Shopping update: Sainsbury's had a longer queue (about 20 minutes) to get in; there were more staff and outlines of feet 2m apart for the queue. This was before the rain and hail. Some tissues (not my brand) and toilet rolls were back on the shelves; no soap or kitchen roll. Fruit and veg looked a bit close to use dates. Some but not enough Coke.
Ordered fish and chips by phone so they could start cooking it before I got there. They did not, however.
Do these queues happen only in the morning ?
Because I don't see them in the evening.
Plenty of toilet roll and soap in Asda and even some dry pasta but chickpeas and lentils are now rare.
Tbh I only go once a week so can't be sure. The queue was twice as long Monday as last Thursday (or was it the Thursday before? I'm losing track of time).
I thought Andy Burnham's measured approach to the Tories is the right tone...to things like HS2 and now Covid 19....
If Andy Burnham had won in 2015.......the last 5 years of British politics would have been profoundly different....for the Tories too...
Makes me even more angry with Corbyn et al....
Burnham should have tried to inspire the membership in 2015 and he might have won.
All candidates except Corbyn pivoted to austerity light.
I was going to vote Burnham until he joined YC and L4%K in dropping opposition to austerity.
Burnham massively overestimated LK's appeal, and massively underestimated Corbyn. He assumed the left had nowhere else to given Corbyn was evidently unelectable, and thought he needed to stop all LK's votes from transferring to YC in the final round. That was a pretty big mistake.
Yes L4%K only stayed in the contest as a favour to YC who begged her not to drop out otherwise she would have been seen as the right wing candidate which at the time she was desperate to avoid.
And Corbyn stayed in the contest to trash the party for a generation. No contest.
Corbyn came within a few thousand votes of becoming PM in 2017.
L4%K came within a few thousand votes of being forever known as L5%K
Corbyn took us back to the 1930s and gave us Boris for five years. He is without equal. Even the SDP left Labour in a stronger position.
The ironic thing is that Corbyn was ever only a pastiche of a socialist. A nostalgic relic from a bygone socialist utopia that never was.
To what do you attribute the fact he came within a few thousand votes of becoming PMin 2017 via the biggest increase in vote share since WW2.
His biggest failing was to allow Boris a Brexit election when almost everybody knew we would lose. The GE2019 Labour campaign was pathetic
He lost in 2017 and lost in 2019, leaving a mountain to climb. A total catastrophe. Corbyn = five wasted years, possibly more. Surprised you have courage to mention LK when you supported this disaster.
So you dont want to admit how close we came in 2017. Or who wanted Labour to go full out Remoan in 2019 Campaign.
We lost. Get it? L o s t. There is no runners up prize. No morale victory. Just a Tory government. That is it. Nothing to be proud of. Just failure.
We also L o s t in 2010 and 2015
Very true. Another five wasted years. Milliband was rubbish too. Brown less so, but yes not good enough to win. But by far the worst result was Corbyn. Thank goodness we’re moving on.
The longer this lockdown goes on, the more people will choose that risk. Because they will be unemployable otherwise. Cooped up in their homes, which may not be nice at all. Living half a life.
We have already had anecdotes in the form of GideonWise (aged 33?) who has had this and survived it. The more anecodotes people hear from their friends the more they will go "yeah, I'll chance it." Particularly when those who have survived it are back at their jobs, socialising, and posting instagram from their holidays, while you're sat under house arrest, waiting for your next government handout.
I'm not sure that's the choice. I mean, *I'm* not under house arrest. OK, it's not a sure thing that this blessed state of affairs will continue but for now it looks promising. *You're* under house arrest, but that's because your government was too slow to do less disruptive things. I don't think it'll make that mistake again.
That said, I do think it's plausible that some places will just fail to contain this and give up, and some young people will end up just moving to those places.
Fair enough.
I see this purely as an expected value calculation.
Let's say I'm in my 30s and the doctor says if I am infected with this, I have a 1 in 500 chance of dying, or 0.2%. The alternative is spending the next 6 months effectively under house arrest.
Assuming I live to 80, 6 months = 0.6% of my life. If surviving and being immune means I can get backto my life as normal, an EV calculation says I am regaining 0.6% of my life for a 0.2% chance of dying, or a x 3 return. If this was a hand of poker, I'd be all in.
This calculation holds true for a 70 year old with a 10% chance of dying, by the way. Assuming they only live another 10 years and, being honest with themselves, the years 80+ aren't a fart in the wind worth living anyway.
How many more summers do any of us have? Those of us who want to take the risk should be allowed the risk. It's a self-regarding action and you can mitigate the possibility of harming others by enforced, supervised quarantine after deliberate infection.
The benefit to society is you add to herd immunity and become economically productive again. So a decision with positive externalities.
"On Monday, former supreme court justice Lord Sumption said that excessive measures were in danger of turning Britain into a “police state”, singling out Derbyshire police – which deployed drones and dyed a lagoon black – for “trying to shame people in using their undoubted right to take exercise in the country and wrecking beauty spots in the fells”."
It's an old mining tails pit with very high Ph levels that has been dyed black to dissuade swimming for years.
Somehow this is now believed to be CV-19 lockdown related.
It's believed to be CV-19 related because Derbyshire Police splattered it all over twitter, claiming it was because of CV-19. As for their antics with the drones...
I thought Andy Burnham's measured approach to the Tories is the right tone...to things like HS2 and now Covid 19....
If Andy Burnham had won in 2015.......the last 5 years of British politics would have been profoundly different....for the Tories too...
Makes me even more angry with Corbyn et al....
Burnham should have tried to inspire the membership in 2015 and he might have won.
All candidates except Corbyn pivoted to austerity light.
I was going to vote Burnham until he joined YC and L4%K in dropping opposition to austerity.
Burnham massively overestimated LK's appeal, and massively underestimated Corbyn. He assumed the left had nowhere else to given Corbyn was evidently unelectable, and thought he needed to stop all LK's votes from transferring to YC in the final round. That was a pretty big mistake.
Yes L4%K only stayed in the contest as a favour to YC who begged her not to drop out otherwise she would have been seen as the right wing candidate which at the time she was desperate to avoid.
And Corbyn stayed in the contest to trash the party for a generation. No contest.
Corbyn came within a few thousand votes of becoming PM in 2017.
L4%K came within a few thousand votes of being forever known as L5%K
Corbyn took us back to the 1930s and gave us Boris for five years. He is without equal. Even the SDP left Labour in a stronger position.
The ironic thing is that Corbyn was ever only a pastiche of a socialist. A nostalgic relic from a bygone socialist utopia that never was.
To what do you attribute the fact he came within a few thousand votes of becoming PMin 2017 via the biggest increase in vote share since WW2.
His biggest failing was to allow Boris a Brexit election when almost everybody knew we would lose. The GE2019 Labour campaign was pathetic
He lost in 2017 and lost in 2019, leaving a mountain to climb. A total catastrophe. Corbyn = five wasted years, possibly more. Surprised you have courage to mention LK when you supported this disaster.
So you dont want to admit how close we came in 2017. Or who wanted Labour to go full out Remoan in 2019 Campaign.
We lost. Get it? L o s t. There is no runners up prize. No morale victory. Just a Tory government. That is it. Nothing to be proud of. Just failure.
We also L o s t in 2010 and 2015
Which is why Corbyns failures in 2017 and 2019 matter so much. The soonest that Labour can be in power at Westminster is May 2024, and that is a long way from certain.
That period of 2010 to 2024 will be the second longest period on the opposition benches ever, and if Labour fails to win in 2029, this stretches to the longest period ever.
That is the magnitude of how crap Corbyn has been.
I thought Andy Burnham's measured approach to the Tories is the right tone...to things like HS2 and now Covid 19....
If Andy Burnham had won in 2015.......the last 5 years of British politics would have been profoundly different....for the Tories too...
Makes me even more angry with Corbyn et al....
Burnham should have tried to inspire the membership in 2015 and he might have won.
All candidates except Corbyn pivoted to austerity light.
I was going to vote Burnham until he joined YC and L4%K in dropping opposition to austerity.
Burnham massively overestimated LK's appeal, and massively underestimated Corbyn. He assumed the left had nowhere else to given Corbyn was evidently unelectable, and thought he needed to stop all LK's votes from transferring to YC in the final round. That was a pretty big mistake.
Yes L4%K only stayed in the contest as a favour to YC who begged her not to drop out otherwise she would have been seen as the right wing candidate which at the time she was desperate to avoid.
And Corbyn stayed in the contest to trash the party for a generation. No contest.
Corbyn came within a few thousand votes of becoming PM in 2017.
L4%K came within a few thousand votes of being forever known as L5%K
Corbyn took us back to the 1930s and gave us Boris for five years. He is without equal. Even the SDP left Labour in a stronger position.
The ironic thing is that Corbyn was ever only a pastiche of a socialist. A nostalgic relic from a bygone socialist utopia that never was.
To what do you attribute the fact he came within a few thousand votes of becoming PMin 2017 via the biggest increase in vote share since WW2.
His biggest failing was to allow Boris a Brexit election when almost everybody knew we would lose. The GE2019 Labour campaign was pathetic
He lost in 2017 and lost in 2019, leaving a mountain to climb. A total catastrophe. Corbyn = five wasted years, possibly more. Surprised you have courage to mention LK when you supported this disaster.
So you dont want to admit how close we came in 2017. Or who wanted Labour to go full out Remoan in 2019 Campaign.
We lost. Get it? L o s t. There is no runners up prize. No morale victory. Just a Tory government. That is it. Nothing to be proud of. Just failure.
We also L o s t in 2010 and 2015
Which is why Corbyns failures in 2017 and 2019 matter so much. The soonest that Labour can be in power at Westminster is May 2024, and that is a long way from certain.
That period of 2010 to 2024 will be the second longest period on the opposition benches ever, and if Labour fails to win in 2029, this stretches to the longest period ever.
That is the magnitude of how crap Corbyn has been.
Corbyn and co looked at the lessons of history, saw the route to power, turned their nose up at it, they thought they were better and purer, went the other way and led the party to its biggest defeat since the 1930s.
WRT to how long this can last, I've found funding to ensure that I can hole up until July.
However after that I'm returning to normal life, with the exception of avoiding the vulnerable.. I'm a fit person in their 20s. Wasting one year of summer and accruing £2k of debt to avoid around a 1 in 1000 to 10000 risk of dying is a totally ridiculous tradeoff.
If the Govt wants me to sacrifice 1/60th of my remaining summer months then they can compensate me for them, an awful lot of my peers are thinking similarly. £5k should do it.
I thought Andy Burnham's measured approach to the Tories is the right tone...to things like HS2 and now Covid 19....
If Andy Burnham had won in 2015.......the last 5 years of British politics would have been profoundly different....for the Tories too...
Makes me even more angry with Corbyn et al....
Burnham should have tried to inspire the membership in 2015 and he might have won.
All candidates except Corbyn pivoted to austerity light.
I was going to vote Burnham until he joined YC and L4%K in dropping opposition to austerity.
Burnham massively overestimated LK's appeal, and massively underestimated Corbyn. He assumed the left had nowhere else to given Corbyn was evidently unelectable, and thought he needed to stop all LK's votes from transferring to YC in the final round. That was a pretty big mistake.
Yes L4%K only stayed in the contest as a favour to YC who begged her not to drop out otherwise she would have been seen as the right wing candidate which at the time she was desperate to avoid.
And Corbyn stayed in the contest to trash the party for a generation. No contest.
Corbyn came within a few thousand votes of becoming PM in 2017.
L4%K came within a few thousand votes of being forever known as L5%K
Corbyn took us back to the 1930s and gave us Boris for five years. He is without equal. Even the SDP left Labour in a stronger position.
The ironic thing is that Corbyn was ever only a pastiche of a socialist. A nostalgic relic from a bygone socialist utopia that never was.
To what do you attribute the fact he came within a few thousand votes of becoming PMin 2017 via the biggest increase in vote share since WW2.
His biggest failing was to allow Boris a Brexit election when almost everybody knew we would lose. The GE2019 Labour campaign was pathetic
He lost in 2017 and lost in 2019, leaving a mountain to climb. A total catastrophe. Corbyn = five wasted years, possibly more. Surprised you have courage to mention LK when you supported this disaster.
So you dont want to admit how close we came in 2017. Or who wanted Labour to go full out Remoan in 2019 Campaign.
We lost. Get it? L o s t. There is no runners up prize. No morale victory. Just a Tory government. That is it. Nothing to be proud of. Just failure.
We also L o s t in 2010 and 2015
Which is why Corbyns failures in 2017 and 2019 matter so much. The soonest that Labour can be in power at Westminster is May 2024, and that is a long way from certain.
That period of 2010 to 2024 will be the second longest period on the opposition benches ever, and if Labour fails to win in 2029, this stretches to the longest period ever.
That is the magnitude of how crap Corbyn has been.
Whether Starmer is Cameron or Kinnock determines whether it will be the former or the latter
The longer this lockdown goes on, the more people will choose that risk. Because they will be unemployable otherwise. Cooped up in their homes, which may not be nice at all. Living half a life.
We have already had anecdotes in the form of GideonWise (aged 33?) who has had this and survived it. The more anecodotes people hear from their friends the more they will go "yeah, I'll chance it." Particularly when those who have survived it are back at their jobs, socialising, and posting instagram from their holidays, while you're sat under house arrest, waiting for your next government handout.
I'm not sure that's the choice. I mean, *I'm* not under house arrest. OK, it's not a sure thing that this blessed state of affairs will continue but for now it looks promising. *You're* under house arrest, but that's because your government was too slow to do less disruptive things. I don't think it'll make that mistake again.
That said, I do think it's plausible that some places will just fail to contain this and give up, and some young people will end up just moving to those places.
Fair enough.
I see this purely as an expected value calculation.
Let's say I'm in my 30s and the doctor says if I am infected with this, I have a 1 in 500 chance of dying, or 0.2%. The alternative is spending the next 6 months effectively under house arrest.
Assuming I live to 80, 6 months = 0.6% of my life. If surviving and being immune means I can get backto my life as normal, an EV calculation says I am regaining 0.6% of my life for a 0.2% chance of dying, or a x 3 return. If this was a hand of poker, I'd be all in.
This calculation holds true for a 70 year old with a 10% chance of dying, by the way. Assuming they only live another 10 years and, being honest with themselves, the years 80+ aren't a fart in the wind worth living anyway.
How many more summers do any of us have? Those of us who want to take the risk should be allowed the risk. It's a self-regarding action and you can mitigate the possibility of harming others by enforced, supervised quarantine after deliberate infection.
The benefit to society is you add to herd immunity and become economically productive again. So a decision with positive externalities.
Running with the poker analogy, this doesn't seem like a bet that would tempt me.
Say the 30 year old's future expected 50 years of life is represented by his chip stack at £50. You are suggesting he gambles all of his £50 to gain 6 months of life, (which is 1% of his future expected life), so to win 50 pence. Now he is highly likely to win this round of poker, (99.8% likely if he only has 0.2% chance of dying. But compare the two possible outcomes.
1. He wins 50 pence, which makes negligible difference to him winning the overall poker game. 2. He's dead. He's out the game.
If 1000 poker players made your move in the same circumstances, 998 of them would end up marginally better off. But 2 of them would be out of the game. Before I commit all my chips to the pot I would want a better return than 50 pence.
The longer this lockdown goes on, the more people will choose that risk. Because they will be unemployable otherwise. Cooped up in their homes, which may not be nice at all. Living half a life.
We have already had anecdotes in the form of GideonWise (aged 33?) who has had this and survived it. The more anecodotes people hear from their friends the more they will go "yeah, I'll chance it." Particularly when those who have survived it are back at their jobs, socialising, and posting instagram from their holidays, while you're sat under house arrest, waiting for your next government handout.
I'm not sure that's the choice. I mean, *I'm* not under house arrest. OK, it's not a sure thing that this blessed state of affairs will continue but for now it looks promising. *You're* under house arrest, but that's because your government was too slow to do less disruptive things. I don't think it'll make that mistake again.
That said, I do think it's plausible that some places will just fail to contain this and give up, and some young people will end up just moving to those places.
Fair enough.
I see this purely as an expected value calculation.
Let's say I'm in my 30s and the doctor says if I am infected with this, I have a 1 in 500 chance of dying, or 0.2%. The alternative is spending the next 6 months effectively under house arrest.
Assuming I live to 80, 6 months = 0.6% of my life. If surviving and being immune means I can get backto my life as normal, an EV calculation says I am regaining 0.6% of my life for a 0.2% chance of dying, or a x 3 return. If this was a hand of poker, I'd be all in.
This calculation holds true for a 70 year old with a 10% chance of dying, by the way. Assuming they only live another 10 years and, being honest with themselves, the years 80+ aren't a fart in the wind worth living anyway.
How many more summers do any of us have? Those of us who want to take the risk should be allowed the risk. It's a self-regarding action and you can mitigate the possibility of harming others by enforced, supervised quarantine after deliberate infection.
The benefit to society is you add to herd immunity and become economically productive again. So a decision with positive externalities.
Running with the poker analogy, this doesn't seem like a bet that would tempt me.
Say the 30 year old's future expected 50 years of life is represented by his chip stack at £50. You are suggesting he gambles all of his £50 to gain 6 months of life, (which is 1% of his future expected life), so to win 50 pence. Now he is highly likely to win this round of poker, (99.8% likely if he only has 0.2% chance of dying. But compare the two possible outcomes.
1. He wins 50 pence, which makes negligible difference to him winning the overall poker game. 2. He's dead. He's out the game.
If 1000 poker players made your move in the same circumstances, 998 of them would end up marginally better off. But 2 of them would be out of the game. Before I commit all my chips to the pot I would want a better return than 50 pence.
I understand your point. Usually if you're going "all in" you expect to double through at least. And betting with one's life is very much all in. EV works best when averaged out over a thousand hands, it's rather different when playing one hand wrong means you're "out of the game" so to speak.
But of course, betting with one's life is also different in that each existing year may be said to have declining value (youth fades, plus the chances of dying of something else must be factored in year on year), not to mention the chances of catching this thing whether you deliberately infect yourself or not. If you have a 50% chance of getting it in the next year anyway, why not get it now to guarantee 6 months back?
There are also other factors to add in, e.g. if none of us work for the next six months we lose our jobs and the economy tanks, leading to a reduced quality of life for the immediate future.
It's a complex calculation that I simplified to EV terms to show that it is a bet with positive returns.
My point is that many people will be looking at what we are sacrificing under lockdown and going "this isn't worth it". And the longer we are locked down (with all its associated social and economic consequences), the greater that number will be.
Foxy said that, "The test is only 70% sensitive. So 1 time in three it gives an all clear incorrectly."
That's only true in people who have got the infection. Sensitivity is the % of people who have got the infection who test positive. It is independent of prevalence. We don't actually know whether Foxy has got the infection or not.
Without knowing whether Foxy has got the infection or not, all we can seek to comment on is the test's predictive value. But nor do we know the Negative Predictive Value of Foxy's test because this depends on the prevalence of the infection - and this is currently unknown.
The longer this lockdown goes on, the more people will choose that risk. Because they will be unemployable otherwise. Cooped up in their homes, which may not be nice at all. Living half a life.
We have already had anecdotes in the form of GideonWise (aged 33?) who has had this and survived it. The more anecodotes people hear from their friends the more they will go "yeah, I'll chance it." Particularly when those who have survived it are back at their jobs, socialising, and posting instagram from their holidays, while you're sat under house arrest, waiting for your next government handout.
I'm not sure that's the choice. I mean, *I'm* not under house arrest. OK, it's not a sure thing that this blessed state of affairs will continue but for now it looks promising. *You're* under house arrest, but that's because your government was too slow to do less disruptive things. I don't think it'll make that mistake again.
That said, I do think it's plausible that some places will just fail to contain this and give up, and some young people will end up just moving to those places.
Fair enough.
I see this purely as an expected value calculation.
Let's say I'm in my 30s and the doctor says if I am infected with this, I have a 1 in 500 chance of dying, or 0.2%. The alternative is spending the next 6 months effectively under house arrest.
Assuming I live to 80, 6 months = 0.6% of my life. If surviving and being immune means I can get backto my life as normal, an EV calculation says I am regaining 0.6% of my life for a 0.2% chance of dying, or a x 3 return. If this was a hand of poker, I'd be all in.
This calculation holds true for a 70 year old with a 10% chance of dying, by the way. Assuming they only live another 10 years and, being honest with themselves, the years 80+ aren't a fart in the wind worth living anyway.
How many more summers do any of us have? Those of us who want to take the risk should be allowed the risk. It's a self-regarding action and you can mitigate the possibility of harming others by enforced, supervised quarantine after deliberate infection.
The benefit to society is you add to herd immunity and become economically productive again. So a decision with positive externalities.
Running with the poker analogy, this doesn't seem like a bet that would tempt me.
Say the 30 year old's future expected 50 years of life is represented by his chip stack at £50. You are suggesting he gambles all of his £50 to gain 6 months of life, (which is 1% of his future expected life), so to win 50 pence. Now he is highly likely to win this round of poker, (99.8% likely if he only has 0.2% chance of dying. But compare the two possible outcomes.
1. He wins 50 pence, which makes negligible difference to him winning the overall poker game. 2. He's dead. He's out the game.
If 1000 poker players made your move in the same circumstances, 998 of them would end up marginally better off. But 2 of them would be out of the game. Before I commit all my chips to the pot I would want a better return than 50 pence.
I understand your point. Usually if you're going "all in" you expect to double through at least. And betting with one's life is very much all in. EV works best when averaged out over a thousand hands, it's rather different when playing one hand wrong means you're "out of the game" so to speak.
But of course, betting with one's life is also different in that each existing year may be said to have declining value (youth fades, plus the chances of dying of something else must be factored in year on year), not to mention the chances of catching this thing whether you deliberately infect yourself or not. If you have a 50% chance of getting it in the next year anyway, why not get it now to guarantee 6 months back?
There are also other factors to add in, e.g. if none of us work for the next six months we lose our jobs and the economy tanks, leading to a reduced quality of life for the immediate future.
It's a complex calculation that I simplified to EV terms to show that it is a bet with positive returns.
My point is that many people will be looking at what we are sacrificing under lockdown and going "this isn't worth it". And the longer we are locked down (with all its associated social and economic consequences), the greater that number will be.
All fair points in response! Interesting discussion.
Hypothetically, if we could eliminate Covid-19 from Great Britain, while the pandemic is still going on in the rest of the world, we could carry on as normal with very tight quarantine and testing protocols for anyone arriving into the country.
The longer this lockdown goes on, the more people will choose that risk. Because they will be unemployable otherwise. Cooped up in their homes, which may not be nice at all. Living half a life.
We have already had anecdotes in the form of GideonWise (aged 33?) who has had this and survived it. The more anecodotes people hear from their friends the more they will go "yeah, I'll chance it." Particularly when those who have survived it are back at their jobs, socialising, and posting instagram from their holidays, while you're sat under house arrest, waiting for your next government handout.
I'm not sure that's the choice. I mean, *I'm* not under house arrest. OK, it's not a sure thing that this blessed state of affairs will continue but for now it looks promising. *You're* under house arrest, but that's because your government was too slow to do less disruptive things. I don't think it'll make that mistake again.
That said, I do think it's plausible that some places will just fail to contain this and give up, and some young people will end up just moving to those places.
Fair enough.
I see this purely as an expected value calculation.
Let's say I'm in my 30s and the doctor says if I am infected with this, I have a 1 in 500 chance of dying, or 0.2%. The alternative is spending the next 6 months effectively under house arrest.
Assuming I live to 80, 6 months = 0.6% of my life. If surviving and being immune means I can get backto my life as normal, an EV calculation says I am regaining 0.6% of my life for a 0.2% chance of dying, or a x 3 return. If this was a hand of poker, I'd be all in.
This calculation holds true for a 70 year old with a 10% chance of dying, by the way. Assuming they only live another 10 years and, being honest with themselves, the years 80+ aren't a fart in the wind worth living anyway.
How many more summers do any of us have? Those of us who want to take the risk should be allowed the risk. It's a self-regarding action and you can mitigate the possibility of harming others by enforced, supervised quarantine after deliberate infection.
The benefit to society is you add to herd immunity and become economically productive again. So a decision with positive externalities.
Running with the poker analogy, this doesn't seem like a bet that would tempt me.
Say the 30 year old's future expected 50 years of life is represented by his chip stack at £50. You are suggesting he gambles all of his £50 to gain 6 months of life, (which is 1% of his future expected life), so to win 50 pence. Now he is highly likely to win this round of poker, (99.8% likely if he only has 0.2% chance of dying. But compare the two possible outcomes.
1. He wins 50 pence, which makes negligible difference to him winning the overall poker game. 2. He's dead. He's out the game.
If 1000 poker players made your move in the same circumstances, 998 of them would end up marginally better off. But 2 of them would be out of the game. Before I commit all my chips to the pot I would want a better return than 50 pence.
I understand your point. Usually if you're going "all in" you expect to double through at least. And betting with one's life is very much all in. EV works best when averaged out over a thousand hands, it's rather different when playing one hand wrong means you're "out of the game" so to speak.
But of course, betting with one's life is also different in that each existing year may be said to have declining value (youth fades, plus the chances of dying of something else must be factored in year on year), not to mention the chances of catching this thing whether you deliberately infect yourself or not. If you have a 50% chance of getting it in the next year anyway, why not get it now to guarantee 6 months back?
There are also other factors to add in, e.g. if none of us work for the next six months we lose our jobs and the economy tanks, leading to a reduced quality of life for the immediate future.
It's a complex calculation that I simplified to EV terms to show that it is a bet with positive returns.
My point is that many people will be looking at what we are sacrificing under lockdown and going "this isn't worth it". And the longer we are locked down (with all its associated social and economic consequences), the greater that number will be.
All fair points in response! Interesting discussion.
:-)
Indeed. I love that I can have chats like this on PB - keeps me sane during this awful time
Police chiefs are drawing up new guidance warning forces not to overreach their lockdown enforcement powers after withering criticism of controversial tactics deployed to stop the spread of coronavirus, the Guardian has learned.
The intervention comes amid growing concern that some forces are going beyond their legal powers to stop the spread of Covid-19, with one issuing a summons to a household for shopping for non-essential items and another telling locals that exercise was “limited to an hour a day”.
...
The source of confusion for frontline officers appears to be a gap between what the emergency legislation actually orders and what the government has said it wants people to do.
Why the fuck do they need new guidance? For crying out loud. All the twits need to do is print off the bloody regulations - you know the actual laws - and give them to each police officer and tell them to read them.
Christ Almighty!! Give me Zoom and half an hour and I could explain the blasted things to them - if understanding plain bloody English is beyond them.
There does seem to be a fairly widespread confusion about the difference between the regulations and the government advice (or officers’ particular interpretation of it). I’m not even sure all of them realise that they are not the same thing.
(OTOH, were there widespread flouting of the advice, but within the regulations, the latter would probably be extended quite quickly.)
If police officers do not understand the difference between the law and advice they have no business being police officers frankly. This is basic stuff.
The regulations are written in pretty clear English on a page and a bit. What needs to be hammered home is that their purpose is to keep people apart as much as possible so as to avoid / reduce the risk of infection.
Keep that purpose in mind when out - and you can’t really go wrong.
I agree with all of that. The quality of policing appears to vary quite widely.
A fairly heated debate seems to be taking place in Sweden.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/30/catastrophe-sweden-coronavirus-stoicism-lockdown-europe ...Panic, though, is exactly what many within Sweden’s scientific and medical community are starting to feel. A petition signed by more than 2,000 doctors, scientists, and professors last week – including the chairman of the Nobel Foundation, Prof Carl-Henrik Heldin – called on the government to introduce more stringent containment measures. “We’re not testing enough, we’re not tracking, we’re not isolating enough – we have let the virus loose,” said Prof Cecilia Söderberg-Nauclér, a virus immunology researcher at the Karolinska Institute. “They are leading us to catastrophe.”
Strong words, but stoicism is a way of life here, as is unflappability. A 300-year history of efficient and transparent public administration, and high levels of trust in experts and governing officials, have left the public inclined to believe what they are told, and that those doing the telling have their best interests at heart.
“I trust that the doctors working with the government know what they are doing, so I suppose we’re as well prepared as we can be,” Robert Andersson, 50, a vendor manager in IT who lives in Södermalm, Stockholm, said. “This ‘hysteria’ that the media is launching is far more dangerous than the virus itself.”...
Hypothetically, if we could eliminate Covid-19 from Great Britain, while the pandemic is still going on in the rest of the world, we could carry on as normal with very tight quarantine and testing protocols for anyone arriving into the country.
Hypothetically, if we could eliminate Covid-19 from Great Britain, while the pandemic is still going on in the rest of the world, we could carry on as normal with very tight quarantine and testing protocols for anyone arriving into the country.
You would have to extend that quarantine to cover everyone in the international transport / freight sector. Given what we learnt during Brexit about the importance of the Dover-Calais trade link, is that at all practical?
India does appear to have made a real mess of their lockdown, announcing it overnight, and making little provision to mitigate any effects it might have. Five million truck drivers stranded by the roadside, for example. It’s such a large place it’s very difficult to get any sense of the size of the mess, but it does not sound good, at all.
Might they have been better off carrying on as normal ?
Hypothetically, if we could eliminate Covid-19 from Great Britain, while the pandemic is still going on in the rest of the world, we could carry on as normal with very tight quarantine and testing protocols for anyone arriving into the country.
Are you suddenly in favour of national borders? You are learning a lot of new words, Humphrey!
Hypothetically, if we could eliminate Covid-19 from Great Britain, while the pandemic is still going on in the rest of the world, we could carry on as normal with very tight quarantine and testing protocols for anyone arriving into the country.
You'd need the test to be infallible.
If the quarantine is infallible then you don't need any testing at all.
The simple fact of the matter is Boris and the Tories are unelectable now after the mess they have made of covid 19. Just the like coming US election is anyone but Trump, all UK elections next ten years will be anyone but Boris and the Tories, no real scrutiny of the opposition getting the votes.
Five clear categories of failure.
Planning and contingency for such an occurrence on a party in power a decade. Nursing numbers, ventilators, and training in this category.
Wasting time. we were weeks ahead of Italy, frittered that time and cost lives playing politics. Government clearly split, Ideological herd immunity v science and threat to nhs. Muddled comms.
The governments failure on testing is unwillingness to learn from other countries. Instead of quickly using a network of public and private laboratories, the UK used just one lab — Public Health England’s Colindale facility in north London, which was processing about 500 tests a day.
We don’t know the route cause of governments PPE failure yet. But is there still a patchy picture in NHS frontline? And and what of nursing and staff in care homes, if the government has a policy to protect them they have a funny way of sharing it.
It’s clear the Economic response, as well as being pro state employee and anti free enterprise and entrepreneurship is so divisive, is unaffordable and unworkable compared to the promises being made.
Lindell then offered advice to families stuck at home because of various social-distancing guidelines: “I encourage you to use this time at home to get back in the Word, read our Bibles and spend time with our families.”
“Our president gave us so much hope. Where just a few short months ago, we had the best economy, the lowest unemployment, and wages going up, it was amazing,” he continued, as Trump stood behind him expressionless. “With our great president, vice president and this administration and all the great people in this country praying daily, we will get through this and get back to a place that’s stronger and safer than ever.”
Hypothetically, if we could eliminate Covid-19 from Great Britain, while the pandemic is still going on in the rest of the world, we could carry on as normal with very tight quarantine and testing protocols for anyone arriving into the country.
Depends on the iceberg I guess. We're debating blind at the moment.
Hypothetically, if we could eliminate Covid-19 from Great Britain, while the pandemic is still going on in the rest of the world, we could carry on as normal with very tight quarantine and testing protocols for anyone arriving into the country.
You would have to extend that quarantine to cover everyone in the international transport / freight sector. Given what we learnt during Brexit about the importance of the Dover-Calais trade link, is that at all practical?
Quite apart from it having to apply to Ireland.
You could have some kind of cordon sanitaire at ports so freight personnel would have to hand over to local certified virus-free people.
A fairly heated debate seems to be taking place in Sweden.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/30/catastrophe-sweden-coronavirus-stoicism-lockdown-europe ...Panic, though, is exactly what many within Sweden’s scientific and medical community are starting to feel. A petition signed by more than 2,000 doctors, scientists, and professors last week – including the chairman of the Nobel Foundation, Prof Carl-Henrik Heldin – called on the government to introduce more stringent containment measures. “We’re not testing enough, we’re not tracking, we’re not isolating enough – we have let the virus loose,” said Prof Cecilia Söderberg-Nauclér, a virus immunology researcher at the Karolinska Institute. “They are leading us to catastrophe.”
Strong words, but stoicism is a way of life here, as is unflappability. A 300-year history of efficient and transparent public administration, and high levels of trust in experts and governing officials, have left the public inclined to believe what they are told, and that those doing the telling have their best interests at heart.
“I trust that the doctors working with the government know what they are doing, so I suppose we’re as well prepared as we can be,” Robert Andersson, 50, a vendor manager in IT who lives in Södermalm, Stockholm, said. “This ‘hysteria’ that the media is launching is far more dangerous than the virus itself.”...
Not seeing much sign of “heated debate” among ordinary Swedes. Most people seem pretty relaxed about government policy, thus far. Mind you, “heated debate” is a very un-Swedish concept.
What is worrying many people is the mass-redundancies and short-time working. The young are nearly always the first to go under Swedish labour law, and they are paying a terrible price. This could have long-term mental health implications for a whole generation.
Our lives continue much as normal: the adults go to work and have dinner parties, the children go to school, play with the neighbours and train football and ice hockey. Education is distance-only for ages 16+, and there are some minor restrictions. All our theatre bookings have been moved til the autumn and the sports shows are all away (which has zero effect on my life).
We had haircuts last week, nipped in to renew a passport, grilled burgers in the sun with friends, took as many walks as we liked without police action, went to dentist.
Pension funds have gone down, but as we have significant chunks in gold, we’re not too concerned. And we personally have a significant period of investment left until using the capital. Our adult children are getting a valuable lesson in funds, risk-taking and investment period. The housing market has not been hit, yet, but few properties are out on the market.
I’m away for a shower and then work, and my wife and one adult child will be doing the same soon. Life goes on.
By the way, someone up post posted a fascinating link to an oup article on an epidemic in 1916-1930, something lethargica: thank you, but now I cannot find your post! But this bit confuses me: I just cannot work out what this “Rafania” was in Sweden in the 18th century. Googled a complete blank.
“ Although encephalitis lethargica was first officially recognized as a separate disease entity in 1917, Crookshank (1918) identified several historical epidemics that resembled encephalitis lethargica, including the English sweats (England, 1529), mal mazzuco (Italy, 1597), Kriebelkrankheit (Germany, 1672–75), Rafania (Sweden, 1754–57), and nona (Italy, 1890–91).”
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Round here I am fairly sure mosques and madrassas have closed. I've not checked but have not seen the usual crowds streaming out of them.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
seen something on facebook….might be better to check the facts.
Supermarkets' just-in-time delivery models, and Covid-19: an interesting article from Wired UK:
Aisles were bare and panic buying gripped the nation. Or so we thought.
The data shows something else was going on. Analysis by market insights firm Kantar found that a significant number of customers were just adding a few extra items to their shop had managed to break the typically well-oiled system. The impact from that very small increase in demand from every single shopper early on showed just how poorly prepared supermarkets were for what was about to come. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/stockpiling-supermarkets-coronavirus
If 50% of people got it, and 1% of infected died, that's 55,000 deaths.
Based on the figures we are now seeing in Europe that is a conservative estimate, although probably in the right ballpark.
I could believe it is worse in Wuhan - because of the terrible air quality degrading lungs there, for decade after decade. As it has done with Italian lungs in the smogs of the Po Valley.
The Chinese and the Italians need to make the push for electric cars. Like, now.
It will be fascinating to overlay CV-19 hotspots with air quality. I have long said on here I felt there was a close link. I have grave worries for places like Delhi and Jakarta too. Sweden has one of Europe's lowest levels of air pollution - maybe they will get away with going for herd immunity if I'm right.
On the real numbers of deaths in Wuhan, I wonder what our security services were hearing - and when. I imagine a detailed briefing at COBRA that the Chinese numbers were unreliable - by orders of magnitude - would have instantly changed the course of the Govt. response. Out goes herd immunity on old assumptions, in comes lockdown on new ones.
A fairly heated debate seems to be taking place in Sweden.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/30/catastrophe-sweden-coronavirus-stoicism-lockdown-europe ...Panic, though, is exactly what many within Sweden’s scientific and medical community are starting to feel. A petition signed by more than 2,000 doctors, scientists, and professors last week – including the chairman of the Nobel Foundation, Prof Carl-Henrik Heldin – called on the government to introduce more stringent containment measures. “We’re not testing enough, we’re not tracking, we’re not isolating enough – we have let the virus loose,” said Prof Cecilia Söderberg-Nauclér, a virus immunology researcher at the Karolinska Institute. “They are leading us to catastrophe.”
Strong words, but stoicism is a way of life here, as is unflappability. A 300-year history of efficient and transparent public administration, and high levels of trust in experts and governing officials, have left the public inclined to believe what they are told, and that those doing the telling have their best interests at heart.
“I trust that the doctors working with the government know what they are doing, so I suppose we’re as well prepared as we can be,” Robert Andersson, 50, a vendor manager in IT who lives in Södermalm, Stockholm, said. “This ‘hysteria’ that the media is launching is far more dangerous than the virus itself.”...
Not seeing much sign of “heated debate” among ordinary Swedes. Most people seem pretty relaxed about government policy, thus far. Mind you, “heated debate” is a very un-Swedish concept.
What is worrying many people is the mass-redundancies and short-time working. The young are nearly always the first to go under Swedish labour law, and they are paying a terrible price. This could have long-term mental health implications for a whole generation.
Our lives continue much as normal: the adults go to work and have dinner parties, the children go to school, play with the neighbours and train football and ice hockey. Education is distance-only for ages 16+, and there are some minor restrictions. All our theatre bookings have been moved til the autumn and the sports shows are all away (which has zero effect on my life).
We had haircuts last week, nipped in to renew a passport, grilled burgers in the sun with friends, took as many walks as we liked without police action, went to dentist.
Pension funds have gone down, but as we have significant chunks in gold, we’re not too concerned. And we personally have a significant period of investment left until using the capital. Our adult children are getting a valuable lesson in funds, risk-taking and investment period. The housing market has not been hit, yet, but few properties are out on the market.
I’m away for a shower and then work, and my wife and one adult child will be doing the same soon. Life goes on.
By the way, someone up post posted a fascinating link to an oup article on an epidemic in 1916-1930, something lethargica: thank you, but now I cannot find your post! But this bit confuses me: I just cannot work out what this “Rafania” was in Sweden in the 18th century. Googled a complete blank.
“ Although encephalitis lethargica was first officially recognized as a separate disease entity in 1917, Crookshank (1918) identified several historical epidemics that resembled encephalitis lethargica, including the English sweats (England, 1529), mal mazzuco (Italy, 1597), Kriebelkrankheit (Germany, 1672–75), Rafania (Sweden, 1754–57), and nona (Italy, 1890–91).”
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
But you decided to spread the rumour around on another forum before checking.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
seen something on facebook….might be better to check the facts.
If 50% of people got it, and 1% of infected died, that's 55,000 deaths.
Based on the figures we are now seeing in Europe that is a conservative estimate, although probably in the right ballpark.
I could believe it is worse in Wuhan - because of the terrible air quality degrading lungs there, for decade after decade. As it has done with Italian lungs in the smogs of the Po Valley.
The Chinese and the Italians need to make the push for electric cars. Like, now.
It will be fascinating to overlay CV-19 hotspots with air quality. I have long said on here I felt there was a close link. I have grave worries for places like Delhi and Jakarta too. Sweden has one of Europe's lowest levels of air pollution - maybe they will get away with going for herd immunity if I'm right.
On the real numbers of deaths in Wuhan, I wonder what our security services were hearing - and when. I imagine a detailed briefing at COBRA that the Chinese numbers were unreliable - by orders of magnitude - would have instantly changed the course of the Govt. response. Out goes herd immunity on old assumptions, in comes lockdown on new ones.
Was it not Italian data combined with knowledge of the NHS's limited capacity that forced the change? It may be that when the new equipment reaches hospitals, along with faster tests, not least for staff, that we can move back. Herd immunity is what we need; the question is how we get there.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
But you decided to spread the rumour around on another forum before checking.
No - try reading what I wrote. I used this forum which I trust to check. #stalker.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Religious services do seem particularly deadly - closed spaces, lots of people in close proximity, singing which projects droplets all over the place. The high ceilings they traditionally have make sense though...
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Religious services do seem particularly deadly - closed spaces, lots of people in close proximity, singing which projects droplets all over the place. The high ceilings they traditionally have make sense though...
Good. I knew I'd get a sensible repsonse from someone on here double -quick.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Religious services do seem particularly deadly - closed spaces, lots of people in close proximity, singing which projects droplets all over the place. The high ceilings they traditionally have make sense though...
Good. I knew I'd get a sensible repsonse from someone on here double -quick.
You might have made the effort yourself, of course.
According to an undisclosed government document, on Dec. 17 two dozen leading South Korean infectious diseases specialists tackled a worrying scenario: a South Korean family contracts pneumonia after a trip to China, where cases of an unidentified disease had arisen.
The hypothetical disease quickly spreads among the colleagues of the family members and medical workers who treated them. In response, the team of experts at the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC) developed an algorithm to find the pathogen and its origin, as well as testing techniques.
Those measures were mobilized in real life when a first suspected coronavirus patient appeared in South Korea on Jan. 20, the document said.
"Looking back over the past 20 years, humans were most tormented by either influenza or coronaviruses, and we're relatively doing well on influenza but had been worried about the possibility of the outbreak of a novel coronavirus," said Lee Sang-won, one of the KCDC experts who led the drill....
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Religious services do seem particularly deadly - closed spaces, lots of people in close proximity, singing which projects droplets all over the place. The high ceilings they traditionally have make sense though...
Good. I knew I'd get a sensible repsonse from someone on here double -quick.
You might have made the effort yourself, of course.
I believe this has proven quicker with the added benefit of other revealing comments like yours. Thank you so much.
If 50% of people got it, and 1% of infected died, that's 55,000 deaths.
Based on the figures we are now seeing in Europe that is a conservative estimate, although probably in the right ballpark.
I could believe it is worse in Wuhan - because of the terrible air quality degrading lungs there, for decade after decade. As it has done with Italian lungs in the smogs of the Po Valley.
The Chinese and the Italians need to make the push for electric cars. Like, now.
It will be fascinating to overlay CV-19 hotspots with air quality. I have long said on here I felt there was a close link. I have grave worries for places like Delhi and Jakarta too. Sweden has one of Europe's lowest levels of air pollution - maybe they will get away with going for herd immunity if I'm right.
On the real numbers of deaths in Wuhan, I wonder what our security services were hearing - and when. I imagine a detailed briefing at COBRA that the Chinese numbers were unreliable - by orders of magnitude - would have instantly changed the course of the Govt. response. Out goes herd immunity on old assumptions, in comes lockdown on new ones.
Was it not Italian data combined with knowledge of the NHS's limited capacity that forced the change? It may be that when the new equipment reaches hospitals, along with faster tests, not least for staff, that we can move back. Herd immunity is what we need; the question is how we get there.
I think the Italian numbers spooked a Govt. that had been inclined to believe the Chinese numbers - until Italy's indicated they must be plain wrong. An NHS that might just have coped on the Chinese numbers turned into one that stood no chance on Italy's.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
All synagogues that I am aware of are closed for the foreseeable future. The caveat is that most of the ones near me are subject to some sort of centralised authority, and it's therefore easier to control what they do. Some organisations were slower than others, and smaller independent institutions have a bigger problem in that there's no one to tell them what to do, so they each had to feel their own way forward. It therefore took longer than it should have to shut down, and now the death toll is rising as a result.
I would imagine a similar situation for the mosques, with the note that they typically are more fragmented due to the broader nature of the community, so coordinating a shutdown may have taken longer (especially in the absence of clear guidance from government).
The virus has in general hit religious communities hard: religious leaders are almost as good a vector as politicians (they shake a lot of hands and visit lots of sick people) and our instincts when bad news hits is to organise prayer meetings. Which, in this case is exactly the worst thing possible. There also tends to be some embedded mistrust of government in the more insular end of communities. The first few deaths help overcome that, but there's then a while to go before the effects feed through.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
All synagogues that I am aware of are closed for the foreseeable future. The caveat is that most of the ones near me are subject to some sort of centralised authority, and it's therefore easier to control what they do. Some organisations were slower than others, and smaller independent institutions have a bigger problem in that there's no one to tell them what to do, so they each had to feel their own way forward. It therefore took longer than it should have to shut down, and now the death toll is rising as a result.
I would imagine a similar situation for the mosques, with the note that they typically are more fragmented due to the broader nature of the community, so coordinating a shutdown may have taken longer (especially in the absence of clear guidance from government).
The virus has in general hit religious communities hard: religious leaders are almost as good a vector as politicians (they shake a lot of hands and visit lots of sick people) and our instincts when bad news hits is to organise prayer meetings. Which, in this case is exactly the worst thing possible. There also tends to be some embedded mistrust of government in the more insular end of communities. The first few deaths help overcome that, but there's then a while to go before the effects feed through.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Religious services do seem particularly deadly - closed spaces, lots of people in close proximity, singing which projects droplets all over the place. The high ceilings they traditionally have make sense though...
It was reported 21st March that "Over 375 mosques across the U.K. have suspended congregations, including traditional Friday prayers, due to the coronavirus pandemic, the Muslim Council of Britain said Friday." This seemed to include the very largest mosques.
But there are around 1,700 mosques in the UK. It is possible some smaller ones are still operating.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Religious services do seem particularly deadly - closed spaces, lots of people in close proximity, singing which projects droplets all over the place. The high ceilings they traditionally have make sense though...
Good. I knew I'd get a sensible repsonse from someone on here double -quick.
You might have made the effort yourself, of course.
I believe this has proven quicker with the added benefit of other revealing comments like yours. Thank you so much.
You’re welcome. No harm in asking the question (and the point about informed responses like Endillion’s is a fair one) - but also no harm in making some effort yourself.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Religious services do seem particularly deadly - closed spaces, lots of people in close proximity, singing which projects droplets all over the place. The high ceilings they traditionally have make sense though...
Good. I knew I'd get a sensible repsonse from someone on here double -quick.
You might have made the effort yourself, of course.
I believe this has proven quicker with the added benefit of other revealing comments like yours. Thank you so much.
You’re welcome. No harm in asking the question - but also no harm in making some effort yourself.
Once again thank you - your kindness overwhelms me.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
All synagogues that I am aware of are closed for the foreseeable future. The caveat is that most of the ones near me are subject to some sort of centralised authority, and it's therefore easier to control what they do. Some organisations were slower than others, and smaller independent institutions have a bigger problem in that there's no one to tell them what to do, so they each had to feel their own way forward. It therefore took longer than it should have to shut down, and now the death toll is rising as a result.
I would imagine a similar situation for the mosques, with the note that they typically are more fragmented due to the broader nature of the community, so coordinating a shutdown may have taken longer (especially in the absence of clear guidance from government).
The virus has in general hit religious communities hard: religious leaders are almost as good a vector as politicians (they shake a lot of hands and visit lots of sick people) and our instincts when bad news hits is to organise prayer meetings. Which, in this case is exactly the worst thing possible. There also tends to be some embedded mistrust of government in the more insular end of communities. The first few deaths help overcome that, but there's then a while to go before the effects feed through.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
All synagogues that I am aware of are closed for the foreseeable future. The caveat is that most of the ones near me are subject to some sort of centralised authority, and it's therefore easier to control what they do. Some organisations were slower than others, and smaller independent institutions have a bigger problem in that there's no one to tell them what to do, so they each had to feel their own way forward. It therefore took longer than it should have to shut down, and now the death toll is rising as a result.
I would imagine a similar situation for the mosques, with the note that they typically are more fragmented due to the broader nature of the community, so coordinating a shutdown may have taken longer (especially in the absence of clear guidance from government).
The virus has in general hit religious communities hard: religious leaders are almost as good a vector as politicians (they shake a lot of hands and visit lots of sick people) and our instincts when bad news hits is to organise prayer meetings. Which, in this case is exactly the worst thing possible. There also tends to be some embedded mistrust of government in the more insular end of communities. The first few deaths help overcome that, but there's then a while to go before the effects feed through.
Interesting. It shows however that Facebook continues to be a very unreliable source for news and information. I had understood they were trying to clean up their act. Clearly not.
India does appear to have made a real mess of their lockdown, announcing it overnight, and making little provision to mitigate any effects it might have. Five million truck drivers stranded by the roadside, for example. It’s such a large place it’s very difficult to get any sense of the size of the mess, but it does not sound good, at all.
Might they have been better off carrying on as normal ?
India's going to be an utter sh!t-show, a very densely packed population without the social rules or healthcare systems of China. Their best chance is going to be to close major roads and airports, and hope to contain it within certain cities. Probably too late for that though.
Supermarkets' just-in-time delivery models, and Covid-19: an interesting article from Wired UK:
Aisles were bare and panic buying gripped the nation. Or so we thought.
The data shows something else was going on. Analysis by market insights firm Kantar found that a significant number of customers were just adding a few extra items to their shop had managed to break the typically well-oiled system. The impact from that very small increase in demand from every single shopper early on showed just how poorly prepared supermarkets were for what was about to come. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/stockpiling-supermarkets-coronavirus
That might help to explain the relative lack of empty shelves around here. I'm pretty sure the supermarkets on cologne have a much less efficient stocking operation. Plus they have been given special permission to run lorries on Sundays which gives them a bit of extra capacity. They've also been given special permission to open on Sundays but so far as I know none have.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
All synagogues that I am aware of are closed for the foreseeable future. The caveat is that most of the ones near me are subject to some sort of centralised authority, and it's therefore easier to control what they do. Some organisations were slower than others, and smaller independent institutions have a bigger problem in that there's no one to tell them what to do, so they each had to feel their own way forward. It therefore took longer than it should have to shut down, and now the death toll is rising as a result.
I would imagine a similar situation for the mosques, with the note that they typically are more fragmented due to the broader nature of the community, so coordinating a shutdown may have taken longer (especially in the absence of clear guidance from government).
The virus has in general hit religious communities hard: religious leaders are almost as good a vector as politicians (they shake a lot of hands and visit lots of sick people) and our instincts when bad news hits is to organise prayer meetings. Which, in this case is exactly the worst thing possible. There also tends to be some embedded mistrust of government in the more insular end of communities. The first few deaths help overcome that, but there's then a while to go before the effects feed through.
That guidance came into effect on 23 March. My synagogue closed with immediate effect on 17 March, and I know of some others that closed even earlier (usually in response to someone falling ill). Regardless of the (valid) debate around whether stricter policies would have been as effective if implemented earlier, I probably know at least one person who'd still be alive if the guidance had come earlier.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Religious services do seem particularly deadly - closed spaces, lots of people in close proximity, singing which projects droplets all over the place. The high ceilings they traditionally have make sense though...
It was reported 21st March that "Over 375 mosques across the U.K. have suspended congregations, including traditional Friday prayers, due to the coronavirus pandemic, the Muslim Council of Britain said Friday." This seemed to include the very largest mosques.
But there are around 1,700 mosques in the UK. It is possible some smaller ones are still operating.
Possible but unlikely else someone would have grassed them up to the rozzers. We might not be able to see inside a mosque, church, synagogue or temple but we would be able to see congregations arriving and departing.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Religious services do seem particularly deadly - closed spaces, lots of people in close proximity, singing which projects droplets all over the place. The high ceilings they traditionally have make sense though...
It was reported 21st March that "Over 375 mosques across the U.K. have suspended congregations, including traditional Friday prayers, due to the coronavirus pandemic, the Muslim Council of Britain said Friday." This seemed to include the very largest mosques.
But there are around 1,700 mosques in the UK. It is possible some smaller ones are still operating.
Possible but unlikely else someone would have grassed them up to the rozzers. We might not be able to see inside a mosque, church, synagogue or temple but we would be able to see congregations arriving and departing.
The other factor is the extent to which pop-up services start in people's houses once the formal ones are cancelled. There was fierce debate in some of my WhatsApp groups as to whether it was ok to hold them in wide open spaces if everyone stayed two metres apart. Conclusion was eventually, no, but I've no doubt this wasn't universal.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Religious services do seem particularly deadly - closed spaces, lots of people in close proximity, singing which projects droplets all over the place. The high ceilings they traditionally have make sense though...
It was reported 21st March that "Over 375 mosques across the U.K. have suspended congregations, including traditional Friday prayers, due to the coronavirus pandemic, the Muslim Council of Britain said Friday." This seemed to include the very largest mosques.
But there are around 1,700 mosques in the UK. It is possible some smaller ones are still operating.
Possible but unlikely else someone would have grassed them up to the rozzers. We might not be able to see inside a mosque, church, synagogue or temple but we would be able to see congregations arriving and departing.
The other factor is the extent to which pop-up services start in people's houses once the formal ones are cancelled. There was fierce debate in some of my WhatsApp groups as to whether it was ok to hold them in wide open spaces if everyone stayed two metres apart. Conclusion was eventually, no, but I've no doubt this wasn't universal.
I gather a lot of streamed religious services are now available. It may be that seeing rabbis, vicars and imams entering buildings to broadcast these is what triggered the FB rumours. Or it could be trolls, possibly foreign.
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
Religious services do seem particularly deadly - closed spaces, lots of people in close proximity, singing which projects droplets all over the place. The high ceilings they traditionally have make sense though...
It was reported 21st March that "Over 375 mosques across the U.K. have suspended congregations, including traditional Friday prayers, due to the coronavirus pandemic, the Muslim Council of Britain said Friday." This seemed to include the very largest mosques.
But there are around 1,700 mosques in the UK. It is possible some smaller ones are still operating.
Possible but unlikely else someone would have grassed them up to the rozzers. We might not be able to see inside a mosque, church, synagogue or temple but we would be able to see congregations arriving and departing.
The other factor is the extent to which pop-up services start in people's houses once the formal ones are cancelled. There was fierce debate in some of my WhatsApp groups as to whether it was ok to hold them in wide open spaces if everyone stayed two metres apart. Conclusion was eventually, no, but I've no doubt this wasn't universal.
I gather a lot of streamed religious services are now available. It may be that seeing rabbis, vicars and imams entering buildings to broadcast these is what triggered the FB rumours. Or it could be trolls, possibly foreign.
Indeed, although in all cases I'm aware of they're being streamed from someone's living room. Can't see a good justification for someone leaving their house for that.
I have high blood pressure already so why on earth do I put myself in danger by watching Kay Burley on Sky News. More importantly why do they employ her!
Have seen something on Facebook that Mosques are still operating as normally. I believe churches and synagogues are closed - don't know about others. I have no idea what the guidance is but to me it seems unwise to put it mildly. On all sorts of levels surely better if, at this time, they all did the same thing. Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
All synagogues that I am aware of are closed for the foreseeable future. The caveat is that most of the ones near me are subject to some sort of centralised authority, and it's therefore easier to control what they do. Some organisations were slower than others, and smaller independent institutions have a bigger problem in that there's no one to tell them what to do, so they each had to feel their own way forward. It therefore took longer than it should have to shut down, and now the death toll is rising as a result.
I would imagine a similar situation for the mosques, with the note that they typically are more fragmented due to the broader nature of the community, so coordinating a shutdown may have taken longer (especially in the absence of clear guidance from government).
The virus has in general hit religious communities hard: religious leaders are almost as good a vector as politicians (they shake a lot of hands and visit lots of sick people) and our instincts when bad news hits is to organise prayer meetings. Which, in this case is exactly the worst thing possible. There also tends to be some embedded mistrust of government in the more insular end of communities. The first few deaths help overcome that, but there's then a while to go before the effects feed through.
Interesting. It shows however that Facebook continues to be a very unreliable source for news and information. I had understood they were trying to clean up their act. Clearly not.
FB (and other publishers) have two problems. One is an American commitment to free speech; but more important is the sheer scale of their operations with billions of updates a day, far too many for humans to police.
Having offloaded most of its world cruise passengers in Australia, the Queen Mary 2 is now carrying those unable to fly back to the UK, currently moored off Durban, South Africa. Yesterday a doctor was on board conducting virus tests, and social media indicates the captain has now written to all passengers saying there has been one positive result. Which is going to complicate the rest of their voyage somewhat. If it has, or does, spread beyond the single carrier, then we have a problem ship coming into Southampton mid April.
Having offloaded most of its world cruise passengers in Australia, the Queen Mary 2 is now carrying those unable to fly back to the UK, currently moored off Durban, South Africa. Yesterday a doctor was on board conducting virus tests, and social media indicates the captain has now written to all passengers saying there has been one positive result. Which is going to complicate the rest of their voyage somewhat. If it has, or does, spread beyond the single carrier, then we have a problem ship coming into Southampton mid April.
We have cruised regularly for past 10 years and absolutely loved it. We used to love the sense of relaxed safety we experienced. Staggering to watch the way the whole industry has been destroyed in a few months. I'm not sure we'll ever do it again now.
A fine bright Spring day here, ladies and gentlemen. If only I could really enjoy it ...... admittedly when it warms up a bit!
Mr B2's post has reminded me. Chap I see .....?saw..... at football and at the gym (happy days) ...... told me the last time we met that he and his wife were off on a 'trip of a .lifetime'; a cruise to Central America, including through the Panama Canal. I wonder what tales he'll have to tell when ...... if..... we ever meet again.
On a more positive note my wife was, on our walk yesterday, collecting pine cones to make Christmas decorations.
The simple fact of the matter is Boris and the Tories are unelectable now after the mess they have made of covid 19. Just the like coming US election is anyone but Trump, all UK elections next ten years will be anyone but Boris and the Tories, no real scrutiny of the opposition getting the votes.
Five clear categories of failure.
Planning and contingency for such an occurrence on a party in power a decade. Nursing numbers, ventilators, and training in this category.
Wasting time. we were weeks ahead of Italy, frittered that time and cost lives playing politics. Government clearly split, Ideological herd immunity v science and threat to nhs. Muddled comms.
The governments failure on testing is unwillingness to learn from other countries. Instead of quickly using a network of public and private laboratories, the UK used just one lab — Public Health England’s Colindale facility in north London, which was processing about 500 tests a day.
We don’t know the route cause of governments PPE failure yet. But is there still a patchy picture in NHS frontline? And and what of nursing and staff in care homes, if the government has a policy to protect them they have a funny way of sharing it.
It’s clear the Economic response, as well as being pro state employee and anti free enterprise and entrepreneurship is so divisive, is unaffordable and unworkable compared to the promises being made.
Strange the polls show the exact opposite.
TBF though, the polls mean nothing. Rawnsley was right at the weekend:
A fine bright Spring day here, ladies and gentlemen. If only I could really enjoy it ...... admittedly when it warms up a bit!
Mr B2's post has reminded me. Chap I see .....?saw..... at football and at the gym (happy days) ...... told me the last time we met that he and his wife were off on a 'trip of a .lifetime'; a cruise to Central America, including through the Panama Canal. I wonder what tales he'll have to tell when ...... if..... we ever meet again.
On a more positive note my wife was, on our walk yesterday, collecting pine cones to make Christmas decorations.
Collecting stuff for Xmas is an essential activity now?
If your friends used the Panama, it won’t have been the QM2. Although the original design specification was ‘short enough for Southampton, low enough for the New York Verrazano bridge, and narrow enough for the Panama Canal, the Carnival CEO insisted that half the cabins have balconies, and the only way they could accommodate this in a stable design was to make the ship wider, to carry the extra weight. So the QM2 is one of those ships that has to go round the bottom of South America.
The simple fact of the matter is Boris and the Tories are unelectable now after the mess they have made of covid 19. Just the like coming US election is anyone but Trump, all UK elections next ten years will be anyone but Boris and the Tories, no real scrutiny of the opposition getting the votes.
Five clear categories of failure.
Planning and contingency for such an occurrence on a party in power a decade. Nursing numbers, ventilators, and training in this category.
Wasting time. we were weeks ahead of Italy, frittered that time and cost lives playing politics. Government clearly split, Ideological herd immunity v science and threat to nhs. Muddled comms.
The governments failure on testing is unwillingness to learn from other countries. Instead of quickly using a network of public and private laboratories, the UK used just one lab — Public Health England’s Colindale facility in north London, which was processing about 500 tests a day.
We don’t know the route cause of governments PPE failure yet. But is there still a patchy picture in NHS frontline? And and what of nursing and staff in care homes, if the government has a policy to protect them they have a funny way of sharing it.
It’s clear the Economic response, as well as being pro state employee and anti free enterprise and entrepreneurship is so divisive, is unaffordable and unworkable compared to the promises being made.
Strange the polls show the exact opposite.
TBF though, the polls mean nothing. Rawnsley was right at the weekend:
The polls mean that the original post at this point in time is not supporterd by the evidence. Nothing more - or less. They are always subject to change on a daily basis. It is no coincidence or surprise that some on the left don't like what the polls say. Some have been driven mad already and are likening Boris to a Nazi, war criminal, dictator, while celebrating on here and elsewhere that Dominic Cummings has tested positive for a life threatening disease. Haters gonna hate.
Having offloaded most of its world cruise passengers in Australia, the Queen Mary 2 is now carrying those unable to fly back to the UK, currently moored off Durban, South Africa. Yesterday a doctor was on board conducting virus tests, and social media indicates the captain has now written to all passengers saying there has been one positive result. Which is going to complicate the rest of their voyage somewhat. If it has, or does, spread beyond the single carrier, then we have a problem ship coming into Southampton mid April.
We have cruised regularly for past 10 years and absolutely loved it. We used to love the sense of relaxed safety we experienced. Staggering to watch the way the whole industry has been destroyed in a few months. I'm not sure we'll ever do it again now.
It is hard to see what they can do to address the speed with which an infectious disease spreads in a cruise ship. A lot of the passengers offloaded in Australia and given flights home were moaning that they would rather stay on the ship, which they had paid for and was heading for the UK anyway. Now I guess they understand.
She still has a couple of hundred of the most vulnerable passengers on board, as well as crew, and days of sailing ahead to get back from South Africa. With at least one carrier on board I fear another bad incident coming our way.
A fine bright Spring day here, ladies and gentlemen. If only I could really enjoy it ...... admittedly when it warms up a bit!
Mr B2's post has reminded me. Chap I see .....?saw..... at football and at the gym (happy days) ...... told me the last time we met that he and his wife were off on a 'trip of a .lifetime'; a cruise to Central America, including through the Panama Canal. I wonder what tales he'll have to tell when ...... if..... we ever meet again.
On a more positive note my wife was, on our walk yesterday, collecting pine cones to make Christmas decorations.
Collecting stuff for Xmas is an essential activity now?
If your friends used the Panama, it won’t have been the QM2. Although the original design specification was ‘short enough for Southampton, low enough for the New York Verrazano bridge, and narrow enough for the Panama Canal, the Carnival CEO insisted that half the cabins have balconies, and the only way they could accommodate this in a stable design was to make the ship wider, to carry the extra weight. So the QM2 is one of those ships that has to go round the bottom of South America.
If 50% of people got it, and 1% of infected died, that's 55,000 deaths.
Based on the figures we are now seeing in Europe that is a conservative estimate, although probably in the right ballpark.
I could believe it is worse in Wuhan - because of the terrible air quality degrading lungs there, for decade after decade. As it has done with Italian lungs in the smogs of the Po Valley.
The Chinese and the Italians need to make the push for electric cars. Like, now.
It will be fascinating to overlay CV-19 hotspots with air quality. I have long said on here I felt there was a close link. I have grave worries for places like Delhi and Jakarta too. Sweden has one of Europe's lowest levels of air pollution - maybe they will get away with going for herd immunity if I'm right.
On the real numbers of deaths in Wuhan, I wonder what our security services were hearing - and when. I imagine a detailed briefing at COBRA that the Chinese numbers were unreliable - by orders of magnitude - would have instantly changed the course of the Govt. response. Out goes herd immunity on old assumptions, in comes lockdown on new ones.
"In 2018, more electric cars were sold in China than in the rest of the world combined. The Chinese government has spent nearly $60 billion in the last decade to create an industry that builds electric cars, while also reducing the number of licenses available for gasoline-powered cars to increase demand for electric cars. And Beijing plans to spend just as much over the next decade." https://qz.com/1517557/five-things-to-know-about-chinas-electric-car-boom/
A fine bright Spring day here, ladies and gentlemen. If only I could really enjoy it ...... admittedly when it warms up a bit!
Mr B2's post has reminded me. Chap I see .....?saw..... at football and at the gym (happy days) ...... told me the last time we met that he and his wife were off on a 'trip of a .lifetime'; a cruise to Central America, including through the Panama Canal. I wonder what tales he'll have to tell when ...... if..... we ever meet again.
On a more positive note my wife was, on our walk yesterday, collecting pine cones to make Christmas decorations.
Collecting stuff for Xmas is an essential activity now?
If your friends used the Panama, it won’t have been the QM2. Although the original design specification was ‘short enough for Southampton, low enough for the New York Verrazano bridge, and narrow enough for the Panama Canal, the Carnival CEO insisted that half the cabins have balconies, and the only way they could accommodate this in a stable design was to make the ship wider, to carry the extra weight. So the QM2 is one of those ships that has to go round the bottom of South America.
LOL about the Christmas decorations, BUT we pass the tree on on of our daily walk route options. We live in a small town with several such where we are unlikely to see many, if any people, and if we do can easily keep 2m away. We have a lot of sympathy for those who live where there is little or no greenery, and whose exercise options are limited.
Little bit of a shift on Biden. He'd fallen to sub 1.1 for the nomination, then stretched to 1.24. Back under 1.2 now (using LadEx numbers, I know Betfair has more liquidity).
If 50% of people got it, and 1% of infected died, that's 55,000 deaths.
Based on the figures we are now seeing in Europe that is a conservative estimate, although probably in the right ballpark.
I could believe it is worse in Wuhan - because of the terrible air quality degrading lungs there, for decade after decade. As it has done with Italian lungs in the smogs of the Po Valley.
The Chinese and the Italians need to make the push for electric cars. Like, now.
It will be fascinating to overlay CV-19 hotspots with air quality. I have long said on here I felt there was a close link. I have grave worries for places like Delhi and Jakarta too. Sweden has one of Europe's lowest levels of air pollution - maybe they will get away with going for herd immunity if I'm right.
On the real numbers of deaths in Wuhan, I wonder what our security services were hearing - and when. I imagine a detailed briefing at COBRA that the Chinese numbers were unreliable - by orders of magnitude - would have instantly changed the course of the Govt. response. Out goes herd immunity on old assumptions, in comes lockdown on new ones.
"In 2018, more electric cars were sold in China than in the rest of the world combined. The Chinese government has spent nearly $60 billion in the last decade to create an industry that builds electric cars, while also reducing the number of licenses available for gasoline-powered cars to increase demand for electric cars. And Beijing plans to spend just as much over the next decade." https://qz.com/1517557/five-things-to-know-about-chinas-electric-car-boom/
I believe China also has 90%+ of the world's electric bus production.
Comments
I see this purely as an expected value calculation.
Let's say I'm in my 30s and the doctor says if I am infected with this, I have a 1 in 500 chance of dying, or 0.2%. The alternative is spending the next 6 months effectively under house arrest.
Assuming I live to 80, 6 months = 0.6% of my life. If surviving and being immune means I can get backto my life as normal, an EV calculation says I am regaining 0.6% of my life for a 0.2% chance of dying, or a x 3 return. If this was a hand of poker, I'd be all in.
This calculation holds true for a 70 year old with a 10% chance of dying, by the way. Assuming they only live another 10 years and, being honest with themselves, the years 80+ aren't a fart in the wind worth living anyway.
How many more summers do any of us have? Those of us who want to take the risk should be allowed the risk. It's a self-regarding action and you can mitigate the possibility of harming others by enforced, supervised quarantine after deliberate infection.
The benefit to society is you add to herd immunity and become economically productive again. So a decision with positive externalities.
As for their antics with the drones...
That period of 2010 to 2024 will be the second longest period on the opposition benches ever, and if Labour fails to win in 2029, this stretches to the longest period ever.
That is the magnitude of how crap Corbyn has been.
That’s it.
However after that I'm returning to normal life, with the exception of avoiding the vulnerable.. I'm a fit person in their 20s. Wasting one year of summer and accruing £2k of debt to avoid around a 1 in 1000 to 10000 risk of dying is a totally ridiculous tradeoff.
If the Govt wants me to sacrifice 1/60th of my remaining summer months then they can compensate me for them, an awful lot of my peers are thinking similarly. £5k should do it.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Say the 30 year old's future expected 50 years of life is represented by his chip stack at £50. You are suggesting he gambles all of his £50 to gain 6 months of life, (which is 1% of his future expected life), so to win 50 pence. Now he is highly likely to win this round of poker, (99.8% likely if he only has 0.2% chance of dying. But compare the two possible outcomes.
1. He wins 50 pence, which makes negligible difference to him winning the overall poker game.
2. He's dead. He's out the game.
If 1000 poker players made your move in the same circumstances, 998 of them would end up marginally better off. But 2 of them would be out of the game. Before I commit all my chips to the pot I would want a better return than 50 pence.
If 50% of people got it, and 1% of infected died, that's 55,000 deaths.
Based on the figures we are now seeing in Europe that is a conservative estimate, although probably in the right ballpark.
I’d treat the source with almost as much scepticism as official pronouncements by China.
But of course, betting with one's life is also different in that each existing year may be said to have declining value (youth fades, plus the chances of dying of something else must be factored in year on year), not to mention the chances of catching this thing whether you deliberately infect yourself or not. If you have a 50% chance of getting it in the next year anyway, why not get it now to guarantee 6 months back?
There are also other factors to add in, e.g. if none of us work for the next six months we lose our jobs and the economy tanks, leading to a reduced quality of life for the immediate future.
It's a complex calculation that I simplified to EV terms to show that it is a bet with positive returns.
My point is that many people will be looking at what we are sacrificing under lockdown and going "this isn't worth it". And the longer we are locked down (with all its associated social and economic consequences), the greater that number will be.
Foxy said that, "The test is only 70% sensitive. So 1 time in three it gives an all clear incorrectly."
That's only true in people who have got the infection. Sensitivity is the % of people who have got the infection who test positive. It is independent of prevalence. We don't actually know whether Foxy has got the infection or not.
Without knowing whether Foxy has got the infection or not, all we can seek to comment on is the test's predictive value. But nor do we know the Negative Predictive Value of Foxy's test because this depends on the prevalence of the infection - and this is currently unknown.
:-)
The quality of policing appears to vary quite widely.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/30/catastrophe-sweden-coronavirus-stoicism-lockdown-europe
...Panic, though, is exactly what many within Sweden’s scientific and medical community are starting to feel. A petition signed by more than 2,000 doctors, scientists, and professors last week – including the chairman of the Nobel Foundation, Prof Carl-Henrik Heldin – called on the government to introduce more stringent containment measures. “We’re not testing enough, we’re not tracking, we’re not isolating enough – we have let the virus loose,” said Prof Cecilia Söderberg-Nauclér, a virus immunology researcher at the Karolinska Institute. “They are leading us to catastrophe.”
Strong words, but stoicism is a way of life here, as is unflappability. A 300-year history of efficient and transparent public administration, and high levels of trust in experts and governing officials, have left the public inclined to believe what they are told, and that those doing the telling have their best interests at heart.
“I trust that the doctors working with the government know what they are doing, so I suppose we’re as well prepared as we can be,” Robert Andersson, 50, a vendor manager in IT who lives in Södermalm, Stockholm, said. “This ‘hysteria’ that the media is launching is far more dangerous than the virus itself.”...
Quite apart from it having to apply to Ireland.
It’s such a large place it’s very difficult to get any sense of the size of the mess, but it does not sound good, at all.
Might they have been better off carrying on as normal ?
Strange the polls show the exact opposite.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/30/my-pillow-lindell-trump-coronavirus-156335
“God gave us grace on November 8, 2016, to change the course we were on,” Lindell began, referencing the day Trump was elected president. “Taken out of our schools and lives, a nation had turned its back on God.”
Lindell then offered advice to families stuck at home because of various social-distancing guidelines: “I encourage you to use this time at home to get back in the Word, read our Bibles and spend time with our families.”
“Our president gave us so much hope. Where just a few short months ago, we had the best economy, the lowest unemployment, and wages going up, it was amazing,” he continued, as Trump stood behind him expressionless. “With our great president, vice president and this administration and all the great people in this country praying daily, we will get through this and get back to a place that’s stronger and safer than ever.”
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/484238-france-police-covid-suburbs/
What is worrying many people is the mass-redundancies and short-time working. The young are nearly always the first to go under Swedish labour law, and they are paying a terrible price. This could have long-term mental health implications for a whole generation.
Our lives continue much as normal: the adults go to work and have dinner parties, the children go to school, play with the neighbours and train football and ice hockey. Education is distance-only for ages 16+, and there are some minor restrictions. All our theatre bookings have been moved til the autumn and the sports shows are all away (which has zero effect on my life).
We had haircuts last week, nipped in to renew a passport, grilled burgers in the sun with friends, took as many walks as we liked without police action, went to dentist.
Pension funds have gone down, but as we have significant chunks in gold, we’re not too concerned. And we personally have a significant period of investment left until using the capital. Our adult children are getting a valuable lesson in funds, risk-taking and investment period. The housing market has not been hit, yet, but few properties are out on the market.
I’m away for a shower and then work, and my wife and one adult child will be doing the same soon. Life goes on.
By the way, someone up post posted a fascinating link to an oup article on an epidemic in 1916-1930, something lethargica: thank you, but now I cannot find your post! But this bit confuses me: I just cannot work out what this “Rafania” was in Sweden in the 18th century. Googled a complete blank.
“ Although encephalitis lethargica was first officially recognized as a separate disease entity in 1917, Crookshank (1918) identified several historical epidemics that resembled encephalitis lethargica, including the English sweats (England, 1529), mal mazzuco (Italy, 1597), Kriebelkrankheit (Germany, 1672–75), Rafania (Sweden, 1754–57), and nona (Italy, 1890–91).”
https://www.thelocal.it/20190122/these-are-the-55-most-polluted-towns-in-italy
https://www.thelocal.it/20190228/po-valley-air-pollution-italy
Does anyone know the position on this - not inclined to believe it based just on one Facebook post.
https://english.elpais.com/society/2020-03-30/health-workers-and-unions-at-madrids-ifema-field-hospital-its-a-disaster.html
Aisles were bare and panic buying gripped the nation. Or so we thought.
The data shows something else was going on. Analysis by market insights firm Kantar found that a significant number of customers were just adding a few extra items to their shop had managed to break the typically well-oiled system. The impact from that very small increase in demand from every single shopper early on showed just how poorly prepared supermarkets were for what was about to come.
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/stockpiling-supermarkets-coronavirus
The Chinese and the Italians need to make the push for electric cars. Like, now.
It will be fascinating to overlay CV-19 hotspots with air quality. I have long said on here I felt there was a close link. I have grave worries for places like Delhi and Jakarta too. Sweden has one of Europe's lowest levels of air pollution - maybe they will get away with going for herd immunity if I'm right.
On the real numbers of deaths in Wuhan, I wonder what our security services were hearing - and when. I imagine a detailed briefing at COBRA that the Chinese numbers were unreliable - by orders of magnitude - would have instantly changed the course of the Govt. response. Out goes herd immunity on old assumptions, in comes lockdown on new ones.
Tuesday. I think.
https://twitter.com/AdamTaylorBates/status/1244749627745845254?s=20
https://www.leedsgrandmosque.com/news/gallery/covid-19-response-updates
Religious services do seem particularly deadly - closed spaces, lots of people in close proximity, singing which projects droplets all over the place. The high ceilings they traditionally have make sense though...
Though remember “the more I practice, the luckier I get”...
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/03/30/asia-pacific/south-korea-emergency-exercise-coronavirus-testing-containment/
SEOUL – A South Korean tabletop exercise on emergency responses to a fictional mysterious outbreak led directly to tools the country deployed less than a month later to manage the arrival and spread of the coronavirus, one of the experts involved said
According to an undisclosed government document, on Dec. 17 two dozen leading South Korean infectious diseases specialists tackled a worrying scenario: a South Korean family contracts pneumonia after a trip to China, where cases of an unidentified disease had arisen.
The hypothetical disease quickly spreads among the colleagues of the family members and medical workers who treated them. In response, the team of experts at the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC) developed an algorithm to find the pathogen and its origin, as well as testing techniques.
Those measures were mobilized in real life when a first suspected coronavirus patient appeared in South Korea on Jan. 20, the document said.
"Looking back over the past 20 years, humans were most tormented by either influenza or coronaviruses, and we're relatively doing well on influenza but had been worried about the possibility of the outbreak of a novel coronavirus," said Lee Sang-won, one of the KCDC experts who led the drill....
I would imagine a similar situation for the mosques, with the note that they typically are more fragmented due to the broader nature of the community, so coordinating a shutdown may have taken longer (especially in the absence of clear guidance from government).
The virus has in general hit religious communities hard: religious leaders are almost as good a vector as politicians (they shake a lot of hands and visit lots of sick people) and our instincts when bad news hits is to organise prayer meetings. Which, in this case is exactly the worst thing possible. There also tends to be some embedded mistrust of government in the more insular end of communities. The first few deaths help overcome that, but there's then a while to go before the effects feed through.
He just wants people talking about him, if everyone puts him on ignore he'll go away.
But there are around 1,700 mosques in the UK. It is possible some smaller ones are still operating.
No harm in asking the question (and the point about informed responses like Endillion’s is a fair one) - but also no harm in making some effort yourself.
Coronavirus closes mosques, churches and temples across Asia
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Asia-Insight/Coronavirus-closes-mosques-churches-and-temples-across-Asia
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/full-guidance-on-staying-at-home-and-away-from-others/full-guidance-on-staying-at-home-and-away-from-others
Nice to see the overnight threads back.
@TSE and @Morris_Dancer haven’t started arguing about Hannibal’s military prowess or lack thereof yet.
And let’s face it, it’s not a proper Nighthawks thread until that happens...
Also, the Daily Mail has several stories of domestic murder and it is only a week into the lock-down.
Take care everyone.
Mr B2's post has reminded me. Chap I see .....?saw..... at football and at the gym (happy days) ...... told me the last time we met that he and his wife were off on a 'trip of a .lifetime'; a cruise to Central America, including through the Panama Canal.
I wonder what tales he'll have to tell when ...... if..... we ever meet again.
On a more positive note my wife was, on our walk yesterday, collecting pine cones to make Christmas decorations.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/29/in-a-national-crisis-people-are-desperate-to-believe-in-their-leaders
If your friends used the Panama, it won’t have been the QM2. Although the original design specification was ‘short enough for Southampton, low enough for the New York Verrazano bridge, and narrow enough for the Panama Canal, the Carnival CEO insisted that half the cabins have balconies, and the only way they could accommodate this in a stable design was to make the ship wider, to carry the extra weight. So the QM2 is one of those ships that has to go round the bottom of South America.
She still has a couple of hundred of the most vulnerable passengers on board, as well as crew, and days of sailing ahead to get back from South Africa. With at least one carrier on board I fear another bad incident coming our way.
Ah, my coat...
https://qz.com/1517557/five-things-to-know-about-chinas-electric-car-boom/
We have a lot of sympathy for those who live where there is little or no greenery, and whose exercise options are limited.
I usually leave the computer in the early evening, unlike a few years ago when I'd keep rambling on