.
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.
He certainly looks like have to do a real job is aging him rapidly.
I have a somewhat more generous definition of “real job”!
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.
He certainly looks like have to do a real job is aging him rapidly.
I have a somewhat more generous definition of “real job”!
40s ago 12:24 On Thursday afternoon Boris Johnson said there was “no medical reason” to ban sporting events. Less than 24 hours later, the Premier League, EFL, FA, Scottish FA and WSL take matters into their own hands and follow the lead of European leagues, with La Liga, Eredivisie and Ligue 1 among those to chop matches:
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.
AFC Bournemouth's first league title?
If an F1 race has to be curtailed they count back one lap so everyone has done the same distance. Lets treat the PL in the same way and reset back to 28 completed matches.
No change at the top. Liverpool win the league by 22 points, and no changes to the CL slots. United and Wolves both drop to 42 points promoting Sheffield United into the Europa League on 43 points. At the bottom no change with the bottom 3 going down. Simples.
If our govt is listening to our experts, why are our experts giving such different advice from everybody else's experts?
They have now let the cat out of the bag. They don't believe the Chinese numbers, and they don't believe a vaccine is coming. One way or another a huge proportion of the population are going to get this over the next few years.
Thus, there are two strategies, hide people away every few months when it flairs up, or try and gain herd immunity.
The first is politically much easier. The second is massively risky on a number of fronts.
If our govt is listening to our experts, why are our experts giving such different advice from everybody else's experts?
Just out of interest, do you know how prominent “everybody else’s experts” have been in other countries? Maybe a number of leaders aren’t listening to them?
And it’s not “everybody” anyway. Countries doing things differently are being flagged up by the media looking for a story. Those that are taking a similar position to the U.K. are not being flagged. All the indications are that Germany, for example is giving largely the same approach as the U.K.
The FTSE seems to like the governments approach at least. Up 7.4% this morning.
The other European indices seem to like their governments' approaches too!
Spain up 2% more than FTSE.
The bounce simply reflects the previous severity of the dip. Spanish latest figures are awful - the centre and north of the country are rapidly resembling Italy. At this point severe lockdown may be the only option for them but it's not a fun or easy ride.
If our govt is listening to our experts, why are our experts giving such different advice from everybody else's experts?
Just out of interest, do you know how prominent “everybody else’s experts” have been in other countries? Maybe a number of leaders aren’t listening to them?
And it’s not “everybody” anyway. Countries doing things differently are being flagged up by the media looking for a story. Those that are taking a similar position to the U.K. are not being flagged. All the indications are that Germany, for example is giving largely the same approach as the U.K.
Merkel's statement two days ago is basically what our egg-heads said yesterday. The mass population are getting this.
There is no reason at all why they should not extend. This is just like Boris and his refusing to extend during the Brexit negotiations. It is pointless grandstanding.
The reason is Farage et al will start screaming and undermining the government
It *will* be extended but at a point when even the nuttiest realise that it must be
The role of absolute humidity on transmission rates of the COVID-19 outbreak https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.12.20022467v1.full.pdf A novel coronavirus (COVID-19) was identified in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, in December 2019 and has caused over 40,000 cases worldwide to date. Previous studies have supported an epidemiological hypothesis that cold and dry (low absolute humidity) environments facilitate the survival and spread of droplet-mediated viral diseases, and warm and humid (high absolute humidity) environments see attenuated viral transmission (i.e., influenza). How- ever, the role of absolute humidity in transmission of COVID-19 has not yet been established. Here, we examine province-level variability of the basic reproductive numbers of COVID-19 across China and find that changes in weather alone (i.e., increase of temperature and humidity as spring and sum-mer months arrive in the North Hemisphere) will not necessarily lead to declines in COVID-19 case counts without the implementation of extensive public health intervention
Fair point, but basically everyones going to go bankrupt.
I really don't know why they didn't go to 3pm kick-offs behind closed doors, streamed online, 99p a match (free for season ticket holders of that club). No pubs / clubs.
If our govt is listening to our experts, why are our experts giving such different advice from everybody else's experts?
Could be all sorts of reasons. Readiness. Geographical spread. Health service preparedness. Societal and cultural reasons.
I would say that some governments (waves at Mr Trump) are clearly taking some actions out of a desire to be seen to take a strongman approach to this. I personally am quite relieved we’ve got leaders who are talking about following the advice of the professionals rather than imposing martial law for the sake of looking proactive. I’m pleasantly surprised tbh.
I trust the experts and the herd immunity policy. I wonder if any other countries will follow the British policy.
Maybe I'm just stupid but I'm struggling a bit to understand the 'benefits of herd immunity' policy.
Sir Patrick Valance was on SKY declaring that for 'herd immunity' to set in at least 60% of people need to be infected, maybe even more. The 30-40% not infected in the first place will be comprised of two large groups: - The "hermits" who lived too remote a life (or self-isolated) - The "freaks" who didn't catch it because of their extraordinary genetic disposition If you subtract their numbers (because the 'herd immunity policy' will be of no benefit to them) how many are left? Maybe 10-20%. So the HIP suggests that the infection of 60-70% shall proceed relatively unimpeded to benefit a much smaller number of maybe (at best) 20%. At a casual glance that doesn't really make sense to me.
FCO advise against all but essential travel to parts of Spain including Madrid
My brothers daughters just back from Barcelona. One lives at home.
He wants to see my very ill father in his care home on Sunday and just can't see why I am telling him he should not go.
FFS - the care homes own advice page clearly says dont go in these circumstances.
The government have really screwed up there. They really should have made it clear you just can't go and visit granny just because that's what you do every week.
If our govt is listening to our experts, why are our experts giving such different advice from everybody else's experts?
One difference may be that Boris doesn't have to face re-election for 5 years. Politicians who are facing re-election sooner may feel more pressure to be seen to be doing something
I trust the experts and the herd immunity policy. I wonder if any other countries will follow the British policy.
Maybe I'm just stupid but I'm struggling a bit to understand the 'benefits of herd immunity' policy.
Sir Patrick Valance was on SKY declaring that for 'herd immunity' to set in at least 60% of people need to be infected, maybe even more. The 30-40% not infected in the first place will be comprised of two large groups: - The "hermits" who lived too remote a life (or self-isolated) - The "freaks" who didn't catch it because of their extraordinary genetic disposition If you subtract their numbers (because the 'herd immunity policy' will be of no benefit to them) how many are left? Maybe 10-20%. So the HIP suggests that the infection of 60-70% shall proceed relatively unimpeded to benefit a much smaller number of maybe (at best) 20%. At a casual glance that doesn't really make sense to me.
But they believe this is coming every year, so the general population need to build up a resistance, otherwise this will just keep happening. And once you have done that, it is much harder to spread again through communities.
If it works out like that is a massive gamble. But they clearly think this is seasonal thing and no vaccine is possible in the short / medium term.
I trust the experts and the herd immunity policy. I wonder if any other countries will follow the British policy.
Maybe I'm just stupid but I'm struggling a bit to understand the 'benefits of herd immunity' policy.
Sir Patrick Valance was on SKY declaring that for 'herd immunity' to set in at least 60% of people need to be infected, maybe even more. The 30-40% not infected in the first place will be comprised of two large groups: - The "hermits" who lived too remote a life (or self-isolated) - The "freaks" who didn't catch it because of their extraordinary genetic disposition If you subtract their numbers (because the 'herd immunity policy' will be of no benefit to them) how many are left? Maybe 10-20%. So the HIP suggests that the infection of 60-70% shall proceed relatively unimpeded to benefit a much smaller number of maybe (at best) 20%. At a casual glance that doesn't really make sense to me.
You try and shuffle the weak into the last 20% and let the stronger carry the burden of gaining immunity to protect them.
It would be interesting to hear an explanation as to why we cannot or don't want to follow suit that is a little more informative than, "because the experts say so".
Shakes head...both from a public safety point of view, you don't what bloody oldies coming out to polling stations and (far less important) politically they will be massively reduced in numbers so Tories at a disadvantage.
If our govt is listening to our experts, why are our experts giving such different advice from everybody else's experts?
Just out of interest, do you know how prominent “everybody else’s experts” have been in other countries? Maybe a number of leaders aren’t listening to them?
In Japan it seems clear "ask people to cancel events and work from home where practical" were the clear advice of the relevant expert committee, however there were allegations that closing schools was something the PM pulled out of his arse at the last minute.
It would be interesting to hear an explanation as to why we cannot or don't want to follow suit that is a little more informative than, "because the experts say so".
They have explained it. They think all this does is temporarily put a lid on it, and that in a month or two it will flair up again, rinse and repeat for years to come. They don't believe in 3 months that will be it, finished forever. They think it will now come around every year like normal flu.
If they are right or not, well we are the experiment.
I trust the experts and the herd immunity policy. I wonder if any other countries will follow the British policy.
Maybe I'm just stupid but I'm struggling a bit to understand the 'benefits of herd immunity' policy.
Sir Patrick Valance was on SKY declaring that for 'herd immunity' to set in at least 60% of people need to be infected, maybe even more. The 30-40% not infected in the first place will be comprised of two large groups: - The "hermits" who lived too remote a life (or self-isolated) - The "freaks" who didn't catch it because of their extraordinary genetic disposition If you subtract their numbers (because the 'herd immunity policy' will be of no benefit to them) how many are left? Maybe 10-20%. So the HIP suggests that the infection of 60-70% shall proceed relatively unimpeded to benefit a much smaller number of maybe (at best) 20%. At a casual glance that doesn't really make sense to me.
You try and shuffle the weak into the last 20% and let the stronger carry the burden of gaining immunity to protect them.
It's a bit like the welfare state.
How can you "shuffle the weak into the last 20%" ?
You cannot change the genetic disposition of anyone and to create more 'hermits' would require large resettlement schemes.
I trust the experts and the herd immunity policy. I wonder if any other countries will follow the British policy.
Maybe I'm just stupid but I'm struggling a bit to understand the 'benefits of herd immunity' policy.
Sir Patrick Valance was on SKY declaring that for 'herd immunity' to set in at least 60% of people need to be infected, maybe even more. The 30-40% not infected in the first place will be comprised of two large groups: - The "hermits" who lived too remote a life (or self-isolated) - The "freaks" who didn't catch it because of their extraordinary genetic disposition If you subtract their numbers (because the 'herd immunity policy' will be of no benefit to them) how many are left? Maybe 10-20%. So the HIP suggests that the infection of 60-70% shall proceed relatively unimpeded to benefit a much smaller number of maybe (at best) 20%. At a casual glance that doesn't really make sense to me.
You try and shuffle the weak into the last 20% and let the stronger carry the burden of gaining immunity to protect them.
It's a bit like the welfare state.
How can you "shuffle the weak into the last 20%" ?
You cannot change the genetic disposition of anyone and to create more 'hermits' would require large resettlement schemes.
You keep them away from the general population during the peak time.
What they have said is they don't believe it is possible to put oldies into isolation for 3-4 months, so they are going to tell them to go and hide in a few weeks. I have to say I don't agree on this.
The FTSE seems to like the governments approach at least. Up 7.4% this morning.
The other European indices seem to like their governments' approaches too!
Spain up 2% more than FTSE.
The bounce simply reflects the previous severity of the dip. Spanish latest figures are awful - the centre and north of the country are rapidly resembling Italy. At this point severe lockdown may be the only option for them but it's not a fun or easy ride.
"However, the direct impact of these events on companies is comparatively small, with some notable exceptions. Coca-Cola’s sales in Italy, for example, are minimal and you’d usually expect lower oil prices to boost consumer spending. Yet Coca-Cola’s share price has fallen 12.2% in the past week.
Shakes head...both from a public safety point of view, you don't what bloody oldies coming out to polling stations and (far less important) politically they will be massively reduced in numbers so Tories at a disadvantage.
I trust the experts and the herd immunity policy. I wonder if any other countries will follow the British policy.
Maybe I'm just stupid but I'm struggling a bit to understand the 'benefits of herd immunity' policy.
Sir Patrick Valance was on SKY declaring that for 'herd immunity' to set in at least 60% of people need to be infected, maybe even more. The 30-40% not infected in the first place will be comprised of two large groups: - The "hermits" who lived too remote a life (or self-isolated) - The "freaks" who didn't catch it because of their extraordinary genetic disposition If you subtract their numbers (because the 'herd immunity policy' will be of no benefit to them) how many are left? Maybe 10-20%. So the HIP suggests that the infection of 60-70% shall proceed relatively unimpeded to benefit a much smaller number of maybe (at best) 20%. At a casual glance that doesn't really make sense to me.
You try and shuffle the weak into the last 20% and let the stronger carry the burden of gaining immunity to protect them.
It's a bit like the welfare state.
How can you "shuffle the weak into the last 20%" ?
You cannot change the genetic disposition of anyone and to create more 'hermits' would require large resettlement schemes.
You keep them away from the general population during the peak time.
What they have said is they don't believe it is possible to put oldies into isolation for 3-4 months, so they are going to tell them to go and hide in a few weeks. I have to say I don't agree on this.
Indeed, get them to self isolate and the army to drop off food packages
A friend of mine who runs a sheet metal fabrication business (employs five people) tells me he's not had a single order this week. That's never happened in the 17 years he's owned it.
It would be interesting to hear an explanation as to why we cannot or don't want to follow suit that is a little more informative than, "because the experts say so".
They have explained it. They think all this does is temporarily put a lid on it, and that in a month or two it will flair up again, rinse and repeat for years to come. They don't believe in 3 months that will be it, finished forever. They think it will now come around every year like normal flu.
If they are right or not, well we are the experiment.
I don't think anyone believes in 3 months that will be it, but the Koreans clearly believe that a radically different approach to the UK is warranted. Why might that be?
I trust the experts and the herd immunity policy. I wonder if any other countries will follow the British policy.
Maybe I'm just stupid but I'm struggling a bit to understand the 'benefits of herd immunity' policy.
Sir Patrick Valance was on SKY declaring that for 'herd immunity' to set in at least 60% of people need to be infected, maybe even more. The 30-40% not infected in the first place will be comprised of two large groups: - The "hermits" who lived too remote a life (or self-isolated) - The "freaks" who didn't catch it because of their extraordinary genetic disposition If you subtract their numbers (because the 'herd immunity policy' will be of no benefit to them) how many are left? Maybe 10-20%. So the HIP suggests that the infection of 60-70% shall proceed relatively unimpeded to benefit a much smaller number of maybe (at best) 20%. At a casual glance that doesn't really make sense to me.
You try and shuffle the weak into the last 20% and let the stronger carry the burden of gaining immunity to protect them.
It's a bit like the welfare state.
How can you "shuffle the weak into the last 20%" ?
You cannot change the genetic disposition of anyone and to create more 'hermits' would require large resettlement schemes.
You keep them away from the general population during the peak time.
What they have said is they don't believe it is possible to put oldies into isolation for 3-4 months, so they are going to tell them to go and hide in a few weeks. I have to say I don't agree on this.
Indeed, get them to self isolate and the army to drop off food packages
Converse with them, and for the reasonably able ones organise home deliveries from the supermarkets (and get them to do it free of charge).
And for the really vulnerable, yes perhaps army to do deliveries of hot food.
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 trust the experts and the herd immunity policy. I wonder if any other countries will follow the British policy.
Maybe I'm just stupid but I'm struggling a bit to understand the 'benefits of herd immunity' policy.
Sir Patrick Valance was on SKY declaring that for 'herd immunity' to set in at least 60% of people need to be infected, maybe even more. The 30-40% not infected in the first place will be comprised of two large groups: - The "hermits" who lived too remote a life (or self-isolated) - The "freaks" who didn't catch it because of their extraordinary genetic disposition If you subtract their numbers (because the 'herd immunity policy' will be of no benefit to them) how many are left? Maybe 10-20%. So the HIP suggests that the infection of 60-70% shall proceed relatively unimpeded to benefit a much smaller number of maybe (at best) 20%. At a casual glance that doesn't really make sense to me.
You try and shuffle the weak into the last 20% and let the stronger carry the burden of gaining immunity to protect them.
It's a bit like the welfare state.
How can you "shuffle the weak into the last 20%" ?
You cannot change the genetic disposition of anyone and to create more 'hermits' would require large resettlement schemes.
You keep the schools and the offices and the shops open and then encourage only the weak and the known infectious to isolate. The rest slowly get it and build up the immune heard.
It would be interesting to hear an explanation as to why we cannot or don't want to follow suit that is a little more informative than, "because the experts say so".
They have explained it. They think all this does is temporarily put a lid on it, and that in a month or two it will flair up again, rinse and repeat for years to come. They don't believe in 3 months that will be it, finished forever. They think it will now come around every year like normal flu.
If they are right or not, well we are the experiment.
I don't think anyone believes in 3 months that will be it, but the Koreans clearly believe that a radically different approach to the UK is warranted. Why might that be?
We really don't know, because we haven't seen the data. Part of it might be that the Korean government feel they can impose restrictions on the population and they will stick to it, even if that means every 3 months they will have to repeat this. This is one thing the UK government absolutely don't believe the British public will accept.
The Chinese absolutely do feel they can keep doing this, and use their massive state surveillance system to identify new outbreaks and target the shutdowns.
Option one of repeated containment phases is also politically easier.
Comments
Awareness of the dangers leading to better practices within the home and from visitors combined with the environment could cumulatively lead to a reduction of the danger in those homes.
Brilliant, made me laugh!
https://tinyurl.com/yx62ylp6
Quite why there isn't a statue of Henry Norris outside of the Emirates, I don't know.
First case in Lesbos refugee camp.
It is worth considering that the CMO or CSO could have Boris out in the street with 2 sentences in public.
As to the confirmation bias - I think I noted earlier the problem that idealogical opponents of the government have. So they are trying not hear the experts. Short of actually putting their fingers in their ears and shouting La-La-La...
40s ago
12:24
On Thursday afternoon Boris Johnson said there was “no medical reason” to ban sporting events. Less than 24 hours later, the Premier League, EFL, FA, Scottish FA and WSL take matters into their own hands and follow the lead of European leagues, with La Liga, Eredivisie and Ligue 1 among those to chop matches:
https://twitter.com/skysportsnews/status/1238434487144460289?s=21
No change at the top. Liverpool win the league by 22 points, and no changes to the CL slots. United and Wolves both drop to 42 points promoting Sheffield United into the Europa League on 43 points. At the bottom no change with the bottom 3 going down. Simples.
Thus, there are two strategies, hide people away every few months when it flairs up, or try and gain herd immunity.
The first is politically much easier. The second is massively risky on a number of fronts.
And it’s not “everybody” anyway. Countries doing things differently are being flagged up by the media looking for a story. Those that are taking a similar position to the U.K. are not being flagged. All the indications are that Germany, for example is giving largely the same approach as the U.K.
Fair point, but basically everyones going to go bankrupt.
It *will* be extended but at a point when even the nuttiest realise that it must be
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.12.20022467v1.full.pdf
A novel coronavirus (COVID-19) was identified in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, in December 2019 and has caused over 40,000 cases worldwide to date. Previous studies have supported an epidemiological hypothesis that cold and dry (low absolute humidity) environments facilitate the survival and spread of droplet-mediated viral diseases, and warm and humid (high absolute humidity) environments see attenuated viral transmission (i.e., influenza). How- ever, the role of absolute humidity in transmission of COVID-19 has not yet been established. Here, we examine province-level variability of the basic reproductive numbers of COVID-19 across China and find that changes in weather alone (i.e., increase of temperature and humidity as spring and sum-mer months arrive in the North Hemisphere) will not necessarily lead to declines in COVID-19 case counts without the implementation of extensive public health intervention
He wants to see my very ill father in his care home on Sunday and just can't see why I am telling him he should not go.
FFS - the care homes own advice page clearly says dont go in these circumstances.
I would say that some governments (waves at Mr Trump) are clearly taking some actions out of a desire to be seen to take a strongman approach to this. I personally am quite relieved we’ve got leaders who are talking about following the advice of the professionals rather than imposing martial law for the sake of looking proactive. I’m pleasantly surprised tbh.
Sir Patrick Valance was on SKY declaring that for 'herd immunity' to set in at least 60% of people need to be infected, maybe even more.
The 30-40% not infected in the first place will be comprised of two large groups:
- The "hermits" who lived too remote a life (or self-isolated)
- The "freaks" who didn't catch it because of their extraordinary genetic disposition
If you subtract their numbers (because the 'herd immunity policy' will be of no benefit to them) how many are left?
Maybe 10-20%. So the HIP suggests that the infection of 60-70% shall proceed relatively unimpeded to benefit a much smaller number of maybe (at best) 20%.
At a casual glance that doesn't really make sense to me.
If it works out like that is a massive gamble. But they clearly think this is seasonal thing and no vaccine is possible in the short / medium term.
It's a bit like the welfare state.
https://twitter.com/jenwilliamsmen/status/1238444512114085888?s=21
If they are right or not, well we are the experiment.
You cannot change the genetic disposition of anyone and to create more 'hermits' would require large resettlement schemes.
What they have said is they don't believe it is possible to put oldies into isolation for 3-4 months, so they are going to tell them to go and hide in a few weeks. I have to say I don't agree on this.
It will also depend on the relative situation in each country in relation to the current infection rate and health services preparedness.
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1238016923029430272
Investors are gripped by fear of the unknown rather than living in the present and what they can control."
https://www.hl.co.uk/news/articles/ftse-100-shocks-our-view-on-a-fearful-market
If you understand the sheer imbecility of "in Italy" there, you understand why it is not safe to go back into the water.
And for the really vulnerable, yes perhaps army to do deliveries of hot food.
Bloody stupid decision (bet it will be reversed in a couple of weeks, though campaign expenses begin on March 25th).
The Chinese absolutely do feel they can keep doing this, and use their massive state surveillance system to identify new outbreaks and target the shutdowns.
Option one of repeated containment phases is also politically easier.