I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I am the last person to be authoritarian without due cause....sorry I dont think skiing in italy was essential
It didn't have to be essential. It was certainly safer than staying in London. 3 cases in South Tyrol. About 200 in London at the time. I skied alone and stayed in an almost deserted hotel. I wasn't travelling by tube or joining the throng in Barnes farmers market. In spite of being safer, I took the precaution of self isolating for 14 days.
And how many might you have passed it on to in the plane or the airport and your self isolating has probably not excluded going to a shop etc. You went to a hot spot, you came back
It wasn't remotely a hot spot, I didn't go to a shop, and I don't have it.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
Let’s see what happens in China now restrictions are being relaxed. If it comes back (other than through reimportation from abroad) then you have a point. If it doesn’t then Barnsean may be right.
That is key. It is possible that China is not seeing more cases because it is saturated. 50-60% already have had it. That's one explanation. If it comes back big time then my hypothesis is incorrect.
This is incorrect. The Chinese policy was precisely to ensure almost noone outside of Hubei got the virus.
As of 9am on 22 March 2020, 78,340 people have been tested in the UK, of which 72,657 were confirmed negative and 5,683 were confirmed positive. 281 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.
This tells me either our testing regime is incredibly shit, OR that an awful lot of people who thought they had CV19 actually have a common cold like I did.
Don't forget that early on in the outbreak, there were 95% negative rates. We're now seeing c. 30-35% of people having the disease.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
Let’s see what happens in China now restrictions are being relaxed. If it comes back (other than through reimportation from abroad) then you have a point. If it doesn’t then Barnsean may be right.
I don't accept this. China has kept a lid on transmissions and therefore deaths, and if you will avoided the end of the world, outside of Hubei precisely by applying those measures, Barnessian deems to be authoritarian.
The Chinese regime is obviously an authoritarian one, but stringent measures to reduce transmission and death aren't necessarily authoritarian in themselves.
Well, they say they have kept a lid on it.
Let's see what happens when they take the lid off.
As of 9am on 22 March 2020, 78,340 people have been tested in the UK, of which 72,657 were confirmed negative and 5,683 were confirmed positive. 281 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.
This tells me either our testing regime is incredibly shit, OR that an awful lot of people who thought they had CV19 actually have a common cold like I did.
As of 9am on 22 March 2020, 78,340 people have been tested in the UK, of which 72,657 were confirmed negative and 5,683 were confirmed positive. 281 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.
So up 665 from yesterday.
Record number of tests. The percentage of positive tests must be well down.
Hopefully they are testing NHS front line staff as a priority...so it's good if our test results accuracy is down...
I have been a bit more relaxed than some on here about the necessity for draconian measures, but as I drove today I saw parks and pavements absolutely packed today. People are not listening for whatever reason. I am afraid I am starting to think a lockdown is the only way.
Although the initial "super spreader" went skiing in France, a huge proportion of the early cases that were tracked were imported from people who had gone skiing in Northern Italy. In fact, I think it might well have been the majority, were those who had been or caught it from somebody who had.
As of 9am on 22 March 2020, 78,340 people have been tested in the UK, of which 72,657 were confirmed negative and 5,683 were confirmed positive. 281 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.
So up 665 from yesterday.
Record number of tests. The percentage of positive tests must be well down.
Hopefully they are testing NHS front line staff as a priority...so it's good if our test results accuracy is down...
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
The average number of deaths from seasonal flu in Italy is about 15,000 a year. So far there have been about 4,000 deaths from Covid-19.
You are forgetting that we are having massive lock-downs and lots of people are social distancing, which doesn't happen with seasonal flu. If the deaths are kept to the level of seasonal flu it's only because of containment measures.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
Let’s see what happens in China now restrictions are being relaxed. If it comes back (other than through reimportation from abroad) then you have a point. If it doesn’t then Barnsean may be right.
That is key. It is possible that China is not seeing more cases because it is saturated. 50-60% already have had it. That's one explanation. If it comes back big time then my hypothesis is incorrect.
This is incorrect. The Chinese policy was precisely to ensure almost noone outside of Hubei got the virus.
To be honest...I've given up with Barnesian and his madcap, misinformed hypothesis....
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I am the last person to be authoritarian without due cause....sorry I dont think skiing in italy was essential
It didn't have to be essential. It was certainly safer than staying in London. 3 cases in South Tyrol. About 200 in London at the time. I skied alone and stayed in an almost deserted hotel. I wasn't travelling by tube or joining the throng in Barnes farmers market. In spite of being safer, I took the precaution of self isolating for 14 days.
I wonder who else went there, and then went back to their own cities. Wasn't this how this first spread, by people returning from skiing trips?
No it wasn't. Fake news. The hot spots in Italy were not in skiing resorts. There was an early isolated case of a chalet in France.
Chalets get coronavirus?
Barnesian is correct, the first super-spreader flew in from a French ski resort. That person had previously been to the Far East.
Although the initial "super spreader" went skiing in France, a huge proportion of the early cases that were tracked were imported from people Remainers who had gone skiing in Northern Italy. In fact, I think it might well have been the majority, were those who had been or caught it from somebody who had.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
The average number of deaths from seasonal flu in Italy is about 15,000 a year. So far there have been about 4,000 deaths from Covid-19.
You are forgetting that we are having massive lock-downs and social distancing, which don't happen with seasonal flu. If the deaths are kept to the level of seasonal flu it's only because of containment measures.
He also seems to be forgetting that this outbreak has only been going on for a few weeks, and the deaths are in the hundreds per day, and rising rapidly.
If a landlord opens their pub, not only should it be closed today, but they should also be told they will never again be allowed to be a pub landlord and will be viewed as “not fit and proper” to be a company director. Should do the trick.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I am the last person to be authoritarian without due cause....sorry I dont think skiing in italy was essential
It didn't have to be essential. It was certainly safer than staying in London. 3 cases in South Tyrol. About 200 in London at the time. I skied alone and stayed in an almost deserted hotel. I wasn't travelling by tube or joining the throng in Barnes farmers market. In spite of being safer, I took the precaution of self isolating for 14 days.
I wonder who else went there, and then went back to their own cities. Wasn't this how this first spread, by people returning from skiing trips?
No it wasn't. Fake news. The hot spots in Italy were not in skiing resorts. There was an early isolated case of a chalet in France.
I though the UK's first super spreader came back on holiday from a skiing trip?
I think having arrived from China or another early hot spot.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
The average number of deaths from seasonal flu in Italy is about 15,000 a year. So far there have been about 4,000 deaths from Covid-19.
You are forgetting that we are having massive lock-downs and social distancing, which don't happen with seasonal flu. If the deaths are kept to the level of seasonal flu it's only because of containment measures.
Can anyone provide a link to the Matthew Parris article of yesterday (with no firewall)?
Absent any sport, we need a betting market on these updates. They are the only live, televised events with uncertain outcomes now.
Absolute obscurities like Russian table tennis leagues and Turkish women's beach volleyball are having their day in the sun with desperate bookies' In Play betting. Experts in the Burundi Premier League could find their opinions much sought after too.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I am the last person to be authoritarian without due cause....sorry I dont think skiing in italy was essential
It didn't have to be essential. It was certainly safer than staying in London. 3 cases in South Tyrol. About 200 in London at the time. I skied alone and stayed in an almost deserted hotel. I wasn't travelling by tube or joining the throng in Barnes farmers market. In spite of being safer, I took the precaution of self isolating for 14 days.
I wonder who else went there, and then went back to their own cities. Wasn't this how this first spread, by people returning from skiing trips?
No it wasn't. Fake news. The hot spots in Italy were not in skiing resorts. There was an early isolated case of a chalet in France.
I though the UK's first super spreader came back on holiday from a skiing trip?
I think having arrived from China or another early hot spot.
Which is my point exactly. Who knows where other people you meet, or those that were in your room before, are from.
As of 9am on 22 March 2020, 78,340 people have been tested in the UK, of which 72,657 were confirmed negative and 5,683 were confirmed positive. 281 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.
So up 665 from yesterday.
Record number of tests. The percentage of positive tests must be well down.
Hopefully they are testing NHS front line staff as a priority...so it's good if our test results accuracy is down...
This says nothing about the accuracy of the test.
It is if we are using to screen staff who work to see if they are safe to work on the frontline rather than using it to find out how many we have got (which I think we have long given up on)....
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
The average number of deaths from seasonal flu in Italy is about 15,000 a year. So far there have been about 4,000 deaths from Covid-19.
About 3,500 have died in smallish area in just over 12 days in an area like the northwest...and many concentrated in a much smaller area...and the death toll is escalating....the health service has collapsed...all the ICU beds have been taken...the death toll is mounting....
Your ignorance on this is quite frankly shocking.....
You are dangerously misinforming people....and ignorance like yours posted on a public site will cost lives....
I'm not misinforming people. I'm self-isolating and I hope others are too. I'm warning against authoritarians and hysterics.
You are right that there has been a concentration of deaths in a part of Lombardy that has overwhelmed the health service.
The pictures on twitter of Richmond Park, it is like somebody is dropping £20 notes...it is busier than the queues for the supermarkets we have been seeing.
As of 9am on 22 March 2020, 78,340 people have been tested in the UK, of which 72,657 were confirmed negative and 5,683 were confirmed positive. 281 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.
So up 665 from yesterday.
Record number of tests. The percentage of positive tests must be well down.
Hopefully they are testing NHS front line staff as a priority...so it's good if our test results accuracy is down...
This says nothing about the accuracy of the test.
It is if we are using to screen staff who work to see if they are safe to work on the frontline rather than using it to find out how many we have got (which I think we have long given up on)....
You could have a perfectly accurate test and detect zero cases if there aren't any. The fraction of detected cases says nothing about how accurate the test is.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
In a sense, it’s catch-22 for the government. If their draconian measures work, deaths will not show a noticeable increase and people will explode at them for over reacting.
If they do nothing, and 500,000 people die, the NHS implodes and the economy collapses, they will be engulfed by a wave of fury as people ask why we weren’t put into lockdown.
So it is a no-win situation.
That is not the same as saying they are taking the right decisions, or in the right way.
You may be surprised to learn, for example, that despite media reports we still do not know what process will replace public examinations this summer. This is because the government have not, so far as anyone knows, consulted OFQUAL or the exam boards,
If governments can save 500 000 lives, it's clearly the right thing to do. There's no actual Catch 22.
(I don't think this contradicts what you are saying)
Absent any sport, we need a betting market on these updates. They are the only live, televised events with uncertain outcomes now.
Absolute obscurities like Russian table tennis leagues and Turkish women's beach volleyball are having their day in the sun with desperate bookies' In Play betting. Experts in the Burundi Premier League could find their opinions much sought after too.
We need something with more tension. The PM could reveal the latest figures on a board in the style of “play your cards right”.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
The average number of deaths from seasonal flu in Italy is about 15,000 a year. So far there have been about 4,000 deaths from Covid-19.
You are forgetting that we are having massive lock-downs and social distancing, which don't happen with seasonal flu. If the deaths are kept to the level of seasonal flu it's only because of containment measures.
He also seems to be forgetting that this outbreak has only been going on for a few weeks, and the deaths are in the hundreds per day, and rising rapidly.
And you're forgetting that those deaths might have happened anyway as a large proportion of those who have lost their lives suffered from one or other illnesses that may include seasonal flu.
Perceptions or deceptions, I'm forced to ask. Look out the window, the sun is shining and you'd think it was a gorgeous spring day but there's an edge to the wind and out of the sun, it's more like winter.
The weather isn't helping - if it were wet and cold, people would be at home but after weeks of gloom, the first hint of sunshine and people want to be out in it.
People shouldn't be out but they are or are they? Mrs Stodge and I have stayed in today - tomorrow may be different. I enjoy my walk despite the vista of the Barking building sites and growling at people helps them keep their distance.
Did Cummings really say that? In a sense, it doesn't matter - it sounds like the sort of thing he would say if you think of him in those terms. Give a dog a bad name, like Tiddles, and you can expect the worst.
As of 9am on 22 March 2020, 78,340 people have been tested in the UK, of which 72,657 were confirmed negative and 5,683 were confirmed positive. 281 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.
This tells me either our testing regime is incredibly shit, OR that an awful lot of people who thought they had CV19 actually have a common cold like I did.
How do you reach that conclusion?
Because anecdotally we are being told about umpteen thousands of cases, yet approximately 92% of actual tests are negative.
So again, either the anecdotal evidence is grossly exaggerating the number of cases, which suggests many common colds, or we are looking for it in all the wrong places, which suggests our testing regime is a bit shit.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
The average number of deaths from seasonal flu in Italy is about 15,000 a year. So far there have been about 4,000 deaths from Covid-19.
You are forgetting that we are having massive lock-downs and social distancing, which don't happen with seasonal flu. If the deaths are kept to the level of seasonal flu it's only because of containment measures.
He also seems to be forgetting that this outbreak has only been going on for a few weeks, and the deaths are in the hundreds per day, and rising rapidly.
And you're forgetting that those deaths might have happened anyway as a large proportion of those who have lost their lives suffered from one or other illnesses that may include seasonal flu.
A subset, perhaps. But I bet it will be a very small subset when the dust settles.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
Let’s see what happens in China now restrictions are being relaxed. If it comes back (other than through reimportation from abroad) then you have a point. If it doesn’t then Barnsean may be right.
Of course it's going to come back!
The question is not whether it comes back, but whether it can be managed - i.e. new infections growing at 0-10%/day, not 33%/day.
This isn't going to be eradicated, but if you combine good testing and better treatments, then it can be controlled.
It depends on what proportion of the Chinese population is already immune. R might be less than 1 if say 60% are immune. Time will tell soon.
As of 9am on 22 March 2020, 78,340 people have been tested in the UK, of which 72,657 were confirmed negative and 5,683 were confirmed positive. 281 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.
This tells me either our testing regime is incredibly shit, OR that an awful lot of people who thought they had CV19 actually have a common cold like I did.
And an awful lot of people seem to be wasting NHS time. If one contracted Covid-19 why rush off the NHS for a test anyway (unless really ill)?
Can we all take a small moment to be thankful that today was better than yesterday and pray that tomorrow will be better still. A day at a time people.
Absent any sport, we need a betting market on these updates. They are the only live, televised events with uncertain outcomes now.
Absolute obscurities like Russian table tennis leagues and Turkish women's beach volleyball are having their day in the sun with desperate bookies' In Play betting. Experts in the Burundi Premier League could find their opinions much sought after too.
Greyhound racing continues as does Irish horse racing for now though I see the Dubai World Cup next Saturday has been lost. I suspect the absence of international horses, trainers and jockeys was a contributory factor in the decision.
I felt solidarity with young remainers...collectivism, internationalism...but now look how they are behaving. I was getting fed up with them on climate change too with them ordering deliveroos, and thinking they have a god given right to go flying around the globe.....
Is not the reality that politics to most young people is just a form of virtue signalling. It is fashionable and cool to be seen a certain way.
Perhaps the change in political views as people age is just the realisation that politics can really affect them.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
Let’s see what happens in China now restrictions are being relaxed. If it comes back (other than through reimportation from abroad) then you have a point. If it doesn’t then Barnsean may be right.
That is key. It is possible that China is not seeing more cases because it is saturated. 50-60% already have had it. That's one explanation. If it comes back big time then my hypothesis is incorrect.
This is incorrect. The Chinese policy was precisely to ensure almost noone outside of Hubei got the virus.
To be honest...I've given up with Barnesian and his madcap, misinformed hypothesis....
Some chavs who go to a pub we label granny killer without anyone leaping to their defense....Barnesian goes skiing in italy because "mah holiday" and some here will defend it
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
In a sense, it’s catch-22 for the government. If their draconian measures work, deaths will not show a noticeable increase and people will explode at them for over reacting.
If they do nothing, and 500,000 people die, the NHS implodes and the economy collapses, they will be engulfed by a wave of fury as people ask why we weren’t put into lockdown.
So it is a no-win situation.
That is not the same as saying they are taking the right decisions, or in the right way.
You may be surprised to learn, for example, that despite media reports we still do not know what process will replace public examinations this summer. This is because the government have not, so far as anyone knows, consulted OFQUAL or the exam boards,
I agree. It is a catch-22. They have to take draconian measures to be on the safe side. I just object to people jogging their elbow to be more authoritarian.
As of 9am on 22 March 2020, 78,340 people have been tested in the UK, of which 72,657 were confirmed negative and 5,683 were confirmed positive. 281 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.
So up 665 from yesterday.
Record number of tests. The percentage of positive tests must be well down.
Hopefully they are testing NHS front line staff as a priority...so it's good if our test results accuracy is down...
This says nothing about the accuracy of the test.
It is if we are using to screen staff who work to see if they are safe to work on the frontline rather than using it to find out how many we have got (which I think we have long given up on)....
You could have a perfectly accurate test and detect zero cases if there aren't any. The fraction of detected cases says nothing about how accurate the test is.
I think we might be talking at cross purposes.....I'll spell out what I'm saying... The test accurately says whether tells us if someone has Covid 19....
And then we test frontline staff to see if they are safe to work....
More evidence that the virus is much more contagious and much less dangerous than assumed.
% infected x fatality rate = deaths Deaths are known so if %infected is higher, then fatality rate is lower.
This is delusional wishful thinking, I'm afraid. Death is a lagging indicator, so if the virus is spreading very fast, it just means there are a lot of people walking around who are contagious, and some of them are themselves doomed.
More evidence that the virus is much more contagious and much less dangerous than assumed.
% infected x fatality rate = deaths Deaths are known so if %infected is higher, then fatality rate is lower.
This is delusional wishful thinking, I'm afraid. Death is a lagging indicator, so if the virus is spreading very fast, it just means there are a lot of people walking around who are contagious, and some of them are themselves doomed.
Death is a lagging indicator of about than two weeks from infection and one week from symptoms in the rare cases that death results.
If 10% of the polulation is already infected (most with no symptoms) and it rises to 50% that means five times more deaths , plus two weeks lag (at a doubling every 5 days) giving another multiple of 4 i.e. 20 times the current numer of deaths. 20 x 250 deaths is 5,000. About average for seasonal flu.
"The mean time from onset to death is 20 (17–24) days, with a standard deviation of 10 (7–14) days."
but you say, without authority, one week. You have also selfishly endangered lives by going to Italy to ski because Covid death numbers are trivial compared to Italian road deaths (current score road deaths 3300 annually Covid 4850 in 6 weeks). It is not my job to stop you being an arse on the internet, but please leave the statistics alone because you aren't very good at either stating or interpreting them. You have done enough damage, surely?
I used 14 days in my calculation. Table 7 in the link you gave indicates 17 days.
I was safer in South Tyrol than in London and i self-isolated for 14 days.
Italy averages 15,000 deaths annually from seasonal flu compared with 4840 from Covid-19 in six weeks.
And the plane and airport and travel to and from? Oh let me guess as a lib dem you walked on water and walked home alone.
I think his final bit re public health is worth quoting. I have noticed that in the public arena, politicians and wonks and medics are talking about vaccination like it's going to be brilliant. They're looking desperately for an exit route from the current chaos. There are difficult issues with mass vaccination, including some delicate ethical problems - eg it is almost certain there will be some vaccine-related adverse events, but the benefits to children of being vaccinated are, on an individual level, likely to be low in the case of COVID-19. Effectively we asking that age group to accept harm in order to confer a benefit on a different group of older or more vulnerable adults. Although not publicised in the media so much (have they learned lessons from Wakefield/MMR?) these perspectives are still fairly well-known and understood. There is though a much more troubling point that I have seen discussed in public health circles, don't think I've ever seen it in the media, suspect isn't common knowledge in political circles, and is subject to grave uncertainty:
I think the bigger worry is even if the vaccine works now will Covid19 come back next year in mutated form and will the same vaccine still work, that is even if you believe a vaccine will be ready soon which frankly I don't. Our successful vaccines for corona have scant evidence
This is one of those longer-term, lowish-probability-we-hope worries with a massive amount of unknowns. There are undoubtedly bigger and more pressing worries for now. But although we've been vaccinating for a long time, there are lots of very basic things we don't understand about vaccination and the possibility mass vaccination schemes drive diseases to evolve into more dangerous forms is not a pleasant one to dwell on.
There are other concerns about vaccination too - if you have something that starts coming back in seasonal waves, it seems higher rates of vaccination uptake can increase the variation in the peaks of the wave, so counterintuitively can make your reasonable worst-case (eg "a season so bad you'd expect it only once in a decade/20 years") worse than if you hadn't vaccinated so many people! That could be a serious issue if your health service is capacity-constrained, and might prefer more constant peaks even if on average they're higher.
Just to make it clear, anti-vaxxers are bad for your health! But the flip side is that vaccination strategies are tricky things and there's considerable uncertainty around them.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
Let’s see what happens in China now restrictions are being relaxed. If it comes back (other than through reimportation from abroad) then you have a point. If it doesn’t then Barnsean may be right.
That is key. It is possible that China is not seeing more cases because it is saturated. 50-60% already have had it. That's one explanation. If it comes back big time then my hypothesis is incorrect.
This is incorrect. The Chinese policy was precisely to ensure almost noone outside of Hubei got the virus.
To be honest...I've given up with Barnesian and his madcap, misinformed hypothesis....
Some chavs who go to a pub we label granny killer without anyone leaping to their defense....Barnesian goes skiing in italy because "mah holiday" and some here will defend it
Yes. He is evidence that stupidity is a moral fault. Selfishness always was anyway.
As of 9am on 22 March 2020, 78,340 people have been tested in the UK, of which 72,657 were confirmed negative and 5,683 were confirmed positive. 281 patients in the UK who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) have died.
So up 665 from yesterday.
Record number of tests. The percentage of positive tests must be well down.
Hopefully they are testing NHS front line staff as a priority...so it's good if our test results accuracy is down...
This says nothing about the accuracy of the test.
It is if we are using to screen staff who work to see if they are safe to work on the frontline rather than using it to find out how many we have got (which I think we have long given up on)....
You could have a perfectly accurate test and detect zero cases if there aren't any. The fraction of detected cases says nothing about how accurate the test is.
I think we might be talking at cross purposes.....I'll spell out what I'm saying... The test accurately says whether tells us if someone has Covid 19....
And then we test frontline staff to see if they are safe to work....
Yeah, accuracy specifically refers to how good the test is. How you distribute your testing capability is another thing entirely.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
As it is I doubt our NHS is going to cope. If you had your way it would have collapsed already.
The NHS is always not going to cope.
No health service is going to cope well but that is no reason to say let it all rip it's just a bad flue season and collapse the service in days. If hospitals effectively cease to function a lot of people other than covid sufferers are going to die unnecessarily.
I wonder how Barnesian's comments would go down in Spain or Iran right now. I'll hang on to them and see how they have aged a year from now.
More evidence that the virus is much more contagious and much less dangerous than assumed.
% infected x fatality rate = deaths Deaths are known so if %infected is higher, then fatality rate is lower.
This is delusional wishful thinking, I'm afraid. Death is a lagging indicator, so if the virus is spreading very fast, it just means there are a lot of people walking around who are contagious, and some of them are themselves doomed.
More evidence that the virus is much more contagious and much less dangerous than assumed.
% infected x fatality rate = deaths Deaths are known so if %infected is higher, then fatality rate is lower.
This is delusional wishful thinking, I'm afraid. Death is a lagging indicator, so if the virus is spreading very fast, it just means there are a lot of people walking around who are contagious, and some of them are themselves doomed.
Death is a lagging indicator of about than two weeks from infection and one week from symptoms in the rare cases that death results.
If 10% of the polulation is already infected (most with no symptoms) and it rises to 50% that means five times more deaths , plus two weeks lag (at a doubling every 5 days) giving another multiple of 4 i.e. 20 times the current numer of deaths. 20 x 250 deaths is 5,000. About average for seasonal flu.
"The mean time from onset to death is 20 (17–24) days, with a standard deviation of 10 (7–14) days."
but you say, without authority, one week. You have also selfishly endangered lives by going to Italy to ski because Covid death numbers are trivial compared to Italian road deaths (current score road deaths 3300 annually Covid 4850 in 6 weeks). It is not my job to stop you being an arse on the internet, but please leave the statistics alone because you aren't very good at either stating or interpreting them. You have done enough damage, surely?
I used 14 days in my calculation. Table 7 in the link you gave indicates 17 days.
I was safer in South Tyrol than in London and i self-isolated for 14 days.
Italy averages 15,000 deaths annually from seasonal flu compared with 4840 from Covid-19 in six weeks.
And the plane and airport and travel to and from? Oh let me guess as a lib dem you walked on water and walked home alone.
Silly
It's a legitimate point. You could have been an asymptomatic carrier unnecessarily putting others at risk.
More evidence that the virus is much more contagious and much less dangerous than assumed.
% infected x fatality rate = deaths Deaths are known so if %infected is higher, then fatality rate is lower.
This is delusional wishful thinking, I'm afraid. Death is a lagging indicator, so if the virus is spreading very fast, it just means there are a lot of people walking around who are contagious, and some of them are themselves doomed.
More evidence that the virus is much more contagious and much less dangerous than assumed.
% infected x fatality rate = deaths Deaths are known so if %infected is higher, then fatality rate is lower.
This is delusional wishful thinking, I'm afraid. Death is a lagging indicator, so if the virus is spreading very fast, it just means there are a lot of people walking around who are contagious, and some of them are themselves doomed.
Death is a lagging indicator of about than two weeks from infection and one week from symptoms in the rare cases that death results.
If 10% of the polulation is already infected (most with no symptoms) and it rises to 50% that means five times more deaths , plus two weeks lag (at a doubling every 5 days) giving another multiple of 4 i.e. 20 times the current numer of deaths. 20 x 250 deaths is 5,000. About average for seasonal flu.
"The mean time from onset to death is 20 (17–24) days, with a standard deviation of 10 (7–14) days."
but you say, without authority, one week. You have also selfishly endangered lives by going to Italy to ski because Covid death numbers are trivial compared to Italian road deaths (current score road deaths 3300 annually Covid 4850 in 6 weeks). It is not my job to stop you being an arse on the internet, but please leave the statistics alone because you aren't very good at either stating or interpreting them. You have done enough damage, surely?
I used 14 days in my calculation. Table 7 in the link you gave indicates 17 days.
I was safer in South Tyrol than in London and i self-isolated for 14 days.
Italy averages 15,000 deaths annually from seasonal flu compared with 4840 from Covid-19 in six weeks.
And the plane and airport and travel to and from? Oh let me guess as a lib dem you walked on water and walked home alone.
Silly
Which part the fact I think you risked infecting a plane load of people and an airport and your transport there and back because you fancied some skiing?
It is very, very complicated. For a start the classic examples are usual highly virulent diseases, and what is usually not mentioned so frequently is that the least virulent strains of them can also get out-competed. The pressures on viruses that aren't highly virulent like this one are far less severe.
In most textbooks, the story stops there [Less virulent strains becoming dominant]. But the virus continued to evolve. From the late 1970s, reports began to accumulate that MYXV was becoming more lethal again. The picture was not simple, partly because the sampling was not as extensive as it had been during Fenner’s studies, and partly because there was substantial regional variation. Fascinated by the possibility that the textbook evolutionary trajectory of virulence had reversed, we, together with Eddie Holmes of the University of Sydney and Penn State University’s Isabella Cattadori, have been using Fenner’s common garden protocols to find out what happened.
To our great surprise, the most virulent of the isolates harvested from the field and frozen in the 1990s caused our susceptible laboratory rabbits to develop a highly lethal immune collapse syndrome akin to septic shock. This disease syndrome had never been seen before. Rabbits die at about the same rate as those infected with the ancestral virus, but they do so without developing classical myxomatosis. Instead, death is associated with a form of toxic or septic shock characterized by an almost complete absence of cellular inflammatory responses, allowing normally well-controlled bacteria to run rampant in the test rabbits.
Does this sound familiar to anyone?
In other words this virus may be SARS fighting back.
I think his final bit re public health is worth quoting. I have noticed that in the public arena, politicians and wonks and medics are talking about vaccination like it's going to be brilliant. They're looking desperately for an exit route from the current chaos. There are difficult issues with mass vaccination, including some delicate ethical problems - eg it is almost certain there will be some vaccine-related adverse events, but the benefits to children of being vaccinated are, on an individual level, likely to be low in the case of COVID-19. Effectively we asking that age group to accept harm in order to confer a benefit on a different group of older or more vulnerable adults. Although not publicised in the media so much (have they learned lessons from Wakefield/MMR?) these perspectives are still fairly well-known and understood. There is though a much more troubling point that I have seen discussed in public health circles, don't think I've ever seen it in the media, suspect isn't common knowledge in political circles, and is subject to grave uncertainty:
Could the widespread use of human vaccines lead to the evolution of pathogens that would be more harmful to the unvaccinated? Most of the human vaccines that have been in use for decades generate sterilizing immunity and so would not be expected to promote pathogen evolution. But next-generation vaccines might be less effective. Clearly, we all hope for malaria or HIV vaccines that completely prevent transmission, but in the absence of fundamental breakthroughs, it seems likely that our current list of vaccine-preventable diseases will soon be joined by a list of vaccine-ameliorable diseases, in which symptoms are alleviated but infection and onward transmission continue. In those cases, it will be critical to understand the possible evolutionary trajectories those target pathogens might take once they evolve in populations that can, just like resistant Australian rabbits, control pathogen titers and sickness, but not prevent infection.
Mathematical models and experimental studies point to the possibility that for some diseases and some vaccines, immunized people might create conditions for the evolution of pathogens that cause more-severe disease in the nonimmunized.1,2 There are controversial suggestions that this might already be so for the nonsterilizing* vaccines against pertussis (also known as whooping cough),3,4,5 and for our money, there is a strong case for examining the evolutionary consequences of vaccines against cervical cancer and typhoid fever. This is not an argument against next-generation vaccines; rather, it is an admonition that, in the future, we may need additional tools to protect those whom vaccines cannot reach.
*nonsterilizing = some vaccines turn out to be pretty good at protecting you from the disease, but you can still carry the infection and transmit it to others
It was a good article. I found the discussion of Marek's and Newcastle Disease fascinating.
But the answer to his concern is that vaccines used for mass vaccination need to be sterlizing.
One advantage for us and the NHS is that we have had some warning. Some time to prepare. It might be a critical difference between us and say Italy.
Worryingly there's no indication of our government using that time effectively to prepare. Italy has a good healthcare system, did plenty of testing etc. I'm not seeing what we're doing different that gives us confidence that we will avoid Italy's fate. Despite Cummings* previous bragging that Italy wasn't the example he was following.
I think his final bit re public health is worth quoting. I have noticed that in the public arena, politicians and wonks and medics are talking about vaccination like it's going to be brilliant. They're looking desperately for an exit route from the current chaos. There are difficult issues with mass vaccination, including some delicate ethical problems - eg it is almost certain there will be some vaccine-related adverse events, but the benefits to children of being vaccinated are, on an individual level, likely to be low in the case of COVID-19. Effectively we asking that age group to accept harm in order to confer a benefit on a different group of older or more vulnerable adults. Although not publicised in the media so much (have they learned lessons from Wakefield/MMR?) these perspectives are still fairly well-known and understood. There is though a much more troubling point that I have seen discussed in public health circles, don't think I've ever seen it in the media, suspect isn't common knowledge in political circles, and is subject to grave uncertainty:
I think the bigger worry is even if the vaccine works now will Covid19 come back next year in mutated form and will the same vaccine still work, that is even if you believe a vaccine will be ready soon which frankly I don't. Our successful vaccines for corona have scant evidence
This is one of those longer-term, lowish-probability-we-hope worries with a massive amount of unknowns. There are undoubtedly bigger and more pressing worries for now. But although we've been vaccinating for a long time, there are lots of very basic things we don't understand about vaccination and the possibility mass vaccination schemes drive diseases to evolve into more dangerous forms is not a pleasant one to dwell on.
There are other concerns about vaccination too - if you have something that starts coming back in seasonal waves, it seems higher rates of vaccination uptake can increase the variation in the peaks of the wave, so counterintuitively can make your reasonable worst-case (eg "a season so bad you'd expect it only once in a decade/20 years") worse than if you hadn't vaccinated so many people! That could be a serious issue if your health service is capacity-constrained, and might prefer more constant peaks even if on average they're higher.
Just to make it clear, anti-vaxxers are bad for your health! But the flip side is that vaccination strategies are tricky things and there's considerable uncertainty around them.
I am definitely not an anti vaxxer was more expressing two concerns one which I think likely which is there wont be an effective vaccine, the other which is even if we find one for now it wont be effective in a year or two
In a sense, it’s catch-22 for the government. If their draconian measures work, deaths will not show a noticeable increase and people will explode at them for over reacting.
If they do nothing, and 500,000 people die, the NHS implodes and the economy collapses, they will be engulfed by a wave of fury as people ask why we weren’t put into lockdown.
So it is a no-win situation.
This.
That being said, we will be able to compare the outcome in the UK with that in Spain, Italy and the Netherlands.
And with South Korea and Germany.
One thing I'd note: based on reports from my friends, and colleagues in London, I think 10+% of Londoners have had CV-19, and I wouldn't be surprised if the total number - when antibody tests are developed - comes out at 15% or more.
If I am correct in this estimate, and only time will tell if I am, then the morbidity rate for CV-19 (in London) is likely to be no more than 0.2-0.3% at most. Now, this may very well be because we go to the edge of the healthcare system's ability to treat, and not beyond. But if so (and it's a big if), then this has to inform our future response to the virus.
Agreed. That's where I am. And it is a big IF.
EDIT: Just heard that my eldest grandson has a recurrent dry cough and a temperature of 39C. So do two classmates. It just adds to the anecdotal evidence.
I think his final bit re public health is worth quoting. I have noticed that in the public arena, politicians and wonks and medics are talking about vaccination like it's going to be brilliant. They're looking desperately for an exit route from the current chaos. There are difficult issues with mass vaccination, including some delicate ethical problems - eg it is almost certain there will be some vaccine-related adverse events, but the benefits to children of being vaccinated are, on an individual level, likely to be low in the case of COVID-19. Effectively we asking that age group to accept harm in order to confer a benefit on a different group of older or more vulnerable adults. Although not publicised in the media so much (have they learned lessons from Wakefield/MMR?) these perspectives are still fairly well-known and understood. There is though a much more troubling point that I have seen discussed in public health circles, don't think I've ever seen it in the media, suspect isn't common knowledge in political circles, and is subject to grave uncertainty:
I think the bigger worry is even if the vaccine works now will Covid19 come back next year in mutated form and will the same vaccine still work, that is even if you believe a vaccine will be ready soon which frankly I don't. Our successful vaccines for corona have scant evidence
This is one of those longer-term, lowish-probability-we-hope worries with a massive amount of unknowns. There are undoubtedly bigger and more pressing worries for now. But although we've been vaccinating for a long time, there are lots of very basic things we don't understand about vaccination and the possibility mass vaccination schemes drive diseases to evolve into more dangerous forms is not a pleasant one to dwell on.
There are other concerns about vaccination too - if you have something that starts coming back in seasonal waves, it seems higher rates of vaccination uptake can increase the variation in the peaks of the wave, so counterintuitively can make your reasonable worst-case (eg "a season so bad you'd expect it only once in a decade/20 years") worse than if you hadn't vaccinated so many people! That could be a serious issue if your health service is capacity-constrained, and might prefer more constant peaks even if on average they're higher.
Just to make it clear, anti-vaxxers are bad for your health! But the flip side is that vaccination strategies are tricky things and there's considerable uncertainty around them.
I'm pretty pessimistic about the possibility of a vaccine, because we've not managed one with anything in this family before (although that might also be because of lack of commercial incentive.)
However, it is worth remembering that CV-19 (and MERS and SARS before it) appear to have relatively slow rates of mutation. Now, that may change. But it seems more likely that it's genetic make-up isn't changing much because most random variations reduce its survivability in some way.
I have some sympathy here. What he has essentially said is “people aren’t getting the message, here is the message again, please listen to it because if you don’t I’ll need to go further.”
Italy have shut down all “non essential” businesses. Will they even have a country at the end of this? At what point due the hard utilitarian calculations actually become necessary? The numbers appear horrific, but they are still only a small dent in annual death figures
Nowhere near strong enough from Boris, it was like he was telling a kid off for dropping an apple core.
Boris, like most politicians, wants to be liked and popular and won't cope well with his inevitable unpopularity (whether this happens sooner or later).
As a result, he holds back from the necessary but really unpopular actions such as restricting movement, closing parks and the like.
He thinks there will be a political price to pay which he will end up paying - in this instance there probably isn't and he probably won't but if it looks at any point as though he has lost control of the situation he will be in big trouble.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I am the last person to be authoritarian without due cause....sorry I dont think skiing in italy was essential
It didn't have to be essential. It was certainly safer than staying in London. 3 cases in South Tyrol. About 200 in London at the time. I skied alone and stayed in an almost deserted hotel. I wasn't travelling by tube or joining the throng in Barnes farmers market. In spite of being safer, I took the precaution of self isolating for 14 days.
I wonder who else went there, and then went back to their own cities. Wasn't this how this first spread, by people returning from skiing trips?
No it wasn't. Fake news. The hot spots in Italy were not in skiing resorts. There was an early isolated case of a chalet in France.
I though the UK's first super spreader came back on holiday from a skiing trip?
That's the chalet party in France I referred to. One of the party had been to China IIFC. It wasn't the skiing that infected them.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I am the last person to be authoritarian without due cause....sorry I dont think skiing in italy was essential
It didn't have to be essential. It was certainly safer than staying in London. 3 cases in South Tyrol. About 200 in London at the time. I skied alone and stayed in an almost deserted hotel. I wasn't travelling by tube or joining the throng in Barnes farmers market. In spite of being safer, I took the precaution of self isolating for 14 days.
I wonder who else went there, and then went back to their own cities. Wasn't this how this first spread, by people returning from skiing trips?
No it wasn't. Fake news. The hot spots in Italy were not in skiing resorts. There was an early isolated case of a chalet in France.
I though the UK's first super spreader came back on holiday from a skiing trip?
That's the chalet party in France I referred to. One of the party had been to China IIFC. It wasn't the skiing that infected them.
Perhaps not, but it was a site where it was undoubtedly spread widely to other countries.
I think his final bit re public health is worth quoting. I have noticed that in the public arena, politicians and wonks and medics are talking about vaccination like it's going to be brilliant. They're looking desperately for an exit route from the current chaos. There are difficult issues with mass vaccination, including some delicate ethical problems - eg it is almost certain there will be some vaccine-related adverse events, but the benefits to children of being vaccinated are, on an individual level, likely to be low in the case of COVID-19. Effectively we asking that age group to accept harm in order to confer a benefit on a different group of older or more vulnerable adults. Although not publicised in the media so much (have they learned lessons from Wakefield/MMR?) these perspectives are still fairly well-known and understood. There is though a much more troubling point that I have seen discussed in public health circles, don't think I've ever seen it in the media, suspect isn't common knowledge in political circles, and is subject to grave uncertainty:
I think the bigger worry is even if the vaccine works now will Covid19 come back next year in mutated form and will the same vaccine still work, that is even if you believe a vaccine will be ready soon which frankly I don't. Our successful vaccines for corona have scant evidence
We have lots of vaccines for coronaviruses, although there are some (e.g. FIP) that we can't treat effectively. But, like rhinovirus, they are difficult.
I have some sympathy here. What he has essentially said is “people aren’t getting the message, here is the message again, please listen to it because if you don’t I’ll need to go further.”
Similar to Nicola Sturgeon this pm
This is all coordinated and the next Cobra meeting will be very interesting
Expect national parks and others will be closed by the park authorities and local authorities
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
Let’s see what happens in China now restrictions are being relaxed. If it comes back (other than through reimportation from abroad) then you have a point. If it doesn’t then Barnsean may be right.
That is key. It is possible that China is not seeing more cases because it is saturated. 50-60% already have had it. That's one explanation. If it comes back big time then my hypothesis is incorrect.
This is incorrect. The Chinese policy was precisely to ensure almost noone outside of Hubei got the virus.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I am the last person to be authoritarian without due cause....sorry I dont think skiing in italy was essential
It didn't have to be essential. It was certainly safer than staying in London. 3 cases in South Tyrol. About 200 in London at the time. I skied alone and stayed in an almost deserted hotel. I wasn't travelling by tube or joining the throng in Barnes farmers market. In spite of being safer, I took the precaution of self isolating for 14 days.
I wonder who else went there, and then went back to their own cities. Wasn't this how this first spread, by people returning from skiing trips?
No it wasn't. Fake news. The hot spots in Italy were not in skiing resorts. There was an early isolated case of a chalet in France.
I though the UK's first super spreader came back on holiday from a skiing trip?
That's the chalet party in France I referred to. One of the party had been to China IIFC. It wasn't the skiing that infected them.
Singapore. It was the chalet environment - close proximity - that infected them.
I think his final bit re public health is worth quoting. I have noticed that in the public arena, politicians and wonks and medics are talking about vaccination like it's going to be brilliant. They're looking desperately for an exit route from the current chaos. There are difficult issues with mass vaccination, including some delicate ethical problems - eg it is almost certain there will be some vaccine-related adverse events, but the benefits to children of being vaccinated are, on an individual level, likely to be low in the case of COVID-19. Effectively we asking that age group to accept harm in order to confer a benefit on a different group of older or more vulnerable adults. Although not publicised in the media so much (have they learned lessons from Wakefield/MMR?) these perspectives are still fairly well-known and understood. There is though a much more troubling point that I have seen discussed in public health circles, don't think I've ever seen it in the media, suspect isn't common knowledge in political circles, and is subject to grave uncertainty:
I think the bigger worry is even if the vaccine works now will Covid19 come back next year in mutated form and will the same vaccine still work, that is even if you believe a vaccine will be ready soon which frankly I don't. Our successful vaccines for corona have scant evidence
We have lots of vaccines for coronaviruses, although there are some (e.g. FIP) that we can't treat effectively. But, like rhinovirus, they are difficult.
The Russian military will start sending medical help to Italy from Sunday to help it to battle the new coronavirus after receiving an order from President Vladimir Putin, Russia’s Defense Ministry said in a statement.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
Let’s see what happens in China now restrictions are being relaxed. If it comes back (other than through reimportation from abroad) then you have a point. If it doesn’t then Barnsean may be right.
Of course it's going to come back!
The question is not whether it comes back, but whether it can be managed - i.e. new infections growing at 0-10%/day, not 33%/day.
This isn't going to be eradicated, but if you combine good testing and better treatments, then it can be controlled.
It depends on what proportion of the Chinese population is already immune. R might be less than 1 if say 60% are immune. Time will tell soon.
There is no basis for believing anything like 60% of the population is immune. The vast majority of Chinese cases and deaths were in Hubei Province whose population is less than 5% of the total Chinese population.
One advantage for us and the NHS is that we have had some warning. Some time to prepare. It might be a critical difference between us and say Italy.
Worryingly there's no indication of our government using that time effectively to prepare. Italy has a good healthcare system, did plenty of testing etc. I'm not seeing what we're doing different that gives us confidence that we will avoid Italy's fate. Despite Cummings* previous bragging that Italy wasn't the example he was following.
* "Downing Street source"
Thankfully, that's crap. CCGs and other NHS organisations have been preparing for several weeks.
I think PB has an unhealthy proportionof authoritarians ("Do as you are told FFS") and hysterics ("It's the end of the world as we know it").
This will turn out to be serious case of seasonal flu (20K dead in UK) with a massive overaction that causes more harm than the disease.
Cue for authoritarians and hysterics to do their thing....
I really, really don't think the situations in Hubei and Italy can be described as "serious cases of seasonal flu". There have been no convincing arguments that we will avoid going down the same route here.
Let’s see what happens in China now restrictions are being relaxed. If it comes back (other than through reimportation from abroad) then you have a point. If it doesn’t then Barnsean may be right.
That is key. It is possible that China is not seeing more cases because it is saturated. 50-60% already have had it. That's one explanation. If it comes back big time then my hypothesis is incorrect.
This is incorrect. The Chinese policy was precisely to ensure almost noone outside of Hubei got the virus.
But many people outside Hubei did get it.
How do you think the rest of China managed to reach saturation without large numbers of vulnerable people in the rest of China dying?
Boris says outdoor exercise is important in parks and green spaces but people should stay 2 metres apart, if they do not do so then further measures will need to be considered
Can any of the folks with medical experience tell me something. Is it impossible to develop an innoculation for Coronavirus? To give someone a small enough dose of Coronavirus to trigger the right immune response without giving them a full blown attack? Or once you've given it to someone have you just given it to someone.
Boris says outdoor exercise is important in parks and green spaces but people should stay 2 metres apart, if they do not do so then further measures will need to be considered
So a married couple must walk 2m apart? That’s closer than usual.
Can any of the folks with medical experience tell me something. Is it impossible to develop an innoculation for Coronavirus? To give someone a small enough dose of Coronavirus to trigger the right immune response without giving them a full blown attack? Or once you've given it to someone have you just given it to someone.
I imagine if this was possible, we'd have found out about it by now.
Can any of the folks with medical experience tell me something. Is it impossible to develop an innoculation for Coronavirus? To give someone a small enough dose of Coronavirus to trigger the right immune response without giving them a full blown attack? Or once you've given it to someone have you just given it to someone.
Viruses are pretty small to begin with. What small dose do you have in mind? Inoculation doesn’t work that way.
Boris, like most politicians, wants to be liked and popular [snip] As a result, he holds back from the necessary but really unpopular actions such as restricting movement, closing parks and the like.
Or maybe he is genuinely a classical liberal and so holds back from authoritarianism if not absolutely needed.
I do get the impression that some people rather like the firm hand of the state.
Can any of the folks with medical experience tell me something. Is it impossible to develop an innoculation for Coronavirus? To give someone a small enough dose of Coronavirus to trigger the right immune response without giving them a full blown attack? Or once you've given it to someone have you just given it to someone.
I imagine if this was possible, we'd have found out about it by now.
So do I, I am just asking why. The above is just the principle of innoculation as I understand it.
Comments
I got a paper the other day and was the only one (ahead of me, anyway) who kept any distance.
Hopefully they are testing NHS front line staff as a priority...so it's good if our test results accuracy is down...
You are right that there has been a concentration of deaths in a part of Lombardy that has overwhelmed the health service.
(I don't think this contradicts what you are saying)
Perceptions or deceptions, I'm forced to ask. Look out the window, the sun is shining and you'd think it was a gorgeous spring day but there's an edge to the wind and out of the sun, it's more like winter.
The weather isn't helping - if it were wet and cold, people would be at home but after weeks of gloom, the first hint of sunshine and people want to be out in it.
People shouldn't be out but they are or are they? Mrs Stodge and I have stayed in today - tomorrow may be different. I enjoy my walk despite the vista of the Barking building sites and growling at people helps them keep their distance.
Did Cummings really say that? In a sense, it doesn't matter - it sounds like the sort of thing he would say if you think of him in those terms. Give a dog a bad name, like Tiddles, and you can expect the worst.
So again, either the anecdotal evidence is grossly exaggerating the number of cases, which suggests many common colds, or we are looking for it in all the wrong places, which suggests our testing regime is a bit shit.
Perhaps the change in political views as people age is just the realisation that politics can really affect them.
Currently positive: 46638 (+3957 net increase)
including 3009 in UIC
Deaths: +651 for a total of 5.476
Healed: +952 for a total of 7024
So 5560 new cases
The test accurately says whether tells us if someone has Covid 19....
And then we test frontline staff to see if they are safe to work....
There are other concerns about vaccination too - if you have something that starts coming back in seasonal waves, it seems higher rates of vaccination uptake can increase the variation in the peaks of the wave, so counterintuitively can make your reasonable worst-case (eg "a season so bad you'd expect it only once in a decade/20 years") worse than if you hadn't vaccinated so many people! That could be a serious issue if your health service is capacity-constrained, and might prefer more constant peaks even if on average they're higher.
Potentially worse still bearing in mind how viruses mutate over your lifetime, there's evidence your immune response "learns more" from what it first encounters, and gets worse at dealing with strains you encountered later. In other words, the sequence of your exposures matters. From a selfish individual perspective, you'd therefore prefer to first be exposed to a strain that's more likely to be similar to the future strains likely to harm you. There's a lot of uncertainty about this and how it might affect optimal vaccination strategies, but it does cause some concern even among researchers who favour childhood vaccination in general that years down the line some people might regret that their best immune response was somewhat "wasted" if we don't get the sequencing/age of vaccination right (and at the moment for something with multiple and evolving strains like flu we simply don't know enough to figure that out right now!).
Just to make it clear, anti-vaxxers are bad for your health! But the flip side is that vaccination strategies are tricky things and there's considerable uncertainty around them.
I'm not totally convinced mine are "well into growth" yet. Cornwall, this is not.
I wonder how Barnesian's comments would go down in Spain or Iran right now. I'll hang on to them and see how they have aged a year from now.
But the answer to his concern is that vaccines used for mass vaccination need to be sterlizing.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1241775779559682055
* "Downing Street source"
EDIT: Just heard that my eldest grandson has a recurrent dry cough and a temperature of 39C. So do two classmates. It just adds to the anecdotal evidence.
However, it is worth remembering that CV-19 (and MERS and SARS before it) appear to have relatively slow rates of mutation. Now, that may change. But it seems more likely that it's genetic make-up isn't changing much because most random variations reduce its survivability in some way.
I will throw the numbers into my spreadsheet in a bit and see what it says
As a result, he holds back from the necessary but really unpopular actions such as restricting movement, closing parks and the like.
He thinks there will be a political price to pay which he will end up paying - in this instance there probably isn't and he probably won't but if it looks at any point as though he has lost control of the situation he will be in big trouble.
This is all coordinated and the next Cobra meeting will be very interesting
Expect national parks and others will be closed by the park authorities and local authorities
This could change in days
My bad.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-russia-italy/russian-army-to-send-coronavirus-help-to-italy-after-putin-phone-call-idUSKBN219081
So in London he’s both “Boristhebutcher” AND “Boristhespoilsport”
I do get the impression that some people rather like the firm hand of the state.