Counterintuitively, given all my previous posts, I have bought into Carnival shares. If any industry is going to be first in line for state aid, it’s going to be the cruising industry, and the shares are now down to almost a quarter of their value a few years back.
Brave
In the Sir Humphrey sense of the word.
Although, that much said, cruises are favoured by oldies and they are typically creatures of habit. Given that the Government has only advised, rather than ordered, older people not to go on cruises, how many do we think will actually take the advice?
Indeed, it would be fascinating to know how many people are still booking to go on the blessed things even now.
Overheard in the school playground: "I don't believe this coronavirus is real. And I won't believe it unless someone I know gets it." People are weird.
Discovery of a 382-nt deletion during the early evolution of SARS-CoV-2
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.11.987222v1 To date, the SARS-CoV-2 genome has been considered genetically more stable than SARS-CoV or MERS-CoV. Here we report a 382-nt deletion covering almost the entire open reading frame 8 (ORF8) of SARS-CoV-2 obtained from eight hospitalized patients in Singapore. The deletion also removes the ORF8 transcription-regulatory sequence (TRS), which in turn enhances the downstream transcription of the N gene. We also found that viruses with the deletion have been circulating for at least four weeks. During the SARS-CoV outbreak in 2003, a number of genetic variants were observed in the human population, and similar variation has since been observed across SARS-related CoVs in humans and bats. Overwhelmingly these viruses had mutations or deletions in ORF8, that have been associated with reduced replicative fitness of the virus. This is also consistent with the observation that towards the end of the outbreak sequences obtained from human SARS cases possessed an ORF8 deletion that may be associated with host adaptation. We therefore hypothesise that the major deletion revealed in this study may lead to an attenuated phenotype of SARS-CoV-2.
and this means?
Well it's another (small) piece of evidence in favour of the shut it down as long as you can option. Clearly on that side of the argument the development of one or more vaccines is the best hope, but this is a suggestion that the virus can change into something less deadly over time. Only a suggestion, though.
It is a different virus ...
It is not even (yet) peer-reviewed & its conclusions are very tentative even for SARS-Cov-2
So, a very, very small piece of positive evidence.
Counterintuitively, given all my previous posts, I have bought into Carnival shares. If any industry is going to be first in line for state aid, it’s going to be the cruising industry, and the shares are now down to almost a quarter of their value a few years back.
Carnival is a US company that owns Cunard, P&O Cruises and Princess Cruises (as in Grand and Diamond) amongst others. It is a great shame that they have been particularly badly hit, but why would they qualify for state aid - and which state would that be?
Despite being a US company, there's very few Americans employed by them. Almost all of the onboard staff are from the third world. No government is going to bail them out.
Carnival owes $10bn (those ships don't come cheap), so it's entirely possible there will be a lot of pressure on governments to step in
Auction off the assets for $5bn, and the other $5bn is the risk the bank took in advancing the money in the first place. You're not suggesting that failing business models should be propped up by governments, surely?
If carnival is smart, though, they will have done a lot of borrowing from a mid sized bank in a marginal Congressional district.
But, you're right. Let it go bust and sell the assets. Maybe it's time to see if we can pick up a cheap cruise liner
Imagine the cost of the deep clean, though.
If you bought it for a few hundred million dollars under the book value, the price of cleaning it won't matter too much. Having it run around somewhere hot with the air-conditioning off for a few days will probably do the job just fine!
Bit of an inconsistency here... We do not recommend the use of facemasks as an effective means of preventing the spread of infection. Facemasks play an important role in clinical settings, such as hospitals, but there’s very little evidence of benefit from their use outside of these settings. However, if you receive external care you may be asked to wear a mask to minimise the risk to your carer.
The government better hope it is only 7 days that you are infectious, because otherwise people are going to burst out of their isolation and go visit all the people they haven't seen for a week.
Iran: "During the next 10 days, the entire Iranian nation will be monitored once through cyberspace, by phone and, if necessary, in person, and those suspected of being ill will be fully identified,"
UK: If you think you've got it, we don't want to know.
Why? If I wear a large sign saying "Self-isolating" (or "unclean") and shout "keep away" to everyone (I live in a reasonably remote Cotswold village) I'd have thought I'd have a better chance of recovering quickly - and of keeping mentally fit too.
I could understand the argument for not walking if I lived in a crowded city. But in the middle of nowhere?
Iran: "During the next 10 days, the entire Iranian nation will be monitored once through cyberspace, by phone and, if necessary, in person, and those suspected of being ill will be fully identified,"
UK: If you think you've got it, we don't want to know.
After a quick swatch of the local supermarkets this afternoon, the one absolute prediction that I'll make about the current & ongoing crisis is that kitchen rolls are going to be seeing a lot of action to which they have so far been unaccustomed.
Are tissues selling out as well? I know they're more expensive than toilet rolls but...
The government better hope it is only 7 days that you are infectious, because otherwise people are going to burst out of their isolation and go visit all the people they haven't seen for a week.
The thinking is presumably that if you do have coronavirus, you're going to be really quite ill after seven days ? Certainly those who are ill shed virus for much longer than that (median around 20 days). I'm not sure how long the asymptomatic infected continue to do so.
Iran: "During the next 10 days, the entire Iranian nation will be monitored once through cyberspace, by phone and, if necessary, in person, and those suspected of being ill will be fully identified,"
UK: If you think you've got it, we don't want to know.
You think Iran will actually manage that?
At least they have a desire to do it.
Here, the data for number of cases going forward basically become meaningless. Only the fatality figures will carry any weight.
Counterintuitively, given all my previous posts, I have bought into Carnival shares. If any industry is going to be first in line for state aid, it’s going to be the cruising industry, and the shares are now down to almost a quarter of their value a few years back.
Carnival is a US company that owns Cunard, P&O Cruises and Princess Cruises (as in Grand and Diamond) amongst others. It is a great shame that they have been particularly badly hit, but why would they qualify for state aid - and which state would that be?
Despite being a US company, there's very few Americans employed by them. Almost all of the onboard staff are from the third world. No government is going to bail them out.
Carnival owes $10bn (those ships don't come cheap), so it's entirely possible there will be a lot of pressure on governments to step in
Auction off the assets for $5bn, and the other $5bn is the risk the bank took in advancing the money in the first place. You're not suggesting that failing business models should be propped up by governments, surely?
If carnival is smart, though, they will have done a lot of borrowing from a mid sized bank in a marginal Congressional district.
But, you're right. Let it go bust and sell the assets. Maybe it's time to see if we can pick up a cheap cruise liner
Imagine the cost of the deep clean, though.
If you bought it for a few hundred million dollars under the book value, the price of cleaning it won't matter too much. Having it run around somewhere hot with the air-conditioning off for a few days will probably do the job just fine!
Most of these ships have had no cases of C-19 anyway so no need to treat them like a used nuclear reactor.
Why? If I wear a large sign saying "Self-isolating" (or "unclean") and shout "keep away" to everyone (I live in a reasonably remote Cotswold village) I'd have thought I'd have a better chance of recovering quickly - and of keeping mentally fit too.
I could understand the argument for not walking if I lived in a crowded city. But in the middle of nowhere?
The problem is if you start complicating the instructions, 90% of people don't read carefully the caveats and / or think well I am clearly one of those exception cases as not that many people live near me.
Furthermore, if you go out coughing everywhere, it will land on all sorts of surfaces. It is why we see China and elsewhere disinfecting streets.
Discovery of a 382-nt deletion during the early evolution of SARS-CoV-2
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.11.987222v1 To date, the SARS-CoV-2 genome has been considered genetically more stable than SARS-CoV or MERS-CoV. Here we report a 382-nt deletion covering almost the entire open reading frame 8 (ORF8) of SARS-CoV-2 obtained from eight hospitalized patients in Singapore. The deletion also removes the ORF8 transcription-regulatory sequence (TRS), which in turn enhances the downstream transcription of the N gene. We also found that viruses with the deletion have been circulating for at least four weeks. During the SARS-CoV outbreak in 2003, a number of genetic variants were observed in the human population, and similar variation has since been observed across SARS-related CoVs in humans and bats. Overwhelmingly these viruses had mutations or deletions in ORF8, that have been associated with reduced replicative fitness of the virus. This is also consistent with the observation that towards the end of the outbreak sequences obtained from human SARS cases possessed an ORF8 deletion that may be associated with host adaptation. We therefore hypothesise that the major deletion revealed in this study may lead to an attenuated phenotype of SARS-CoV-2.
and this means?
Well it's another (small) piece of evidence in favour of the shut it down as long as you can option. Clearly on that side of the argument the development of one or more vaccines is the best hope, but this is a suggestion that the virus can change into something less deadly over time. Only a suggestion, though.
It is a different virus ...
It is not even (yet) peer-reviewed & its conclusions are very tentative even for SARS-Cov-2
So, a very, very small piece of positive evidence.
Errrr... it's the same virus with a 382bp deletion, which putatively arises as viruses adapt to their host. Deletions in similar regions have been observed in other Coronaviruses previously and have been associated with a weakened phenotype. It's actually quite important since host-pathogen interactions arise and could mean that there are weaker strains circulating as we move forward. Not sure why you state it's a different virus (although I perhaps missed something on a quick skim of the paper)
I quickly skimmed it too -- but the evidence seems rather weak. I agree that host-pathogen interactions arise, and there may be weaker strains circulating.
Iran: "During the next 10 days, the entire Iranian nation will be monitored once through cyberspace, by phone and, if necessary, in person, and those suspected of being ill will be fully identified,"
UK: If you think you've got it, we don't want to know.
You think Iran will actually manage that?
At least they have a desire to do it.
Here, the data for number of cases going forward basically become meaningless. Only the fatality figures will carry any weight.
No, its a desire to send a signal to the population, who probably aware via social media of mass graves and that the regime isn't telling the truth.
Iran: "During the next 10 days, the entire Iranian nation will be monitored once through cyberspace, by phone and, if necessary, in person, and those suspected of being ill will be fully identified,"
UK: If you think you've got it, we don't want to know.
Which is why so many Brits are hammering at the gates of the Turkey/Greece border clamouring to get to Isfahan and a bit of freedom, decency and health care.
Discovery of a 382-nt deletion during the early evolution of SARS-CoV-2
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.11.987222v1 To date, the SARS-CoV-2 genome has been considered genetically more stable than SARS-CoV or MERS-CoV. Here we report a 382-nt deletion covering almost the entire open reading frame 8 (ORF8) of SARS-CoV-2 obtained from eight hospitalized patients in Singapore. The deletion also removes the ORF8 transcription-regulatory sequence (TRS), which in turn enhances the downstream transcription of the N gene. We also found that viruses with the deletion have been circulating for at least four weeks. During the SARS-CoV outbreak in 2003, a number of genetic variants were observed in the human population, and similar variation has since been observed across SARS-related CoVs in humans and bats. Overwhelmingly these viruses had mutations or deletions in ORF8, that have been associated with reduced replicative fitness of the virus. This is also consistent with the observation that towards the end of the outbreak sequences obtained from human SARS cases possessed an ORF8 deletion that may be associated with host adaptation. We therefore hypothesise that the major deletion revealed in this study may lead to an attenuated phenotype of SARS-CoV-2.
and this means?
Well it's another (small) piece of evidence in favour of the shut it down as long as you can option. Clearly on that side of the argument the development of one or more vaccines is the best hope, but this is a suggestion that the virus can change into something less deadly over time. Only a suggestion, though.
It is a different virus ...
It is not even (yet) peer-reviewed & its conclusions are very tentative even for SARS-Cov-2
So, a very, very small piece of positive evidence.
SARS-Cov-2 (ie Covid 19) is the virus in which they observed this particular deletion, so no, it's not a different virus.
Discovery of a 382-nt deletion during the early evolution of SARS-CoV-2
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.11.987222v1 To date, the SARS-CoV-2 genome has been considered genetically more stable than SARS-CoV or MERS-CoV. Here we report a 382-nt deletion covering almost the entire open reading frame 8 (ORF8) of SARS-CoV-2 obtained from eight hospitalized patients in Singapore. The deletion also removes the ORF8 transcription-regulatory sequence (TRS), which in turn enhances the downstream transcription of the N gene. We also found that viruses with the deletion have been circulating for at least four weeks. During the SARS-CoV outbreak in 2003, a number of genetic variants were observed in the human population, and similar variation has since been observed across SARS-related CoVs in humans and bats. Overwhelmingly these viruses had mutations or deletions in ORF8, that have been associated with reduced replicative fitness of the virus. This is also consistent with the observation that towards the end of the outbreak sequences obtained from human SARS cases possessed an ORF8 deletion that may be associated with host adaptation. We therefore hypothesise that the major deletion revealed in this study may lead to an attenuated phenotype of SARS-CoV-2.
and this means?
Well it's another (small) piece of evidence in favour of the shut it down as long as you can option. Clearly on that side of the argument the development of one or more vaccines is the best hope, but this is a suggestion that the virus can change into something less deadly over time. Only a suggestion, though.
It is a different virus ...
It is not even (yet) peer-reviewed & its conclusions are very tentative even for SARS-Cov-2
So, a very, very small piece of positive evidence.
Nope. SARS-Cov-2 is the virus which causes covid-19 the disease.
Counterintuitively, given all my previous posts, I have bought into Carnival shares. If any industry is going to be first in line for state aid, it’s going to be the cruising industry, and the shares are now down to almost a quarter of their value a few years back.
Brave
In the Sir Humphrey sense of the word.
Although, that much said, cruises are favoured by oldies and they are typically creatures of habit. Given that the Government has only advised, rather than ordered, older people not to go on cruises, how many do we think will actually take the advice?
Indeed, it would be fascinating to know how many people are still booking to go on the blessed things even now.
Currently there is a flood of cancellations, with remaining passengers in denial as cruise company after company cancels their summer offerings. The industry is in real trouble, which is why I think someone will intervene. My exposure on carnival is, at worse, £1200, and I stand to gain onboard credit for the 2021 return trip on the QM2 to the US that I have booked for spring next year. Whatever else happens to the world, I don’t believe that such an iconic ocean crossing will ever be allowed to fold.
This is just an observation but the collapse of a company doesn't necessarily mean the ocean crossing ends, does it? The ship could be sold by the administrators and a new company operate the service?
More likely they'd go Chapter 11 like most US airlines will.
Counterintuitively, given all my previous posts, I have bought into Carnival shares. If any industry is going to be first in line for state aid, it’s going to be the cruising industry, and the shares are now down to almost a quarter of their value a few years back.
Carnival is a US company that owns Cunard, P&O Cruises and Princess Cruises (as in Grand and Diamond) amongst others. It is a great shame that they have been particularly badly hit, but why would they qualify for state aid - and which state would that be?
Despite being a US company, there's very few Americans employed by them. Almost all of the onboard staff are from the third world. No government is going to bail them out.
Carnival owes $10bn (those ships don't come cheap), so it's entirely possible there will be a lot of pressure on governments to step in
Auction off the assets for $5bn, and the other $5bn is the risk the bank took in advancing the money in the first place. You're not suggesting that failing business models should be propped up by governments, surely?
If carnival is smart, though, they will have done a lot of borrowing from a mid sized bank in a marginal Congressional district.
But, you're right. Let it go bust and sell the assets. Maybe it's time to see if we can pick up a cheap cruise liner
Imagine the cost of the deep clean, though.
If you bought it for a few hundred million dollars under the book value, the price of cleaning it won't matter too much. Having it run around somewhere hot with the air-conditioning off for a few days will probably do the job just fine!
Most of these ships have had no cases of C-19 anyway so no need to treat them like a used nuclear reactor.
Is this the same Donald Trump who just a fortnight ago declared coronavirus to be a "democratic hoax"?
Or a way to engineer postponing the election?
We've been through this I don't know how many times but US federal elections cannot be postponed. Term limits are set by the constitution and cannot be amended other than by amending the constitution.
If Trump cancelled the election (which he can't anyway as it's not a federal responsibility), then his term would expire as normal in Jan 2021 and he would be replaced either by whoever the House elected, if some states had managed to hold the election, or by the Speaker, in the absence of any Electoral College votes.
Dr Tedros added: "You can fight a virus, you can't fight a virus if you don’t know where it is. Find, isolate, treat and test every case.
"Every case we find and treat reduces the expansion of the disease. Do not just let this virus burn. Isolate the sick and quarantine their contacts."
It makes the UK decision to pivot from 10,000 tests a day to only hospital admissions even stranger.
Only if you start from the incorrect assumption that the objective is to minimise the spread of the disease. It explicitly isnt. It is to manage the spread of the virus at a level that doesnt overwhelm the country and NHS this spring/summer but also builds up herd immunity by the winter.
Once you start from there, do you want to spend lots of resources on testing the public or do you want to spend those resources testing medical workers and avoiding a hospital suddenly missing a big proportion of its doctors and nurses because the virus spread undetected amongst the staff who now need to be isolated for 2 weeks unable to treat those who need it?
Is this the same Donald Trump who just a fortnight ago declared coronavirus to be a "democratic hoax"?
Or a way to engineer postponing the election?
We've been through this I don't know how many times but US federal elections cannot be postponed. Term limits are set by the constitution and cannot be amended other than by amending the constitution.
If Trump cancelled the election (which he can't anyway as it's not a federal responsibility), then his term would expire as normal in Jan 2021 and he would be replaced either by whoever the House elected, if some states had managed to hold the election, or by the Speaker, in the absence of any Electoral College votes.
So Pelosi could appoint someone in that scenario? Herself?
'"Do not just let this fire burn" - that's what World Health Organization director Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus warned governments at the WHO daily press conference.
He urged countries to “find, isolate, test and treat every case to break the chains of transmission”. Every case found reduced the risk of spread, he said.'
O/T Is there any sport to follow over the weekend whilst I'm working?
National league footie? Anything else?
Snooker still planning to be on. Is it a sport? Some Rugby League Olympic Boxing qualifiers....
Paris-Nice cycling although they have cancelled Sunday's stage into Nice.
Even events like that lose their shine. I could be vaguely interested just to get a line on form into the Giro or Tour but couldnt really care who wins Paris-Nice itself.
Dr Tedros added: "You can fight a virus, you can't fight a virus if you don’t know where it is. Find, isolate, treat and test every case.
"Every case we find and treat reduces the expansion of the disease. Do not just let this virus burn. Isolate the sick and quarantine their contacts."
It makes the UK decision to pivot from 10,000 tests a day to only hospital admissions even stranger.
WHO making UK Government look stupid. And basically slapping them down.
Is there a link to that quote and, just for balance, has anybody on a par with our last SoS for Health or the WHO congratulated the govt on its wisdom and insight?
Indeed, but we need to be equally diligent in asking what are the second, third, fourth etc... order effects of economic shut down on public health, law and order, mental health, social cohesion and any number of other things that are vital to life for a social species.
O/T Is there any sport to follow over the weekend whilst I'm working?
National league footie? Anything else?
Snooker still planning to be on. Is it a sport? Some Rugby League Olympic Boxing qualifiers....
Going forward, I rate there being perhaps a 1 in 3 chance of the World Snooker Championship going ahead, and the horse racing calendar will probably go on in England and Wales until the point at which the Government elects to ban mass gatherings - so the Grand National might yet take place.
You'd expect virtually everything else that hasn't yet been cancelled to go kaput within the next few days. In a team sport like rugby or football, it only takes one player in one team to come down with this thing in order to prompt a wave of self-isolation and completely wreck the fixture list.
Is this the same Donald Trump who just a fortnight ago declared coronavirus to be a "democratic hoax"?
Or a way to engineer postponing the election?
We've been through this I don't know how many times but US federal elections cannot be postponed. Term limits are set by the constitution and cannot be amended other than by amending the constitution.
If Trump cancelled the election (which he can't anyway as it's not a federal responsibility), then his term would expire as normal in Jan 2021 and he would be replaced either by whoever the House elected, if some states had managed to hold the election, or by the Speaker, in the absence of any Electoral College votes.
So Pelosi could appoint someone in that scenario? Herself?
No, she would be the new President if no new President and/or Vice-President has been elected. However, Congress also ends in January, and it's before the Presidential term ends, so if no new Congress has been elected, then I think the succession would devolve to the highest-ranking eligible Cabinet secretary. I think I'm right in saying that Cabinet secretaries serve at the pleasure of the President and that legally the outgoing secretaries' terms do not expire with the Presidency, rather they all resign pro forma when there's a change in President for the new Pres to make their picks.
'"Do not just let this fire burn" - that's what World Health Organization director Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus warned governments at the WHO daily press conference.
He urged countries to “find, isolate, test and treat every case to break the chains of transmission”. Every case found reduced the risk of spread, he said.'
Were you listening Bozo???
I cannot understand why you wouldn't test?
If you get it and have mild symptoms- you could be a lifeline to the elderly and weak in the future- and you wouldn't know....
The government better hope it is only 7 days that you are infectious, because otherwise people are going to burst out of their isolation and go visit all the people they haven't seen for a week.
The thinking is presumably that if you do have coronavirus, you're going to be really quite ill after seven days ? Certainly those who are ill shed virus for much longer than that (median around 20 days). I'm not sure how long the asymptomatic infected continue to do so.
I think the CMO said in the press conference yesterday that people with virus much less likely to pass it on after 7 days. So didn't say it coukdnt happen.
I'm not due to meet anyone vulnerable soon, and work is dead, I think I'm a well 55yo so I think I just want to catch the bloody thing now and then self isolate. Then be one of the herd.
Dr Tedros added: "You can fight a virus, you can't fight a virus if you don’t know where it is. Find, isolate, treat and test every case.
"Every case we find and treat reduces the expansion of the disease. Do not just let this virus burn. Isolate the sick and quarantine their contacts."
It makes the UK decision to pivot from 10,000 tests a day to only hospital admissions even stranger.
Only if you start from the incorrect assumption that the objective is to minimise the spread of the disease. It explicitly isnt. It is to manage the spread of the virus at a level that doesnt overwhelm the country and NHS this spring/summer but also builds up herd immunity by the winter. ...
To do that would require something like 3 million infected per month. That's anywhere up to 300,000 requiring hospitalisation.
Well, for one thing it focuses on the number of cases - which we are no longer proactively testing for anyway, so that number is rubbish. For another there is no information about the numbers of critical cases or recoveries. There is no historical data about the rate of fatilities.
The Worldometer UK sub-site has a vastly superior UK dashboard but obviously I can't be sure they are using official data.
The government better hope it is only 7 days that you are infectious, because otherwise people are going to burst out of their isolation and go visit all the people they haven't seen for a week.
The thinking is presumably that if you do have coronavirus, you're going to be really quite ill after seven days ? Certainly those who are ill shed virus for much longer than that (median around 20 days). I'm not sure how long the asymptomatic infected continue to do so.
I think the CMO said in the press conference yesterday that people with virus much less likely to pass it on after 7 days. So didn't say it coukdnt happen.
I'm not due to meet anyone vulnerable soon, and work is dead, I think I'm a well 55yo so I think I just want to catch the bloody thing now and then self isolate. Then be one of the herd.
What evidence for 'much less likely after seven days' do they have ? I'm genuinely curious, as it doesn't accord with the limited evidence I've seen.
Unless, of course, he means those people with a mild case of the virus (the seriously ill obviously not being in a state to go out again). I've not seen any evidence published on that, and it is an interesting point.
Iran: "During the next 10 days, the entire Iranian nation will be monitored once through cyberspace, by phone and, if necessary, in person, and those suspected of being ill will be fully identified,"
UK: If you think you've got it, we don't want to know.
You missed the last 2 important words off the Iranian announcement...
Is this the same Donald Trump who just a fortnight ago declared coronavirus to be a "democratic hoax"?
Or a way to engineer postponing the election?
We've been through this I don't know how many times but US federal elections cannot be postponed. Term limits are set by the constitution and cannot be amended other than by amending the constitution.
If Trump cancelled the election (which he can't anyway as it's not a federal responsibility), then his term would expire as normal in Jan 2021 and he would be replaced either by whoever the House elected, if some states had managed to hold the election, or by the Speaker, in the absence of any Electoral College votes.
So Pelosi could appoint someone in that scenario? Herself?
Actually, I've screwed up there. If there'd been no November election then there'd be no House of Representatives. So not Pelosi.
In normal circumstances, the Speaker of the House is 2nd in line of succession, after the VP (who in this scenario wouldn't exist for the same reason there wouldn't be a president to inaugurate). There would, however, be a rump Senate as that's elected in thirds, so the presidency would devolve onto the third-in-line, the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.
As the GOP is defending a huge number of seats this year, then if no election were held, the Dems would gain control by default, with a 33-30 majority (plus 2 caucusing independents making it 35-30 in reality). That would put Patrick Leahy into the White House.
Dr Tedros added: "You can fight a virus, you can't fight a virus if you don’t know where it is. Find, isolate, treat and test every case.
"Every case we find and treat reduces the expansion of the disease. Do not just let this virus burn. Isolate the sick and quarantine their contacts."
It makes the UK decision to pivot from 10,000 tests a day to only hospital admissions even stranger.
Only if you start from the incorrect assumption that the objective is to minimise the spread of the disease. It explicitly isnt. It is to manage the spread of the virus at a level that doesnt overwhelm the country and NHS this spring/summer but also builds up herd immunity by the winter. ...
To do that would require something like 3 million infected per month. That's anywhere up to 300,000 requiring hospitalisation.
Is that realistic ?
The assumption they are working from, as stated yesterday, is that there are ten times as many mild/undetected cases - so containment is that much harder, and building herd immunity is that much less dangerous.
Well, for one thing it focuses on the number of cases - which we are no longer proactively testing for anyway, so that number is rubbish. For another there is no information about the numbers of critical cases or recoveries. There is no historical data about the rate of fatilities.
The Worldometer UK sub-site has a vastly superior UK dashboard but obviously I can't be sure they are using official data.
Dr Tedros added: "You can fight a virus, you can't fight a virus if you don’t know where it is. Find, isolate, treat and test every case.
"Every case we find and treat reduces the expansion of the disease. Do not just let this virus burn. Isolate the sick and quarantine their contacts."
It makes the UK decision to pivot from 10,000 tests a day to only hospital admissions even stranger.
Only if you start from the incorrect assumption that the objective is to minimise the spread of the disease. It explicitly isnt. It is to manage the spread of the virus at a level that doesnt overwhelm the country and NHS this spring/summer but also builds up herd immunity by the winter. ...
To do that would require something like 3 million infected per month. That's anywhere up to 300,000 requiring hospitalisation.
Is that realistic ?
It is quite possible that there isn't an option which, in normal times, would count as realistic. It's like asking what is realistic during the blitz. When we are in a long term post virus settled situation somewhere which is socially back to normal it can be discussed. For now various experiments are taking place. What no nation can do is try several experiments at once, as they involve opposed actions.
I see South Korea had another good day on the new cases front.
No, no. They are doing it all wrong. They don't have ENOUGH new cases.
Why would they have new cases when they still have the restrictions in place? Wait until they remove the restrictions and then see what happens. Only then will you know what the right approach is.
Who was posting about the stupid cruise ship that might or might not be going to the Bahamas the other day? Anyway, Sky reporting that - surprise surprise - it's now got five suspected Covid cases aboard.
Why the Government doesn't just instruct everyone not to get on these sodding things for the duration, God alone knows.
Confirmation of what we already know and what other European countries don't agree with:
"Millions of Britons will need to contract coronavirus in order to control the impact of the disease which is likely to return "year on year", the government's chief scientific adviser has told Sky News.
Around 60% of the UK population will need to become infected with coronavirus in order for society to have "herd immunity" from future outbreaks, Sir Patrick Vallance said."
So they are lining 1% - 3% of us (650,000 - 1.9m) up against the wall for execution? And this is supposed to be a viable strategy that the public will back?
What are they on? Crack-cocaine?
Remind us of your proposed strategy and qualifications for having one?
My strategy for staying alive? Simple enough - do not volunteer to be a Guinea Pig.
Feel free to step up and take one for Team GB Felix....
Dr Tedros added: "You can fight a virus, you can't fight a virus if you don’t know where it is. Find, isolate, treat and test every case.
"Every case we find and treat reduces the expansion of the disease. Do not just let this virus burn. Isolate the sick and quarantine their contacts."
It makes the UK decision to pivot from 10,000 tests a day to only hospital admissions even stranger.
Only if you start from the incorrect assumption that the objective is to minimise the spread of the disease. It explicitly isnt. It is to manage the spread of the virus at a level that doesnt overwhelm the country and NHS this spring/summer but also builds up herd immunity by the winter. ...
To do that would require something like 3 million infected per month. That's anywhere up to 300,000 requiring hospitalisation.
Is that realistic ?
The assumption they are working from, as stated yesterday, is that there are ten times as many mild/undetected cases - so containment is that much harder, and building herd immunity is that much less dangerous.
How do they come up with that assumption ? Did they explain ? (I was doing other stuff, and simply didn't see the press conference.)
Who was posting about the stupid cruise ship that might or might not be going to the Bahamas the other day? Anyway, Sky reporting that - surprise surprise - it's now got five suspected Covid cases aboard.
Why the Government doesn't just instruct everyone not to get on these sodding things for the duration, God alone knows.
Some people live on them though. They become tax resident somewhere if they get off, so they'd rather risk death than taxes.
Klopp didn't give a toss about that game on Tuesday. He knew what was going on..
I don’t think this is a moment where the thoughts of a football manager should be important, but I understand for our supporters they will want to hear from the team and I will front that.
First and foremost, all of us have to do whatever we can to protect one another. In society I mean. This should be the case all the time in life, but in this moment I think it matters more than ever.
I’ve said before that football always seems the most important of the least important things. Today, football and football matches really aren’t important at all.
Of course, we don’t want to play in front of an empty stadium and we don’t want games or competitions suspended, but if doing so helps one individual stay healthy - just one - we do it no questions asked.
If it’s a choice between football and the good of the wider society, it’s no contest. Really, it isn’t.
Today’s decision and announcement is being implemented with the motive of keeping people safe. Because of that we support it completely. We have seen members of teams we compete against become ill. This virus has shown that being involved in football offers no immunity. To our rival clubs and individuals who are affected and to those who later will become so, you are in our thoughts and prayers.
None of us know in this moment what the final outcome will be, but as a team we have to have belief that the authorities make decisions based on sound judgement and morality.
Yes, I am the manager of this team and club and therefore carry a leadership responsibility with regards to our future on the pitch. But I think in the present moment, with so many people around our city, the region, the country and the world facing anxiety and uncertainty, it would be entirely wrong to speak about anything other than advising people to follow expert advice and look after themselves and each other.
The message from the team to our supporters is only about your well-being. Put your health first. Don’t take any risk. Think about the vulnerable in our society and act where possible with compassion for them.
Please look after yourselves and look out for each other.
Good on him for that but it doesn't quite gel with going ahead with a game against Madrid 48 hours ago.
To continue our discussion from the last thread I am angry because my wife and I are in the vulnerable category and are being cautious. We live in Cheshire and had somebody come to the house to do some work yesterday and as he was leaving he happened to comment that he's been at the Liverpool game the night before and it had been great before the game, all singing in the pub with the Madrid fans. It pissed me off frankly and it will piss me off even more if infections grow in the northwest because of it.
Yes I can understand you anger. I would be furious too. It's not good enough.
Reading that thread, it shows the danger of this herd immunity policy in that there is real uncertainty about best practice. Not just if a certain drug is effective, but also if common approaches to similar conditions are helpful or harmless e.g. claims of the use of steroids, caused issues in China, when normally the standard response, but in that thread saying it seems ok for us.
Dr Tedros added: "You can fight a virus, you can't fight a virus if you don’t know where it is. Find, isolate, treat and test every case.
"Every case we find and treat reduces the expansion of the disease. Do not just let this virus burn. Isolate the sick and quarantine their contacts."
It makes the UK decision to pivot from 10,000 tests a day to only hospital admissions even stranger.
Only if you start from the incorrect assumption that the objective is to minimise the spread of the disease. It explicitly isnt. It is to manage the spread of the virus at a level that doesnt overwhelm the country and NHS this spring/summer but also builds up herd immunity by the winter. ...
To do that would require something like 3 million infected per month. That's anywhere up to 300,000 requiring hospitalisation.
Is that realistic ?
It is quite possible that there isn't an option which, in normal times, would count as realistic. It's like asking what is realistic during the blitz. When we are in a long term post virus settled situation somewhere which is socially back to normal it can be discussed. For now various experiments are taking place. What no nation can do is try several experiments at once, as they involve opposed actions.
It is indeed quite possible. I'm just interested in being clear about the choices being made, and things like the 'ten times as many mild undetected cases' appear to be guesses rather than evidence based.
Must say, as an 80+ year old who is a life-long, albeit mild, asthmatic I'm now getting worried. And the worry isn't doing my asthma a lot of good; there's always been a psychological component. So I gave the gym a miss today and had a walk along a nearby seafront. Couple of U3a Group meetings scheduled next week that are causing me furiously to think.
Is this the same Donald Trump who just a fortnight ago declared coronavirus to be a "democratic hoax"?
Or a way to engineer postponing the election?
We've been through this I don't know how many times but US federal elections cannot be postponed. Term limits are set by the constitution and cannot be amended other than by amending the constitution.
If Trump cancelled the election (which he can't anyway as it's not a federal responsibility), then his term would expire as normal in Jan 2021 and he would be replaced either by whoever the House elected, if some states had managed to hold the election, or by the Speaker, in the absence of any Electoral College votes.
So Pelosi could appoint someone in that scenario? Herself?
Actually, I've screwed up there. If there'd been no November election then there'd be no House of Representatives. So not Pelosi.
In normal circumstances, the Speaker of the House is 2nd in line of succession, after the VP (who in this scenario wouldn't exist for the same reason there wouldn't be a president to inaugurate). There would, however, be a rump Senate as that's elected in thirds, so the presidency would devolve onto the third-in-line, the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.
As the GOP is defending a huge number of seats this year, then if no election were held, the Dems would gain control by default, with a 33-30 majority (plus 2 caucusing independents making it 35-30 in reality). That would put Patrick Leahy into the White House.
Why? Chuck Grassley is the President pro Tem and his current term doesn't end until 2022.
Iran: "During the next 10 days, the entire Iranian nation will be monitored once through cyberspace, by phone and, if necessary, in person, and those suspected of being ill will be fully identified,"
UK: If you think you've got it, we don't want to know.
Which is why so many Brits are hammering at the gates of the Turkey/Greece border clamouring to get to Isfahan and a bit of freedom, decency and health care.
I am bemused somewhat by the 'whatever the UK does, it must be crap' crowd.
The UK invented epidemiology, it invented epidemiological mapping, it is still at the forefront of both globally, and our pioneers are revered in the US and globally.
That the UK is doing things differently from the rest of the world - particularly on something where we are at the forefront of scientific knowledge - does not mean it is wrong. It may turn out to be, but why would we go with the crowd if we are confident that our knowledge is better? Lemmings much?
The government better hope it is only 7 days that you are infectious, because otherwise people are going to burst out of their isolation and go visit all the people they haven't seen for a week.
The thinking is presumably that if you do have coronavirus, you're going to be really quite ill after seven days ? Certainly those who are ill shed virus for much longer than that (median around 20 days). I'm not sure how long the asymptomatic infected continue to do so.
I think the CMO said in the press conference yesterday that people with virus much less likely to pass it on after 7 days. So didn't say it coukdnt happen.
I'm not due to meet anyone vulnerable soon, and work is dead, I think I'm a well 55yo so I think I just want to catch the bloody thing now and then self isolate. Then be one of the herd.
What evidence for 'much less likely after seven days' do they have ? I'm genuinely curious, as it doesn't accord with the limited evidence I've seen.
Unless, of course, he means those people with a mild case of the virus (the seriously ill obviously not being in a state to go out again). I've not seen any evidence published on that, and it is an interesting point.
He offered no evidence and I dont think was questioned on it. I'm not saying hes right or wrong. I have no clue beyond what I hear and read. I got a cough/cold 10 days ago so under new rules would have had to isolate. No fever tho and a runny nose so I'm sure I'm still waiting to catch it.
Must say, as an 80+ year old who is a life-long, albeit mild, asthmatic I'm now getting worried. And the worry isn't doing my asthma a lot of good; there's always been a psychological component. So I gave the gym a miss today and had a walk along a nearby seafront. Couple of U3a Group meetings scheduled next week that are causing me furiously to think.
Honestly, I would remove yourself as best you can from society. That is what I have done with my elderly parents.
Confirmation of what we already know and what other European countries don't agree with:
"Millions of Britons will need to contract coronavirus in order to control the impact of the disease which is likely to return "year on year", the government's chief scientific adviser has told Sky News.
Around 60% of the UK population will need to become infected with coronavirus in order for society to have "herd immunity" from future outbreaks, Sir Patrick Vallance said."
So they are lining 1% - 3% of us (650,000 - 1.9m) up against the wall for execution? And this is supposed to be a viable strategy that the public will back?
What are they on? Crack-cocaine?
Remind us of your proposed strategy and qualifications for having one?
My strategy for staying alive? Simple enough - do not volunteer to be a Guinea Pig.
Feel free to step up and take one for Team GB Felix....
You truly are one of the stupidest posters I've encountered on any internet site anywhere. Oh and the latest polling just out shows quite broad support for the government strategy and shows just 34% think schools should close:
NEW: YouGov poll for Sky News
* Public broadly backing Boris Johnson's handling
How well is the UK government doing over Coronavirus? Well 55% Badly 30% Don't know 14%
Reading that thread, it shows the danger of this herd immunity policy in that there is real uncertainty about best practice. Not just if a certain drug is effective, but also if common approaches to similar conditions are helpful or harmless e.g. claims of the use of steroids, caused issues in China, when normally the standard response, but in that thread saying it seems ok for us.
Indeed. It has been suggested that Actemra (a commonly available antibody drug) might be very effective in treating the sickest patients, but until ongoing clinical trials are finished, there's no way of knowing.
I doubt Remdesivir is going to be available in quantity any time soon, but Actemra certainly is.
Is this the same Donald Trump who just a fortnight ago declared coronavirus to be a "democratic hoax"?
Or a way to engineer postponing the election?
We've been through this I don't know how many times but US federal elections cannot be postponed. Term limits are set by the constitution and cannot be amended other than by amending the constitution.
If Trump cancelled the election (which he can't anyway as it's not a federal responsibility), then his term would expire as normal in Jan 2021 and he would be replaced either by whoever the House elected, if some states had managed to hold the election, or by the Speaker, in the absence of any Electoral College votes.
So Pelosi could appoint someone in that scenario? Herself?
Actually, I've screwed up there. If there'd been no November election then there'd be no House of Representatives. So not Pelosi.
In normal circumstances, the Speaker of the House is 2nd in line of succession, after the VP (who in this scenario wouldn't exist for the same reason there wouldn't be a president to inaugurate). There would, however, be a rump Senate as that's elected in thirds, so the presidency would devolve onto the third-in-line, the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.
As the GOP is defending a huge number of seats this year, then if no election were held, the Dems would gain control by default, with a 33-30 majority (plus 2 caucusing independents making it 35-30 in reality). That would put Patrick Leahy into the White House.
Comments
People are weird.
It is not even (yet) peer-reviewed & its conclusions are very tentative even for SARS-Cov-2
So, a very, very small piece of positive evidence.
We do not recommend the use of facemasks as an effective means of preventing the spread of infection. Facemasks play an important role in clinical settings, such as hospitals, but there’s very little evidence of benefit from their use outside of these settings. However, if you receive external care you may be asked to wear a mask to minimise the risk to your carer.
Iran: "During the next 10 days, the entire Iranian nation will be monitored once through cyberspace, by phone and, if necessary, in person, and those suspected of being ill will be fully identified,"
UK: If you think you've got it, we don't want to know.
The guidelines say "You cannot go for a walk."
Why? If I wear a large sign saying "Self-isolating" (or "unclean") and shout "keep away" to everyone (I live in a reasonably remote Cotswold village) I'd have thought I'd have a better chance of recovering quickly - and of keeping mentally fit too.
I could understand the argument for not walking if I lived in a crowded city. But in the middle of nowhere?
https://twitter.com/bradcesak/status/1238494134094233600
Certainly those who are ill shed virus for much longer than that (median around 20 days). I'm not sure how long the asymptomatic infected continue to do so.
Here, the data for number of cases going forward basically become meaningless. Only the fatality figures will carry any weight.
Furthermore, if you go out coughing everywhere, it will land on all sorts of surfaces. It is why we see China and elsewhere disinfecting streets.
National league footie? Anything else?
https://mobile.twitter.com/globalhlthtwit/status/1238425621375651840
Some Rugby League
Olympic Boxing qualifiers....
But yes, the conclusions are indeed tentative.
Albeit a feeble one.
"Coronavirus Live Updates: Louisiana Official to Propose Delaying Primary as U.S. Aims to Speed Testing"
So it begins...
If Trump cancelled the election (which he can't anyway as it's not a federal responsibility), then his term would expire as normal in Jan 2021 and he would be replaced either by whoever the House elected, if some states had managed to hold the election, or by the Speaker, in the absence of any Electoral College votes.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.128151441
Biden 2.26 / 2.28
Trump 2.26 / 2.3
Biden now favourite for WH2020.
Once you start from there, do you want to spend lots of resources on testing the public or do you want to spend those resources testing medical workers and avoiding a hospital suddenly missing a big proportion of its doctors and nurses because the virus spread undetected amongst the staff who now need to be isolated for 2 weeks unable to treat those who need it?
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/f94c3c90da5b4e9f9a0b19484dd4bb14
Is there any other source of info on UK cases?
https://twitter.com/Chenbariatrics1/status/1238322250392039424
Interesting comment about Remdesivir (but it is hard to get hold of):
https://twitter.com/Chenbariatrics1/status/1238328364911345665
He urged countries to “find, isolate, test and treat every case to break the chains of transmission”. Every case found reduced the risk of spread, he said.'
Were you listening Bozo???
There are no easy, indeed, no certain, answers.
You'd expect virtually everything else that hasn't yet been cancelled to go kaput within the next few days. In a team sport like rugby or football, it only takes one player in one team to come down with this thing in order to prompt a wave of self-isolation and completely wreck the fixture list.
I cannot understand why you wouldn't test?
If you get it and have mild symptoms- you could be a lifeline to the elderly and weak in the future- and you wouldn't know....
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41422-020-0282-0
I'm not due to meet anyone vulnerable soon, and work is dead, I think I'm a well 55yo so I think I just want to catch the bloody thing now and then self isolate. Then be one of the herd.
That's anywhere up to 300,000 requiring hospitalisation.
Is that realistic ?
The Worldometer UK sub-site has a vastly superior UK dashboard but obviously I can't be sure they are using official data.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/
I'm genuinely curious, as it doesn't accord with the limited evidence I've seen.
Unless, of course, he means those people with a mild case of the virus (the seriously ill obviously not being in a state to go out again).
I've not seen any evidence published on that, and it is an interesting point.
"and shot".
In normal circumstances, the Speaker of the House is 2nd in line of succession, after the VP (who in this scenario wouldn't exist for the same reason there wouldn't be a president to inaugurate). There would, however, be a rump Senate as that's elected in thirds, so the presidency would devolve onto the third-in-line, the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.
As the GOP is defending a huge number of seats this year, then if no election were held, the Dems would gain control by default, with a 33-30 majority (plus 2 caucusing independents making it 35-30 in reality). That would put Patrick Leahy into the White House.
https://www.singaporeair.com/saar5/pdf/media-centre/200313bflightcanxtable.pdf
Why the Government doesn't just instruct everyone not to get on these sodding things for the duration, God alone knows.
Feel free to step up and take one for Team GB Felix....
Did they explain ?
(I was doing other stuff, and simply didn't see the press conference.)
But now there isn't testing etc, it is all null and void anyway.
I'm just interested in being clear about the choices being made, and things like the 'ten times as many mild undetected cases' appear to be guesses rather than evidence based.
And the worry isn't doing my asthma a lot of good; there's always been a psychological component.
So I gave the gym a miss today and had a walk along a nearby seafront. Couple of U3a Group meetings scheduled next week that are causing me furiously to think.
The UK invented epidemiology, it invented epidemiological mapping, it is still at the forefront of both globally, and our pioneers are revered in the US and globally.
That the UK is doing things differently from the rest of the world - particularly on something where we are at the forefront of scientific knowledge - does not mean it is wrong. It may turn out to be, but why would we go with the crowd if we are confident that our knowledge is better? Lemmings much?
2116 new infections
250 new deaths
181 new healed
NEW: YouGov poll for Sky News
* Public broadly backing Boris Johnson's handling
How well is the UK government doing over Coronavirus?
Well 55%
Badly 30%
Don't know 14%
It has been suggested that Actemra (a commonly available antibody drug) might be very effective in treating the sickest patients, but until ongoing clinical trials are finished, there's no way of knowing.
I doubt Remdesivir is going to be available in quantity any time soon, but Actemra certainly is.