Talking of food supplies, I think we must be heading for a quite serious shortage of fresh fruit and veg over the next few weeks. The lockdowns in Spain and Italy must be having a serious disruptive effect on supplies and transport, and it's going to be made worse by effect of the awful weather in the UK on our agriculture.
I live near the main motorway which takes fruit and veg from SE Spain north. Despite the lockdown the lorries are still heading north in full force.
Handpicked by people guaranteed to have had no exposure to Covid-19, presumably.....
In Almeria there are 14 confirmed cases! You want the toms or not?
Tinned from my cupboard store, thanks.
Fortunately for world trade others are less silly.
Their figures are really weird and getting weirder. 6,924 cases and 14 deaths? They should have 4-5x that, minimum, probably many more at this stage since many cases unfortunately end quickly with an early death weighting the fatality higher at the start. France has 1500 fewer cases and 127 deaths.
They are either doing something very right or they are using different criteria for recording deaths than anyone else.
I saw someone on Twitter say that they are counting deaths differently. Other are listing 'died, and had Covid-19' whereas as they are apparently saying 'Died and Covid-19 was the primary cause'
Good advice but I'm itching to. Mission is to sense when it becomes a bet with more (risk adjusted) upside than downside. And this has to be at a point when most people are still extremely worried that the bottom is miles away.
Ahem, FPT: Not sure if people think this wise or a waste of time but I'm putting together a few reading suggestions for those who are going to have a ton of time on their hands.
Trying to mix it up a little. Currently got: Lone Wolf gamebooks Sharpe series A few Chinese classics Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire Complete Works of Shakespeare
Any quick suggestions to add to the list, bearing in mind I'm looking for time sinks?
Edited extra bit: questions should have question marks.
On-topic: I think I've got some green on Harris and Warren, so if they're the VP picks I'll be pleased.
'A few Chinese classics'? Seems a bit of a loose recommendation.
Station Eleven by Emily St. John Mandel is very apt right now ;-)
The Patrick O'Brian's Aubrey-Maturin series are very good if you like historical fiction.
David Drake has written a science fiction take on the Aubrey-Maturin series, starting with “With The Lightnings”. Includes the most dangerous librarian I know of in literature (the Maturin equivalent).
Thanks for that recc... I'll have a look.
Dorothy Dunnet's stuff is quite fun, and multi volume.
Very poor reporting by the media on the latest UK figures. Hardly any of them mentioning the fact that the percentage increase in cases is the lowest since 27th February.
You might also notice that every Monday has less new cases than the day before, and that this is also seen in the numbers from other countries. Perhaps this is because less tests are processed on a SUnday.
Their figures are really weird and getting weirder. 6,924 cases and 14 deaths? They should have 4-5x that, minimum, probably many more at this stage since many cases unfortunately end quickly with an early death weighting the fatality higher at the start. France has 1500 fewer cases and 127 deaths.
They are either doing something very right or they are using different criteria for recording deaths than anyone else.
They do have the highest number of ICU beds per capita according to some reports.
Their figures are really weird and getting weirder. 6,924 cases and 14 deaths? They should have 4-5x that, minimum, probably many more at this stage since many cases unfortunately end quickly with an early death weighting the fatality higher at the start. France has 1500 fewer cases and 127 deaths.
They are either doing something very right or they are using different criteria for recording deaths than anyone else.
They do have the highest number of ICU beds per capita according to some reports.
Yeah, and that clearly helps but the difference is massive.
@Dura_Ace Joe Biden - if no one has picked him already, if they have then Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Nasty, you want another Kavanaugh before Trump gets his marching orders?
Its not a "who do you want" to get it post.
Is it not? What's it about then? I may have to apologise.
Dura_Ace started a "deadpool" dark humour 'competition' of getting people to guess who might be the first celebrity who passes from this. There were dozens and dozens of replies in the last thread about it.
That's what I thought - and then posters started choosing people they wouldn't mind losing. So, no apology necessary in my opinion.
(Guardian)The head of the World Health Organizaion, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has implored governments to test more suspected cases, warning that they cannot fight the pandemic blindfolded.
In a strongly-worded attack on governments which have neglected or held back testing, he said: “We have not seen an urgent enough escalation in testing, isolation and contact tracing, which is the backbone of the response.”
Tedros added:
The most effective way to prevent infections and save lives is breaking the chains of transmission. And to do that, you must test and isolate. You cannot fight the fire blindfolded. And we cannot stop this pandemic, if we don’t know who is infected. We have a simple message for all countries Test, test, test. Test every suspected case.
There’ll be resistance at 5000, maybe for a while, until the crisis takes another turn for the worse. You are right only if news of a successful vaccine or cure breaks.
Three month ban on oldies going out is coming at the weekend.
Edit/ except that it’s now to be called “shield of maximum protection”
I'm still confused as to whether it's going to be just very strong advice or whether it's going to be compulsory.
Is there a real world difference?
Yes. YOU WILL NOT with the police enforcing is one thing (like Spain). What we got was soft language and wiggle room. Define "unnecessary travel". WFH "if you can" and "avoid social contact". Are the pubs open or shut?
Terrible presentation from Shagger - we needed absolute clarity and he fluffed it.
How are the Germans getting so many cases and so few deaths? Are they vastly out-testing everyone else?
Perhaps the virus is now so widespread that testing can't possibly keep up, and the better indicator of hos widespread it is is death rate.
Initially the outbreak was among much younger people so it could be conceivable that their death rate was much lower, but now it is much more widespread.
Either they have some magic elixir or they are being a bit naughty and only confirming if they definitely died of that and only that and after the postmortem has confirmed it.
In the UK, we seem to categorise anybody who tested positive for it and then died as 100% due to coronavirus. From some of the reports, it definitely sounds like in a number of cases they people were already very very ill with unrelated conditions.
And even yesterday the 59 year old who died, had it, but his window said it wasn't certain that is what killed him, she was waiting for the postmortem.
Yes, it is obviously impossible that the Germans are simply better at caring for critically ill people than we are. They must be fiddling the figures somehow.
I wouldn't expect them to be much different from Finland, Sweden, Norway, Iceland or Denmark. These countries have a modern well-funded NHS and probably less red tape because they're tax funded like the UK's is.
If they're lower, they may be using a different definition.
The last time I looked at the Nordic countries, they had far fewer bodies than the UK, per case diagnosed.
My guess is that the NHS a) is creaking at the seams, b) needs the £30 bn Lansley cited, but yesterday and c) has lots of other flaws that have crept in since Thatcher introduced the internal market.
Indeed - I was obviously being sarcastic. That fact that the other Nordic countries (with well-funded health systems) also have low death rates indicates that health funding is indeed a factor in the Covid-19 death rate.
I'm hoping that lots of commentators after the epidemic will say exactly this.
How are the Germans getting so many cases and so few deaths? Are they vastly out-testing everyone else?
Perhaps the virus is now so widespread that testing can't possibly keep up, and the better indicator of hos widespread it is is death rate.
Initially the outbreak was among much younger people so it could be conceivable that their death rate was much lower, but now it is much more widespread.
Either they have some magic elixir or they are being a bit naughty and only confirming if they definitely died of that and only that and after the postmortem has confirmed it.
In the UK, we seem to categorise anybody who tested positive for it and then died as 100% due to coronavirus. From some of the reports, it definitely sounds like in a number of cases they people were already very very ill with unrelated conditions.
And even yesterday the 59 year old who died, had it, but his window said it wasn't certain that is what killed him, she was waiting for the postmortem.
Yes, it is obviously impossible that the Germans are simply better at caring for critically ill people than we are. They must be fiddling the figures somehow.
I wouldn't expect them to be much different from Finland, Sweden, Norway, Iceland or Denmark. These countries have a modern well-funded NHS and probably less red tape because they're tax funded like the UK's is.
If they're lower, they may be using a different definition.
The last time I looked at the Nordic countries, they had far fewer bodies than the UK, per case diagnosed.
My guess is that the NHS a) is creaking at the seams, b) needs the £30 bn Lansley cited, but yesterday and c) has lots of other flaws that have crept in since Thatcher introduced the internal market.
Indeed - I was obviously being sarcastic. That fact that the other Nordic countries (with well-funded health systems) also have low death rates indicates that health funding is indeed a factor in the Covid-19 death rate.
I'm hoping that lots of commentators after the epidemic will say exactly this.
I expect they will, but it will be palpable nonsense. What about France, for heaven's sake?
The burden on Boris, Vallance and Whitty is beyond compare and I would not like to have their responsibility and I far one will and do trust them and so must the Country
Left - right, remain - leave are no longer relevant.
We all need to unify not only behind those leading this fight but also to reflect on how each and everyone of us can contribute in some way, large or small, to helping all those in need and to ensure we respect and honour our NHS and not to use it unnecessarily
It's a bit wooly, isn't it? Pubs and clubs and the like aren't being shut, people are just advised to avoid them?
Perhaps they think that advice is sufficient to reduce transmission, and that compulsory action is not necessary, at least at the moment.
I get that, but won't the temptation for bars, cafés, restaurants and similar to risk being open be too great? What about shopping centres, big DIY stores? It's too vague.
There’ll be resistance at 5000, maybe for a while, until the crisis takes another turn for the worse. You are right only if news of a successful vaccine or cure breaks.
I'm not quite ready to buy yet but I'm starting to feel it.
Don't think it necessarily needs cure or vaccine to make the turn.
And I have to do it when most say "No!" in order to win big.
Very poor reporting by the media on the latest UK figures. Hardly any of them mentioning the fact that the percentage increase in cases is the lowest since 27th February.
You might also notice that every Monday has less new cases than the day before, and that this is also seen in the numbers from other countries. Perhaps this is because less tests are processed on a SUnday.
Yes, I'd noticed that too. Somebody should do a Fourier analysis of the data :-)
It's a bit wooly, isn't it? Pubs and clubs and the like aren't being shut, people are just advised to avoid them?
Perhaps they think that advice is sufficient to reduce transmission, and that compulsory action is not necessary, at least at the moment.
I get that, but won't the temptation for bars, cafés, restaurants and similar to risk being open be too great? What about shopping centres, big DIY stores? It's too vague.
They can be open, but how many will go? I don't get why people need to be told that something is forbidden from doing something, when it is obviously not a good idea.
I must say I'm baffled by the criticisms of the UK government. They seem to be rolling out increasingly strict recommendations/measures as the likely numbers of cases (including undetected cases) progresses. There was little point in lots of self-isolation and social distancing when there was around 1 person in 100,000 infected. Now it's down to something like one in a few thousand or so (I'm guessing, but of that order of magnitude) which justifies stronger measures. Meanwhile a lot of people are already taking steps to reduce possible exposure. In a week or so even stronger measures will be appropriate. This seems entirely logical to me.
Very poor reporting by the media on the latest UK figures. Hardly any of them mentioning the fact that the percentage increase in cases is the lowest since 27th February.
You might also notice that every Monday has less new cases than the day before, and that this is also seen in the numbers from other countries. Perhaps this is because less tests are processed on a SUnday.
For UK numbers, there were 4000 tests (I think the second highest single day number of tests).
So, do I cancel my weekend away in Lyme Regis at the end of the month or do I still go?
Do you consider your travel to be essential? That's up to you to decide. Are you likely to visit a pub or restaurant? That's your choice to make. Will you be exercising there? That's a decision for you not the authorities.
Work from home if can, don't meet with people you don't need to, work or socially. If you get symptoms, your whole household is to stay at home for 14 days, and that means no going to the shops etc.
I had some bad news today in that a good friend of mine has inoperable bowel cancer. He is about to start chemo but it is purely life extending. He wants a consultation in a case which I am taking over from him but given this advice should he be at such a meeting? I really don't think so. His immune system is about to be seriously compromised.
Life is pretty shitty sometimes. He is a great bloke.
I must say I'm baffled by the criticisms of the UK government. They seem to be rolling out increasingly strict recommendations/measures as the likely numbers of cases (including undetected cases) progresses. There was little point in lots of self-isolation and social distancing when there was around 1 person in 100,000 infected. Now it's down to something like one in a few thousand or so (I'm guessing, but of that order of magnitude) which justifies stronger measures. Meanwhile a lot of people are already taking steps to reduce possible exposure. In a week or so even stronger measures will be appropriate. This seems entirely logical to me.
It's a bit wooly, isn't it? Pubs and clubs and the like aren't being shut, people are just advised to avoid them?
Perhaps they think that advice is sufficient to reduce transmission, and that compulsory action is not necessary, at least at the moment.
I get that, but won't the temptation for bars, cafés, restaurants and similar to risk being open be too great? What about shopping centres, big DIY stores? It's too vague.
They can be open, but how many will go? I don't get why people need to be told that something is forbidden from doing something, when it is obviously not a good idea.
That's just a cop-out, though, isn't it? "We really don't want you to go to these places, but we're too scared politically to close them."
Why does it have to be compulsory? If a very large fraction go along with it in a voluntary fashion, there is no need to make it compulsory (and all the unnecessary expense that would involve)
I must say I'm baffled by the criticisms of the UK government. They seem to be rolling out increasingly strict recommendations/measures as the likely numbers of cases (including undetected cases) progresses. There was little point in lots of self-isolation and social distancing when there was around 1 person in 100,000 infected. Now it's down to something like one in a few thousand or so (I'm guessing, but of that order of magnitude) which justifies stronger measures. Meanwhile a lot of people are already taking steps to reduce possible exposure. In a week or so even stronger measures will be appropriate. This seems entirely logical to me.
Quite
You also have people arguing that the measures aren't strong enough and others arguing we need to do much more
Arhhh as I thought, they are testing all over the place and going to radically expand capacity, they just don't want to say everybody who wants a test gets a test ala Trump.
How are the Germans getting so many cases and so few deaths? Are they vastly out-testing everyone else?
Perhaps the virus is now so widespread that testing can't possibly keep up, and the better indicator of hos widespread it is is death rate.
Initially the outbreak was among much younger people so it could be conceivable that their death rate was much lower, but now it is much more widespread.
Either they have some magic elixir or they are being a bit naughty and only confirming if they definitely died of that and only that and after the postmortem has confirmed it.
In the UK, we seem to categorise anybody who tested positive for it and then died as 100% due to coronavirus. From some of the reports, it definitely sounds like in a number of cases they people were already very very ill with unrelated conditions.
And even yesterday the 59 year old who died, had it, but his window said it wasn't certain that is what killed him, she was waiting for the postmortem.
Yes, it is obviously impossible that the Germans are simply better at caring for critically ill people than we are. They must be fiddling the figures somehow.
I wouldn't expect them to be much different from Finland, Sweden, Norway, Iceland or Denmark. These countries have a modern well-funded NHS and probably less red tape because they're tax funded like the UK's is.
If they're lower, they may be using a different definition.
The last time I looked at the Nordic countries, they had far fewer bodies than the UK, per case diagnosed.
My guess is that the NHS a) is creaking at the seams, b) needs the £30 bn Lansley cited, but yesterday and c) has lots of other flaws that have crept in since Thatcher introduced the internal market.
Indeed - I was obviously being sarcastic. That fact that the other Nordic countries (with well-funded health systems) also have low death rates indicates that health funding is indeed a factor in the Covid-19 death rate.
I'm hoping that lots of commentators after the epidemic will say exactly this.
I expect they will, but it will be palpable nonsense. What about France, for heaven's sake?
We don't have a health service like France's where you can visit five different doctors if you don't like the first four opinions. You also have to pay at the point of use. No thanks. Here are the details
As for the difference between France and Germany, as both use private insurers and don't just have a government-run system like UK or Canada, sorry I don't know. Could it be that France is very badly set-up for pandemics and heads will roll there...?
I must say I'm baffled by the criticisms of the UK government. They seem to be rolling out increasingly strict recommendations/measures as the likely numbers of cases (including undetected cases) progresses. There was little point in lots of self-isolation and social distancing when there was around 1 person in 100,000 infected. Now it's down to something like one in a few thousand or so (I'm guessing, but of that order of magnitude) which justifies stronger measures. Meanwhile a lot of people are already taking steps to reduce possible exposure. In a week or so even stronger measures will be appropriate. This seems entirely logical to me.
Richard, do you think people having a high temperature and dry cough and recent contact with someone (Who did not get tested when he really should have volunteered for it) arriving from Italy should be tested ?!
Arhhh as I thought, they are testing all over the place and going to radically expand capacity, they just don't want to say everybody who wants a test gets a test ala Trump.
Arhhh as I thought, they are testing all over the place and going to radically expand capacity, they just don't want to say everybody who wants a test gets a test ala Trump.
Maybe they know what they are doing?
Nah, they are definitely winging this. Whenever I hear the two egg heads, I am gently reassured.
It's a bit wooly, isn't it? Pubs and clubs and the like aren't being shut, people are just advised to avoid them?
Perhaps they think that advice is sufficient to reduce transmission, and that compulsory action is not necessary, at least at the moment.
I get that, but won't the temptation for bars, cafés, restaurants and similar to risk being open be too great? What about shopping centres, big DIY stores? It's too vague.
They can be open, but how many will go? I don't get why people need to be told that something is forbidden from doing something, when it is obviously not a good idea.
That's just a cop-out, though, isn't it? "We really don't want you to go to these places, but we're too scared politically to close them."
If people don’t go, they’ll close anyway. My brothers restaurant has had tons of cancellations these last few days; after this advice it’ll be cheaper for him just to close up and cut his costs as best he can.
I must say I'm baffled by the criticisms of the UK government. They seem to be rolling out increasingly strict recommendations/measures as the likely numbers of cases (including undetected cases) progresses. There was little point in lots of self-isolation and social distancing when there was around 1 person in 100,000 infected. Now it's down to something like one in a few thousand or so (I'm guessing, but of that order of magnitude) which justifies stronger measures. Meanwhile a lot of people are already taking steps to reduce possible exposure. In a week or so even stronger measures will be appropriate. This seems entirely logical to me.
Richard, do you think people having a high temperature and dry cough and recent contact with someone (Who did not get tested when he really should have volunteered for it) arriving from Italy should be tested ?!
If symptoms aren't severe? No.
They've either got a flu, in which case they need to self-quarantine. Or They've got coronavirus, in which case they need to self-quarantine.
I don't think so. I trust in the public's common sense. I'm meeting someone in a pub tomorrow for what is (for me) urgent business, if pubs are closed I'd probably go elsewhere not cancel the meeting. I'm not going to the pub to watch the footy - and it isn't on in the first place even if I wanted to do so.
Comments
You can buy the Jun 6000 call for 224.
(And what was with the accent? Was it dubbed?)
Dorothy Dunnet's stuff is quite fun, and multi volume.
Edit/ except that it’s now to be called “shield of maximum protection”
In a strongly-worded attack on governments which have neglected or held back testing, he said: “We have not seen an urgent enough escalation in testing, isolation and contact tracing, which is the backbone of the response.”
Tedros added:
The most effective way to prevent infections and save lives is breaking the chains of transmission. And to do that, you must test and isolate. You cannot fight the fire blindfolded. And we cannot stop this pandemic, if we don’t know who is infected. We have a simple message for all countries Test, test, test. Test every suspected case.
15,000 DJ
What was said about those with underlying conditions?
Terrible presentation from Shagger - we needed absolute clarity and he fluffed it.
Iranian police arrest five over prank aubergine-rain video
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/iranian-police-arrest-five-over-prank-aubergine-rain-video
Left - right, remain - leave are no longer relevant.
We all need to unify not only behind those leading this fight but also to reflect on how each and everyone of us can contribute in some way, large or small, to helping all those in need and to ensure we respect and honour our NHS and not to use it unnecessarily
Has anybody told our most worried regular?
Don't think it necessarily needs cure or vaccine to make the turn.
And I have to do it when most say "No!" in order to win big.
Hope that`s helpful.
And adds pregnant women to the elderly and ill
Life is pretty shitty sometimes. He is a great bloke.
Doesn't sound compulsory from this report.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/mar/16/boris-johnson-press-conference-coronavirus-live-firms-could-soon-be-allowed-to-run-reduced-services-because-of-coronavirus-shapps-suggests-politics-live
The testing question from the BBC is a key one.
Sounds like it is just advice, but they are holding power to enforce in reserve
Either close pubs etc 100% or don't.
This is bound to lead to confusion.
You also have people arguing that the measures aren't strong enough and others arguing we need to do much more
How can any government square that circle?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_France
As for the difference between France and Germany, as both use private insurers and don't just have a government-run system like UK or Canada, sorry I don't know. Could it be that France is very badly set-up for pandemics and heads will roll there...?
He lives with 2 nurses ............. both of whom have just been tested (and cleared ) for the virus
It's fair to describe him as agitated
They've either got a flu, in which case they need to self-quarantine.
Or
They've got coronavirus, in which case they need to self-quarantine.