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/
Have you been to China ? 2 strokes, dodgy diesels , coal and wood burning etc.
A few rips offs of the Nissan Leaf won’t solve it overnight.
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
Prior to this the experience with SARDS showed what the demands for respiratory support would be. The Chinese were quite open on this.
The spin that is going on that the Chinese misled the government on the seriousness of the epidemic is quite a long way from the truth. It is plain old arse covering.
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.
If you think that certain sections of the UK are losing their minds, that's nothing compared to what's going on in the USA.
People are screaming blue murder that the FDA gave approval to test malaria medication on coronavirus patients, mostly because Trump mentioned it at his press conference and they don't want him to be able to take credit.
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.
The Chinese government manage to police their internet with hundreds of thousands of humans.
Not my cup of tea, but given the quiet state of the sports markets, could be a decent time for anyone into eSports to share their wisdom.
I wonder if bookies will start taking bets on the Virtual Grands Prix (I'd probably be disinclined to bet on such things, but would give them a look just in case).
Not my cup of tea, but given the quiet state of the sports markets, could be a decent time for anyone into eSports to share their wisdom.
I wonder if bookies will start taking bets on the Virtual Grands Prix (I'd probably be disinclined to bet on such things, but would give them a look just in case).
I've discovered lightning dice (william hill) as something to punt on in these fallow times!
Not my cup of tea, but given the quiet state of the sports markets, could be a decent time for anyone into eSports to share their wisdom.
I wonder if bookies will start taking bets on the Virtual Grands Prix (I'd probably be disinclined to bet on such things, but would give them a look just in case).
I doubt the bookies are going to allow betting on 'amateur' esports such as the virtual GP series, it's too open to manipulation. It would need to be more organised, with a substantial prize being competed for. Betfair does have markets for the pro esports competitions.
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.
In the First Age of the web people relied on lists of links to find useful information. In the Second Age of the web people used search engines to find the information they were after. In the Third Age of the web people asked other people questions and relied on them finding and linking to information to answer their question. In this, the Fourth Age of the web most people believe the fake news fed to them by bots and algorithms in their filter bubble, and are impervious to any contrary information.
Be glad that you came across a holdout against the Fourth Age. The Second/Third Age battle was lost long ago.
"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.
So they did dye a lagoon black...
(It is COVID related in the sense that they are specifically keen to avoid swimming at this point in time, even if it is a measure that has been undertaken before. Our journalists really are shit though)
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).
In normal circumstances, 1.2 would be extraordinarily generous. Biden has an unassailable lead. Betting on a horserace in running, you'd expect 1.04 for a clear leader before the final fence at which it might fall. 1.2 says Biden has an almost 20 per cent chance of pulling out before the convention in July, a little over three months away.
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/
Have you been to China ? 2 strokes, dodgy diesels , coal and wood burning etc.
A few rips offs of the Nissan Leaf won’t solve it overnight.
Is that an example of 'whataboutery'? Just pointing out facts, with no comment.
long time lurker, tempted back. posted (and even wrote an article ten years ago). not sure why I'm posting again. Corona related I think. Current madness will either be seen as a monumental testament to modern ingenuity avoiding monumental death, or mass hysteria. Three years and we get the answer.
I fear it might endure as another Y2K moment. All those who lack the knowledge of all the work that went into averting disaster and who have an axe to grind for or against a particular position or party will use any lack of hundreds of thousands of deaths as 'evidence' it was all a giant waste. Sadly and annoyingly many of those doing this will be from the more extreme elements of my own libertarian persuasion.
Edit. Oh and very welcome back.
A technical question: let us say a significant proportion of the population develops immunity and there is no vaccine. What happens to people who are at high risk if they do catch it? How do they benefit? There is still no cure, the risk of death is great. So do they have to stay isolated for ever?
As I understand the numbers, herd immunity is achieved at 40% of the population. COVID19 mortality is unknown but it is greater by an order of magnitude than flu, which is also very infectious, and less than SARS, which is much less infectious. Probably 1% to 3%. This means, I think, a quarter of a million or so people need to die in the UK before we reach herd immunity.
This death is a somewhat horrible one. Currently the hospital system is coping after seeing 1400 deaths. We are talking about a scale of need that is 100 times bigger. The effect on the healthcare system is unimaginable.
We need a vaccine. Failing that we need to isolate the infected from the uninfected and the vulnerable from everyone else. And we need to test, test and test.
I thought it was 60%? Although of course in reality it’s a sliding scale.
Sorry you're right I got the percentages the wrong way round. So approximately 400 000 deaths are needed to get to herd immunity at 1% mortality, I reckon.
The impression I got was that the 1% mortality rate was for a standard cross section of the population with elderly and those with underlying conditions being part of the calculation. If you can successfully isolate that portion of the population into the 40% who don't catch it then the CFR should be a great deal less than 1%
As I said the other night, perhaps the most efficient way to end this would be to deliberately infect everyone under the age of 60 with no underlying health conditions with the virus.
It would rely on people to volunteer, but if getting back to work is not incentive enough it would be cheaper to pay people to be infected than to pay furlough forever and job seekers allowance bill that will result from extended quarantine.
You'd go to the clinic, be assessed, ensure you have no serious medical conditions, then infected. You wait it out, possibly in a hotel (there are plenty going begging the government could commandeer). Then in two weeks, you're clear.
Herd immunity this way could be achieved in a month, using only healthy people. Cheaper, faster and more effective than three months of quarantine.
The problem with this otherwise brilliant plan is that many of the people under 60 still get very sick, some die and many more suffer permanent lung damage.
Yes, mostly people with underlying health conditions and the clinically obese. Once you filter for other conditions the mortality rate for under 60s is very, very, very low.
The point of being assessed prior to being infected is to ensure that only the healthy population are given a dose of this.
The other point here is that we are not dealing with people who *otherwise would not have got the virus*, in the absence of a vaccine the herd immunity strategy is the only viable one. People will get this anyway, over the course of the next couple of years.
If we were to infect everyone who is healthy, all at once, we would actually reduce the chance of the sick and those with pre-existing health conditions catching this.
The chance of someone aged 35-44 dying of _anything_ in the next year is 1 in 663. So what?
Again, my point is that maybe at least half of those 50,000 people are going to get it anyway over the next year, so why not allow them to choose the risk?
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 I accept your premise. The government is going to be much more thoughtful about how they lift the restrictions
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/
So they now need more electricity and need to keep burning coal to power the cars.
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.
There is an element of bad reporting as well For example the Easter egg thing was that people were making specific journeys to buy Easter eggs. The question was whether the journey was essential. Not quite as reported.
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.
Except that I doubt you would be all in in poker. The trade is assymetrical.
You either “win” 0.6% of your life or it is all over for ever. Would you take 3-1 odds on that bet? Or would you want more?
Mr. Away, that's a casino type game rather than an eSport, right?
Just be careful not to get carried away.
Mr. Sandpit, yeah, I did read somewhere they'd be taking bets on the Virtual Grand National (again, not my area really).
If you want a gamble then buying shares in online bookies might be sensible now. Prices got hammered like most shares in last 2 months but people stuck at home (like me !) need a bit of fun and online casinos are there for that.
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/
So they now need more electricity and need to keep burning coal to power the cars.
They also had the largest increase of any country in the sale of traditionally-powered cars.
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.
To be fair to @felix that is exactly what he is doing!
Amazing what happened inside Cameron’s second term, really, isn’t it?
It wouldn’t be him fighting this one though. It would probably be Osborne v. Corbyn assuming Remain won by enough but he might have been ousted for Boris by now too.
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
Prior to this the experience with SARDS showed what the demands for respiratory support would be. The Chinese were quite open on this.
The spin that is going on that the Chinese misled the government on the seriousness of the epidemic is quite a long way from the truth. It is plain old arse covering.
What I find so interesting is why you continue to do the Chinese Government’s propaganda work for it whilst attacking our own.
The Chinese campaign of disinformation and deception over this virus is very well documented and acknowledged at the highest levels in our security services and our government.
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.
Except that I doubt you would be all in in poker. The trade is assymetrical.
You either “win” 0.6% of your life or it is all over for ever. Would you take 3-1 odds on that bet? Or would you want more?
A simpler way of looking at it is that, in the round, getting the virus pretty much doubles the chance you already had of dying this year, at all ages.
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/
So they now need more electricity and need to keep burning coal to power the cars.
God, you make some ill-informed comments.
"At the start of 2017, China announced that it would invest $360 billion in renewable energy by 2020 and scrap plans to build 85 coal-fired power plants. In March, Chinese authorities reported that the country was already exceeding official targets for energy efficiency, carbon intensity, and the share of clean energy sources." https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/08/how-china-is-leading-the-renewable-energy-revolution
.. and that's without thanking China for our cheap solar panels. Of course it's not enough!
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/
So they now need more electricity and need to keep burning coal to power the cars.
indeed. but they must have the room (and climate?) for a solar field the size of England? Not sure how many cars that would power.
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
Prior to this the experience with SARDS showed what the demands for respiratory support would be. The Chinese were quite open on this.
The spin that is going on that the Chinese misled the government on the seriousness of the epidemic is quite a long way from the truth. It is plain old arse covering.
What I find so interesting is why you continue to do the Chinese Government’s propaganda work for it whilst attacking our own.
The Chinese campaign of disinformation and deception over this virus is very well documented and acknowledged at the highest levels in our security services and our government.
Have a look in the mirror man.
I am not spreading Chinese propaganda, merely pointing out via links to published scientific articles that the infectivity and severe clinical effects of Coronavirus were well documented at the time that the government was making decisions. The government claims that they were not informed are tosh.
If our security services are that easy to fool, then clearly they need to up their game.
On Jan 31st the FCO advised against all non essential travel to China, and arranged evacuation flights with quarantine. Clearly the government new the risks of the disease.
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.
Except that I doubt you would be all in in poker. The trade is assymetrical.
You either “win” 0.6% of your life or it is all over for ever. Would you take 3-1 odds on that bet? Or would you want more?
It’s more complex than that since you can enjoy and spend the money freely if you win but can’t do very much with it at all if you don’t play.
So you’re not just playing for the 0.6% but the rights and freedom to enjoy the 100.6%.
I would say the UK was poorly prepared for the epidemic, it didn't learn from Asian experience and was slow to react. This means the mitigation in the form of lockdown will be more damaging than it need to be. However I don't think it's very different from other European countries in those respects.
Johnson has gone up in my estimation. I think he wants to do the best he can in dealing with this epidemic. It's the first time I have thought that about anything he's ever done.
As a left-of-centre Europhile type I'm all for critiquing this Gov't. And, yes, they were painfully slow off the mark.
However, surely the best thing we can do, left or right, is to get behind them now that they are up to speed? I am currently happy with Boris' handling of the situation and he has my support, even approval.
For Cameron to have stayed on he would have had to have won in 2016. A different Labour leader is therefore a likely prerequisite in this counter factual. If the referendum had been 52:48 the other way it would have settled nothing, the right would have been split. True to his principles Boris would have picked the winning side. The Tory leadership election would have been far too unpredictable, but Gove as the arch Eurosceptic might have beaten Osborne. The 2020 election: Gove vs. Cooper, started with the Tories 15pts behind and now delayed indefinitely due to 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.
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
I bought my mask and sanitisers on 23rd January. It was blindingly obvious what was coming.
I would say the UK was poorly prepared for the epidemic, it didn't learn from Asian experience and was slow to react. This means the mitigation in the form of lockdown will be more damaging than it need to be. However I don't think it's very different from other European countries in those respects.
Johnson has gone up in my estimation. I think he wants to do the best he can in dealing with this epidemic. It's the first time I have thought that about anything he's ever done.
This is precisely my position. I'm critical of our tardy response but impressed now by Johnson.
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/
So they now need more electricity and need to keep burning coal to power the cars.
They also had the largest increase of any country in the sale of traditionally-powered cars.
"China is both the biggest manufacturer and the biggest market for cars globally. But after two decades of rapid expansion, sales fell in 2018 by 6% to 22.7 million units. The most recent figures show that New Energy Vehicles (NEVs) - a category which includes electric and hybrid models - has defied that trend, growing substantially over the past year." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46745472
For clarity, despite my username and 'Song' being a common Chinese name I am not Chinese, but I am attached to the use of Facts.
As a left-of-centre Europhile type I'm all for critiquing this Gov't. And, yes, they were painfully slow off the mark.
However, surely the best thing we can do, left or right, is to get behind them now that they are up to speed? I am currently happy with Boris' handling of the situation and he has my support, even approval.
Once things have settled down will be the time for a long hard look at what went well and what did not.
I for one will be very interested to hear more about that pandemic planning exercise from a few years back.
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.
Except that I doubt you would be all in in poker. The trade is assymetrical.
You either “win” 0.6% of your life or it is all over for ever. Would you take 3-1 odds on that bet? Or would you want more?
It’s more complex than that since you can enjoy and spend the money freely if you win but can’t do very much with it at all if you don’t play.
So you’re not just playing for the 0.6% but the rights and freedom to enjoy the 100.6%.
The visceral Europhobia of this government is boundless. It is willing to risk lives rather than work with the EU.
I have two takeaways from the government lying on the reasons for not taking part in EU joint procurement. The first positive interpretation is the hope that the Johnson regime is growing up and realising that ideology doesn't butter the parsnips.
The second more worrying interpretation is that it knows it hasn't sourced nearly as much equipment as it should have done and it's getting its excuses in early.
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/
So they now need more electricity and need to keep burning coal to power the cars.
indeed. but they must have the room (and climate?) for a solar field the size of England? Not sure how many cars that would power.
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
I bought my mask and sanitisers on 23rd January. It was blindingly obvious what was coming.
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
Prior to this the experience with SARDS showed what the demands for respiratory support would be. The Chinese were quite open on this.
The spin that is going on that the Chinese misled the government on the seriousness of the epidemic is quite a long way from the truth. It is plain old arse covering.
What I find so interesting is why you continue to do the Chinese Government’s propaganda work for it whilst attacking our own.
The Chinese campaign of disinformation and deception over this virus is very well documented and acknowledged at the highest levels in our security services and our government.
Have a look in the mirror man.
I am not spreading Chinese propaganda, merely pointing out via links to published scientific articles that the infectivity and severe clinical effects of Coronavirus were well documented at the time that the government was making decisions. The government claims that they were not informed are tosh.
If our security services are that easy to fool, then clearly they need to up their game.
On Jan 31st the FCO advised against all non essential travel to China, and arranged evacuation flights with quarantine. Clearly the government new the risks of the disease.
Yes, it’s deeply depressing that you think a couple of articles in the Lancet on emerging trends on the disease excuses China completely from any culpability whilst criticism of our own Government is fair game as is second-guessing our security services.
I think you should do some more reading up on the political, economic and diplomatic actions of the Chinese government on this virus over the last 4 months before you comment further.
For Cameron to have stayed on he would have had to have won in 2016. A different Labour leader is therefore a likely prerequisite in this counter factual. If the referendum had been 52:48 the other way it would have settled nothing, the right would have been split. True to his principles Boris would have picked the winning side. The Tory leadership election would have been far too unpredictable, but Gove as the arch Eurosceptic might have beaten Osborne. The 2020 election: Gove vs. Cooper, started with the Tories 15pts behind and now delayed indefinitely due to Coronavirus.
Just as well that did not happen and Labour picked Corbyn. He has royally fucked Labour for the forseeable future. He was only leader for 4.5 yrs and boy has he messed up Labour
I would say the UK was poorly prepared for the epidemic, it didn't learn from Asian experience and was slow to react. This means the mitigation in the form of lockdown will be more damaging than it need to be. However I don't think it's very different from other European countries in those respects.
Johnson has gone up in my estimation. I think he wants to do the best he can in dealing with this epidemic. It's the first time I have thought that about anything he's ever done.
This is precisely my position. I'm critical of our tardy response but impressed now by Johnson.
Johnson is just a cork in a storm, tossed about by events. It is Hancock who has done all the work in terms of preparation, though kicking off on things like PPE acquisition and distribution 2 weeks earlier would have been better. Hunt has also been good.
It is not surprising that politicians were flat footed, they have no experience or preparation for these events, and that is true across the world.
For Cameron to have stayed on he would have had to have won in 2016. A different Labour leader is therefore a likely prerequisite in this counter factual. If the referendum had been 52:48 the other way it would have settled nothing, the right would have been split. True to his principles Boris would have picked the winning side. The Tory leadership election would have been far too unpredictable, but Gove as the arch Eurosceptic might have beaten Osborne. The 2020 election: Gove vs. Cooper, started with the Tories 15pts behind and now delayed indefinitely due to Coronavirus.
Boris had picked a side before the referendum vote.....
If it had gone the other way, there would have been a massively reduced UKIP et al pitch - they'd had their vote and lost. What would be the pitch - the people got it wrong and they want another vote? Too close to the Irish revote thing....
That was the intent of the referendum in the first place - to kill off Out for a generation.
If Cameron had won it, he would have been unassailable.
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
Prior to this the experience with SARDS showed what the demands for respiratory support would be. The Chinese were quite open on this.
The spin that is going on that the Chinese misled the government on the seriousness of the epidemic is quite a long way from the truth. It is plain old arse covering.
But, hold on, if you lie about the actual volume of those that get it (which is clear in China is the case, 90,000 my arse), then when you take the % of those with that require hospital treatment, you are going to get incorrect demand.
It took like the real numbers are perhaps up to 40x what they claim. That isn't just a bit of massaging.
The models that are built require decent estimates of a whole load of factors, and if you lie about some of the base numbers, the whole thing will be off.
I can also believe to some extent that Western governments thought that the population density, high smoking rates, high pollution and poorer health, probably would mean that demand in the West would be lower.
The fact that basically every Western government have basically had the same outlook on this says something. The only real difference across Europe is that Germany have managed to ramp up their testing to a much larger extent than anywhere else, but they started with a much bigger case of things like PCR machines.
South Korea is really the only large state that was very early with a response, one because of closeness to China and two because they have been through SARs and MERs, so they are tended to act to the other extreme.
I would say the UK was poorly prepared for the epidemic, it didn't learn from Asian experience and was slow to react. This means the mitigation in the form of lockdown will be more damaging than it need to be. However I don't think it's very different from other European countries in those respects.
Johnson has gone up in my estimation. I think he wants to do the best he can in dealing with this epidemic. It's the first time I have thought that about anything he's ever done.
This is precisely my position. I'm critical of our tardy response but impressed now by Johnson.
I wouldn't say I'm impressed by Johnson. I think he's sincere in his response to it, when he's never shown any sincerity before. I kind of think that should be a given. I don't think his government's response has been particularly outstanding, compared with its peers, except perhaps for the economic package.
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
Prior to this the experience with SARDS showed what the demands for respiratory support would be. The Chinese were quite open on this.
The spin that is going on that the Chinese misled the government on the seriousness of the epidemic is quite a long way from the truth. It is plain old arse covering.
What I find so interesting is why you continue to do the Chinese Government’s propaganda work for it whilst attacking our own.
The Chinese campaign of disinformation and deception over this virus is very well documented and acknowledged at the highest levels in our security services and our government.
Have a look in the mirror man.
I am not spreading Chinese propaganda, merely pointing out via links to published scientific articles that the infectivity and severe clinical effects of Coronavirus were well documented at the time that the government was making decisions. The government claims that they were not informed are tosh.
If our security services are that easy to fool, then clearly they need to up their game.
On Jan 31st the FCO advised against all non essential travel to China, and arranged evacuation flights with quarantine. Clearly the government new the risks of the disease.
Yes, it’s deeply depressing that you think a couple of articles in the Lancet on emerging trends on the disease excuses China completely from any culpability whilst criticism of our own Government is fair game as is second-guessing our security services.
I think you should do some more reading up on the political, economic and diplomatic actions of the Chinese government on this virus over the last 4 months before you comment further.
They were the only published data at that time! They were not obscure. The fact that the government was flat footed in response had nothing to do with China. Indeed the FCO actions demonstrate that some parts of the government were taking the risks seriously.
For Cameron to have stayed on he would have had to have won in 2016. A different Labour leader is therefore a likely prerequisite in this counter factual. If the referendum had been 52:48 the other way it would have settled nothing, the right would have been split. True to his principles Boris would have picked the winning side. The Tory leadership election would have been far too unpredictable, but Gove as the arch Eurosceptic might have beaten Osborne. The 2020 election: Gove vs. Cooper, started with the Tories 15pts behind and now delayed indefinitely due to Coronavirus.
Boris had picked a side before the referendum vote.....
If it had gone the other way, there would have been a massively reduced UKIP et al pitch - they'd had their vote and lost. What would be the pitch - the people got it wrong and they want another vote? Too close to the Irish revote thing....
That was the intent of the referendum in the first place - to kill off Out for a generation.
If Cameron had won it, he would have been unassailable.
I would say the UK was poorly prepared for the epidemic, it didn't learn from Asian experience and was slow to react. This means the mitigation in the form of lockdown will be more damaging than it need to be. However I don't think it's very different from other European countries in those respects.
Johnson has gone up in my estimation. I think he wants to do the best he can in dealing with this epidemic. It's the first time I have thought that about anything he's ever done.
This is precisely my position. I'm critical of our tardy response but impressed now by Johnson.
Johnson is just a cork in a storm, tossed about by events. It is Hancock who has done all the work in terms of preparation, though kicking off on things like PPE acquisition and distribution 2 weeks earlier would have been better. Hunt has also been good.
It is not surprising that politicians were flat footed, they have no experience or preparation for these events, and that is true across the world.
Someone gave Hancock et al the unlimited budget and authorisation to do what he is doing.....
Delegation is one of the key skills in actually running things. The macho garbage about leaders personally running everything is horse manure - I associate it with the propaganda of truly dictatorial regimes. Look at Fat Boy in North Korea for the extreme version of that trope.
The visceral Europhobia of this government is boundless. It is willing to risk lives rather than work with the EU.
I have two takeaways from the government lying on the reasons for not taking part in EU joint procurement. The first positive interpretation is the hope that the Johnson regime is growing up and realising that ideology doesn't butter the parsnips.
The second more worrying interpretation is that it knows it hasn't sourced nearly as much equipment as it should have done and it's getting its excuses in early.
The simple interpretation is the correct one. This is hardwired into the government's ideology but they realise that now is not the time to advertise it.
There is a further takeaway. Observe the silence of the site's Leavers. Not a peep from them. They either prefer to back up the government than be seen to be insufficiently Europhobic or agree with its priorities. The pathological hatred of the EU runs deep in them.
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
Prior to this the experience with SARDS showed what the demands for respiratory support would be. The Chinese were quite open on this.
The spin that is going on that the Chinese misled the government on the seriousness of the epidemic is quite a long way from the truth. It is plain old arse covering.
But, hold on, if you lie about the actual volume of those that get it (which is clear in China is the case, 90,000 my arse), then when you take the % of those with that require hospital treatment, you are going to get incorrect demand.
It took like the real numbers are perhaps up to 40x what they claim. That isn't just a bit of massaging.
The models that are built require decent estimates of a whole load of factors, and if you lie about some of the base numbers, the whole thing will be off.
Those base numbers were in the two papers that I cited, including both case transmission rates, doubling times and severity of disease. Whether the starting point was 900 cases or 9 000 or 90 000 means very little. It just moves the timing a week or two.
For Cameron to have stayed on he would have had to have won in 2016. A different Labour leader is therefore a likely prerequisite in this counter factual. If the referendum had been 52:48 the other way it would have settled nothing, the right would have been split. True to his principles Boris would have picked the winning side. The Tory leadership election would have been far too unpredictable, but Gove as the arch Eurosceptic might have beaten Osborne. The 2020 election: Gove vs. Cooper, started with the Tories 15pts behind and now delayed indefinitely due to Coronavirus.
Boris had picked a side before the referendum vote.....
If it had gone the other way, there would have been a massively reduced UKIP et al pitch - they'd had their vote and lost. What would be the pitch - the people got it wrong and they want another vote? Too close to the Irish revote thing....
That was the intent of the referendum in the first place - to kill off Out for a generation.
If Cameron had won it, he would have been unassailable.
Scotland suggests otherwise.
If Brexit had gone the other way, the SNP would have had a hard time arguing for a second referendum any time soon.
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.
That seems likely. Given the probable continuing chaos, I just wonder if they'd have been better not trying to lockdown at all. (It was exceptionally badly done, declared overnight, for ALL citizens, without warning... or apparently planning.)
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/
So they now need more electricity and need to keep burning coal to power the cars.
They also had the largest increase of any country in the sale of traditionally-powered cars.
"China is both the biggest manufacturer and the biggest market for cars globally. But after two decades of rapid expansion, sales fell in 2018 by 6% to 22.7 million units. The most recent figures show that New Energy Vehicles (NEVs) - a category which includes electric and hybrid models - has defied that trend, growing substantially over the past year." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46745472
For clarity, despite my username and 'Song' being a common Chinese name I am not Chinese, but I am attached to the use of Facts.
Okay, my figures were 2017, showing a YoY increase of half a million units to 27 million. Second highest country in worldwide sales was the USA on 17m, so there's way more cars sold in China than anywhere else.
For Cameron to have stayed on he would have had to have won in 2016. A different Labour leader is therefore a likely prerequisite in this counter factual. If the referendum had been 52:48 the other way it would have settled nothing, the right would have been split. True to his principles Boris would have picked the winning side. The Tory leadership election would have been far too unpredictable, but Gove as the arch Eurosceptic might have beaten Osborne. The 2020 election: Gove vs. Cooper, started with the Tories 15pts behind and now delayed indefinitely due to Coronavirus.
Boris had picked a side before the referendum vote.....
If it had gone the other way, there would have been a massively reduced UKIP et al pitch - they'd had their vote and lost. What would be the pitch - the people got it wrong and they want another vote? Too close to the Irish revote thing....
That was the intent of the referendum in the first place - to kill off Out for a generation.
If Cameron had won it, he would have been unassailable.
Scotland suggests otherwise.
If Brexit had gone the other way, the SNP would have had a hard time arguing for a second referendum any time soon.
In Scotland, the losing side in the referendum was rampant. It settled nothing. You are naive if you think the Eurosceptics and Faragists would have shut up after coming so close.
For Cameron to have stayed on he would have had to have won in 2016. A different Labour leader is therefore a likely prerequisite in this counter factual. If the referendum had been 52:48 the other way it would have settled nothing, the right would have been split. True to his principles Boris would have picked the winning side. The Tory leadership election would have been far too unpredictable, but Gove as the arch Eurosceptic might have beaten Osborne. The 2020 election: Gove vs. Cooper, started with the Tories 15pts behind and now delayed indefinitely due to Coronavirus.
Boris had picked a side before the referendum vote.....
If it had gone the other way, there would have been a massively reduced UKIP et al pitch - they'd had their vote and lost. What would be the pitch - the people got it wrong and they want another vote? Too close to the Irish revote thing....
That was the intent of the referendum in the first place - to kill off Out for a generation.
If Cameron had won it, he would have been unassailable.
Scotland suggests otherwise.
If Brexit had gone the other way, the SNP would have had a hard time arguing for a second referendum any time soon.
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/
Have you been to China ? 2 strokes, dodgy diesels , coal and wood burning etc.
A few rips offs of the Nissan Leaf won’t solve it overnight.
I travelled around western china last year and all the motorbikes and scooters etc were electric.
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/
So they now need more electricity and need to keep burning coal to power the cars.
They also had the largest increase of any country in the sale of traditionally-powered cars.
"China is both the biggest manufacturer and the biggest market for cars globally. But after two decades of rapid expansion, sales fell in 2018 by 6% to 22.7 million units. The most recent figures show that New Energy Vehicles (NEVs) - a category which includes electric and hybrid models - has defied that trend, growing substantially over the past year." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46745472
For clarity, despite my username and 'Song' being a common Chinese name I am not Chinese, but I am attached to the use of Facts.
Okay, my figures were 2017, showing a YoY increase of half a million units.
So that would be around 1.4 million unit drop in 2018 then.
The visceral Europhobia of this government is boundless. It is willing to risk lives rather than work with the EU.
I have two takeaways from the government lying on the reasons for not taking part in EU joint procurement. The first positive interpretation is the hope that the Johnson regime is growing up and realising that ideology doesn't butter the parsnips.
The second more worrying interpretation is that it knows it hasn't sourced nearly as much equipment as it should have done and it's getting its excuses in early.
The simple interpretation is the correct one. This is hardwired into the government's ideology but they realise that now is not the time to advertise it.
There is a further takeaway. Observe the silence of the site's Leavers. Not a peep from them. They either prefer to back up the government than be seen to be insufficiently Europhobic or agree with its priorities. The pathological hatred of the EU runs deep in them.
There is a third possibility - the probability that the EU procurement initiative won't magic more materials into existence. All the manufacturers are working flat out. The UK has some non-trivial amount of manufacturing capability in this regard. To put it crudely, would UK be putting material into such a program or getting it out?
On the cancelled boundary review at 600, the Torres would have won less seats (352 vs 364) but would have had a bigger majority as Lab would only have had 174, the SNP 47 and the LDs 7. A few that would have switched to Con are Westmoreland, Plymouth Sutton and Southampton Test
In a review based on 650 seats the Cons will likely gain seats as there will be new seats created in the shires e.g. Berks, Bucks, Oxon each gain one. The main area of Tory losses will be Wales, which loses its over representation
The visceral Europhobia of this government is boundless. It is willing to risk lives rather than work with the EU.
I have two takeaways from the government lying on the reasons for not taking part in EU joint procurement. The first positive interpretation is the hope that the Johnson regime is growing up and realising that ideology doesn't butter the parsnips.
The second more worrying interpretation is that it knows it hasn't sourced nearly as much equipment as it should have done and it's getting its excuses in early.
The simple interpretation is the correct one. This is hardwired into the government's ideology but they realise that now is not the time to advertise it.
There is a further takeaway. Observe the silence of the site's Leavers. Not a peep from them. They either prefer to back up the government than be seen to be insufficiently Europhobic or agree with its priorities. The pathological hatred of the EU runs deep in them.
There is a third possibility - the probability that the EU procurement initiative won't magic more materials into existence. All the manufacturers are working flat out. The UK has some non-trivial amount of manufacturing capability in this regard. To put it crudely, would UK be putting material into such a program or getting it out?
That, however, is not the UK government's position. Its formal position, so far as one can discern it, is that the EU's invitation to work with them got chewed by the dog.
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
Prior to this the experience with SARDS showed what the demands for respiratory support would be. The Chinese were quite open on this.
The spin that is going on that the Chinese misled the government on the seriousness of the epidemic is quite a long way from the truth. It is plain old arse covering.
But, hold on, if you lie about the actual volume of those that get it (which is clear in China is the case, 90,000 my arse), then when you take the % of those with that require hospital treatment, you are going to get incorrect demand.
It took like the real numbers are perhaps up to 40x what they claim. That isn't just a bit of massaging.
The models that are built require decent estimates of a whole load of factors, and if you lie about some of the base numbers, the whole thing will be off.
Those base numbers were in the two papers that I cited, including both case transmission rates, doubling times and severity of disease. Whether the starting point was 900 cases or 9 000 or 90 000 means very little. It just moves the timing a week or two.
I don't know Ferguson model and what factors will effect it, but from the summary along,
"The epidemic doubling time was 6.4 days"...well that clearly isn't what we are seeing in the West.
As I say, pretty much every Western's government was the same at in January and February. That suggest they all came to basically the same conclusion based on early data.
And given the lack of any real plans in Italy and Spain, they still didn't think it was going to be a problem.
It does seem like the UK put in place a range of plans very early on. The difference is a bit longer we thought it was more likely it would be on the lesser end of severity until the Italy numbers.
On the cancelled boundary review at 600, the Torres would have won less seats (352 vs 364) but would have had a bigger majority as Lab would only have had 174, the SNP 47 and the LDs 7. A few that would have switched to Con are Westmoreland, Plymouth Sutton and Southampton Test
In a review based on 650 seats the Cons will likely gain seats as there will be new seats created in the shires e.g. Berks, Bucks, Oxon each gain one. The main area of Tory losses will be Wales, which loses its over representation
It wont be dramatic, though, because many London seats are oversize and some of the new seats the Tories won in the North are undersize
The visceral Europhobia of this government is boundless. It is willing to risk lives rather than work with the EU.
I have two takeaways from the government lying on the reasons for not taking part in EU joint procurement. The first positive interpretation is the hope that the Johnson regime is growing up and realising that ideology doesn't butter the parsnips.
The second more worrying interpretation is that it knows it hasn't sourced nearly as much equipment as it should have done and it's getting its excuses in early.
The simple interpretation is the correct one. This is hardwired into the government's ideology but they realise that now is not the time to advertise it.
There is a further takeaway. Observe the silence of the site's Leavers. Not a peep from them. They either prefer to back up the government than be seen to be insufficiently Europhobic or agree with its priorities. The pathological hatred of the EU runs deep in them.
There is a third possibility - the probability that the EU procurement initiative won't magic more materials into existence. All the manufacturers are working flat out. The UK has some non-trivial amount of manufacturing capability in this regard. To put it crudely, would UK be putting material into such a program or getting it out?
That would be a plausible and intelligent reply. It was however, not the one that our government gave.
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/
So they now need more electricity and need to keep burning coal to power the cars.
indeed. but they must have the room (and climate?) for a solar field the size of England? Not sure how many cars that would power.
Zero at night!
Tesla Powerwall - other manufacturers are available. Besides fewer cars on the road at night.
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
Prior to this the experience with SARDS showed what the demands for respiratory support would be. The Chinese were quite open on this.
The spin that is going on that the Chinese misled the government on the seriousness of the epidemic is quite a long way from the truth. It is plain old arse covering.
Agreed. While it's entirely possible/very likely that the Chinese have played fast and loose with the numbers infected (for example, they don't count detected cases who are asymptomatic), the idea that they misled the world as to the seriousness of this isn't tenable. It's undeniable that there was a coverup by local officials at the start of the outbreak, but following that the scale of the response (which was discussed on here at the time in some detail) gave a quite early warning of how serious they thought it was. That their nearest neighbours reacted almost immediately, and have suffered least from the pandemic, is confirmation of that.
The visceral Europhobia of this government is boundless. It is willing to risk lives rather than work with the EU.
I have two takeaways from the government lying on the reasons for not taking part in EU joint procurement. The first positive interpretation is the hope that the Johnson regime is growing up and realising that ideology doesn't butter the parsnips.
The second more worrying interpretation is that it knows it hasn't sourced nearly as much equipment as it should have done and it's getting its excuses in early.
The simple interpretation is the correct one. This is hardwired into the government's ideology but they realise that now is not the time to advertise it.
There is a further takeaway. Observe the silence of the site's Leavers. Not a peep from them. They either prefer to back up the government than be seen to be insufficiently Europhobic or agree with its priorities. The pathological hatred of the EU runs deep in them.
There is a third possibility - the probability that the EU procurement initiative won't magic more materials into existence. All the manufacturers are working flat out. The UK has some non-trivial amount of manufacturing capability in this regard. To put it crudely, would UK be putting material into such a program or getting it out?
Why lie about it? The government's first justification for not taking part was simply that the UK had decided to leave the EU. This explanation is by far the most plausible as the government has hardly hidden its refusal to deal with EU programmes.
Its second explanation was that it couldn't take part due to an admin error. There has been plenty of evidence to demonstrate that that this explanation is completely false.
Lies are interesting because of the reasons why people lied in that particular way.
Amazing what happened inside Cameron’s second term, really, isn’t it?
It wouldn’t be him fighting this one though. It would probably be Osborne v. Corbyn assuming Remain won by enough but he might have been ousted for Boris by now too.
It probably wouldn't be happening.
Question for the brains trusts - if we were in such an alternate timeline, and a GE was effectively mandated within about six weeks, what would really happen? How would it be delayed?
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
Prior to this the experience with SARDS showed what the demands for respiratory support would be. The Chinese were quite open on this.
The spin that is going on that the Chinese misled the government on the seriousness of the epidemic is quite a long way from the truth. It is plain old arse covering.
But, hold on, if you lie about the actual volume of those that get it (which is clear in China is the case, 90,000 my arse), then when you take the % of those with that require hospital treatment, you are going to get incorrect demand.
It took like the real numbers are perhaps up to 40x what they claim. That isn't just a bit of massaging.
The models that are built require decent estimates of a whole load of factors, and if you lie about some of the base numbers, the whole thing will be off.
Those base numbers were in the two papers that I cited, including both case transmission rates, doubling times and severity of disease. Whether the starting point was 900 cases or 9 000 or 90 000 means very little. It just moves the timing a week or two.
I don't know Ferguson model and what factors will effect it, but from the summary along,
"The epidemic doubling time was 6.4 days"...well that clearly isn't what we are seeing in the West.
As I say, pretty much every Western's government was the same at in January and February. That suggest they all came to basically the same conclusion based on early data.
And given the lack of any real plans in Italy and Spain, they still didn't think it was going to be a problem.
It does seem like the UK put in place a range of plans very early on. The difference is a bit longer we thought it was more likely it would be on the lesser end of severity until the Italy numbers.
Should add, where the UK has "failed" is moving from the early testing / contact tracing which we did really well and put out a load of hotspots, to the mass testing. Germany has excelled at this, partly because of having bigger supply of PCR machines.
But lots of the other planning seems very good. The expanding NHS capacity, the plans to get retired staff back in, the likes of the Excel centre, the ratcheting approach to lockdown.
This is a post from my wife's cousin's daughter (58) living in Toronto
This is a fearful illness
So I am a presumptive case of Covid-19 waiting for Toronto Public Health to confirm (that seems like it is taking forever). I was wondering when I typed this post if there is actually a stigma to having Covid-19 but who cares. I am stuck at home, isolated, sick as hell and wondering when this is going to end. I have been hospitalized to get oxygen, my fever hit 40.1(104+). I now get winded going from the living room to the bathroom, my chest is tight, I feel like I have glass shards in my lungs, I have lost my sense of smell and taste. This has been hell and I am 10 days in. Nobody wants this! It is not a hoax, no one is immune, this is killing people! Be scared. People need to take this seriously and stay the fuck home. You do not want to be responsible for giving this to someone you love. People please start listening!!
Estimates of the real mortality rate of the virus range widely from ~0.1% (implied by the Chief Medical Officer for Scotland yesterday) to 5+% (from articles in The Lancet). Professor Neil Ferguson, an advisor to the government, has also said that up to 5-10% of London may become infected in the next few weeks, implying a lower mortality rate.
However, news on the economic front is also grim and getting worse. There is a risk that the government could leave it too late to restart the economy. I cannot visualise where the UK economy will be in a year or two, especially if no vaccine is found. Fortunately, there is a reasonable chance that a vaccine can be developed.
The situation in countries which are implementing a less effective lockdown than the UK will be very informative. I would include in these Sweden, Iran and India. Right now the government is gathering information. Then later, before the end of this year, the government will have to make some very difficult decisions.
Some key questions have not been answered. What is the mortality rate of the virus? What will be the effectiveness of a safe vaccine that can be developed? What is the lessor of two evils: a coronavirus epidemic and economic devastation caused by a lockdown?
Amazing what happened inside Cameron’s second term, really, isn’t it?
It wouldn’t be him fighting this one though. It would probably be Osborne v. Corbyn assuming Remain won by enough but he might have been ousted for Boris by now too.
It probably wouldn't be happening.
Question for the brains trusts - if we were in such an alternate timeline, and a GE was effectively mandated within about six weeks, what would really happen? How would it be delayed?
Good question. When the locals were delayed I thought the same. It obviously made senses, but how was it done? On the basis of what? And how does this not open the opportunity to a slippery slope to abuse?
The visceral Europhobia of this government is boundless. It is willing to risk lives rather than work with the EU.
I have two takeaways from the government lying on the reasons for not taking part in EU joint procurement. The first positive interpretation is the hope that the Johnson regime is growing up and realising that ideology doesn't butter the parsnips.
The second more worrying interpretation is that it knows it hasn't sourced nearly as much equipment as it should have done and it's getting its excuses in early.
The simple interpretation is the correct one. This is hardwired into the government's ideology but they realise that now is not the time to advertise it.
There is a further takeaway. Observe the silence of the site's Leavers. Not a peep from them. They either prefer to back up the government than be seen to be insufficiently Europhobic or agree with its priorities. The pathological hatred of the EU runs deep in them.
There is a third possibility - the probability that the EU procurement initiative won't magic more materials into existence. All the manufacturers are working flat out. The UK has some non-trivial amount of manufacturing capability in this regard. To put it crudely, would UK be putting material into such a program or getting it out?
Why lie about it? The government's first justification for not taking part was simply that the UK had decided to leave the EU. This explanation is by far the most plausible as the government has hardly hidden its refusal to deal with EU programmes.
Its second explanation was that it couldn't take part due to an admin error. There has been plenty of evidence to demonstrate that that this explanation is completely false.
Lies are interesting because of the reasons why people lied in that particular way.
I think we can guess why they are telling porkies. There are 12 ventilator manufactures in the world that do it at any scale, one of them is British. If we joined an EU scheme we would have to share.
The UK government can hardly stand up and saying we are being selfish bastards and not going to share with Italy when their people are dying from a lack of them.
On the cancelled boundary review at 600, the Torres would have won less seats (352 vs 364) but would have had a bigger majority as Lab would only have had 174, the SNP 47 and the LDs 7. A few that would have switched to Con are Westmoreland, Plymouth Sutton and Southampton Test
In a review based on 650 seats the Cons will likely gain seats as there will be new seats created in the shires e.g. Berks, Bucks, Oxon each gain one. The main area of Tory losses will be Wales, which loses its over representation
Do we know how many seats Wales will get?
Incidentally, I am not at all sure I agree with you that the Tories would suffer major losses in Wales. On the 600 notional boundaries Labour took an absolute pounding - eight down due largely to consolidation in the Valleys - but the Tories only lost two. The score would have been Lab 14, Tory 12, PC 2 and 2 toss-ups.
As a left-of-centre Europhile type I'm all for critiquing this Gov't. And, yes, they were painfully slow off the mark.
However, surely the best thing we can do, left or right, is to get behind them now that they are up to speed? I am currently happy with Boris' handling of the situation and he has my support, even approval.
I would say the UK was poorly prepared for the epidemic, it didn't learn from Asian experience and was slow to react. This means the mitigation in the form of lockdown will be more damaging than it need to be. However I don't think it's very different from other European countries in those respects.
Johnson has gone up in my estimation. I think he wants to do the best he can in dealing with this epidemic. It's the first time I have thought that about anything he's ever done.
I like the way the King of Thailand is coping with the situation. He has, apparently taken over a whole hotel in Garmisch-Partenkrichen and moved his staff and 20 concubines there.
Estimates of the real mortality rate of the virus range widely from ~0.1% (implied by the Chief Medical Officer for Scotland yesterday) to 5+% (from articles in The Lancet). Professor Neil Ferguson, an advisor to the government, has also said that up to 5-10% of London may become infected in the next few weeks, implying a lower mortality rate.
However, news on the economic front is also grim and getting worse. There is a risk that the government could leave it too late to restart the economy. I cannot visualise where the UK economy will be in a year or two, especially if no vaccine is found. Fortunately, there is a reasonable chance that a vaccine can be developed.
The situation in countries which are implementing a less effective lockdown than the UK will be very informative. I would include in these Sweden, Iran and India. Right now the government is gathering information. Then later, before the end of this year, the government will have to make some very difficult decisions.
Some key questions have not been answered. What is the mortality rate of the virus? What will be the effectiveness of a safe vaccine that can be developed? What is the lessor of two evils: a coronavirus epidemic and economic devastation caused by a lockdown?
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/
So they now need more electricity and need to keep burning coal to power the cars.
indeed. but they must have the room (and climate?) for a solar field the size of England? Not sure how many cars that would power.
I like the way the King of Thailand is coping with the situation. He has, apparently taken over a whole hotel in Garmisch-Partenkrichen and moved his staff and 20 concubines there.
The visceral Europhobia of this government is boundless. It is willing to risk lives rather than work with the EU.
I have two takeaways from the government lying on the reasons for not taking part in EU joint procurement. The first positive interpretation is the hope that the Johnson regime is growing up and realising that ideology doesn't butter the parsnips.
The second more worrying interpretation is that it knows it hasn't sourced nearly as much equipment as it should have done and it's getting its excuses in early.
The simple interpretation is the correct one. This is hardwired into the government's ideology but they realise that now is not the time to advertise it.
There is a further takeaway. Observe the silence of the site's Leavers. Not a peep from them. They either prefer to back up the government than be seen to be insufficiently Europhobic or agree with its priorities. The pathological hatred of the EU runs deep in them.
There is a third possibility - the probability that the EU procurement initiative won't magic more materials into existence. All the manufacturers are working flat out. The UK has some non-trivial amount of manufacturing capability in this regard. To put it crudely, would UK be putting material into such a program or getting it out?
That, however, is not the UK government's position. Its formal position, so far as one can discern it, is that the EU's invitation to work with them got chewed by the dog.
Which is perhaps a more diplomatic way of refusing than saying. We get first dibs on all new ventilators built in Britain then if there is any left you can have some
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.
That doesn't seem tenable to me. At the end of January, several papers were published in the Lancet on typical features of COVID19, including hospitalization rate and need for intensive care. 17% and 11% respectively in this review:
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
Prior to this the experience with SARDS showed what the demands for respiratory support would be. The Chinese were quite open on this.
The spin that is going on that the Chinese misled the government on the seriousness of the epidemic is quite a long way from the truth. It is plain old arse covering.
But, hold on, if you lie about the actual volume of those that get it (which is clear in China is the case, 90,000 my arse), then when you take the % of those with that require hospital treatment, you are going to get incorrect demand.
It took like the real numbers are perhaps up to 40x what they claim. That isn't just a bit of massaging.
The models that are built require decent estimates of a whole load of factors, and if you lie about some of the base numbers, the whole thing will be off.
I can also believe to some extent that Western governments thought that the population density, high smoking rates, high pollution and poorer health, probably would mean that demand in the West would be lower.
The fact that basically every Western government have basically had the same outlook on this says something. The only real difference across Europe is that Germany have managed to ramp up their testing to a much larger extent than anywhere else, but they started with a much bigger case of things like PCR machines.
South Korea is really the only large state that was very early with a response, one because of closeness to China and two because they have been through SARs and MERs, so they are tended to act to the other extreme.
South Korea also had to deal with a Death Cult (a real one this time, Mr. Meeks) that gleefully went about spreading the virus.
Comments
2 strokes, dodgy diesels , coal and wood burning etc.
A few rips offs of the Nissan Leaf won’t solve it overnight.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30211-7/fulltext
I suspect the lack of action was more down to not expecting sustained transmission outside China. The evidence was clear on how severe the disease was. This paper from China on 31 Jan for example:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30260-9/fulltext
Prior to this the experience with SARDS showed what the demands for respiratory support would be. The Chinese were quite open on this.
The spin that is going on that the Chinese misled the government on the seriousness of the epidemic is quite a long way from the truth. It is plain old arse covering.
People are screaming blue murder that the FDA gave approval to test malaria medication on coronavirus patients, mostly because Trump mentioned it at his press conference and they don't want him to be able to take credit.
I wonder if bookies will start taking bets on the Virtual Grands Prix (I'd probably be disinclined to bet on such things, but would give them a look just in case).
In the Second Age of the web people used search engines to find the information they were after.
In the Third Age of the web people asked other people questions and relied on them finding and linking to information to answer their question.
In this, the Fourth Age of the web most people believe the fake news fed to them by bots and algorithms in their filter bubble, and are impervious to any contrary information.
Be glad that you came across a holdout against the Fourth Age. The Second/Third Age battle was lost long ago.
Just be careful not to get carried away.
Mr. Sandpit, yeah, I did read somewhere they'd be taking bets on the Virtual Grand National (again, not my area really).
(It is COVID related in the sense that they are specifically keen to avoid swimming at this point in time, even if it is a measure that has been undertaken before. Our journalists really are shit though)
Just pointing out facts, with no comment.
For example the Easter egg thing was that people were making specific journeys to buy Easter eggs. The question was whether the journey was essential. Not quite as reported.
In other news: Garden centres want digging out of a hole.
Nighthawk is a great word for Superghosts.
You either “win” 0.6% of your life or it is all over for ever. Would you take 3-1 odds on that bet? Or would you want more?
It wouldn’t be him fighting this one though. It would probably be Osborne v. Corbyn.
Mr. Jonathan, saw on Twitter the other day that Kevin Maguire seems to think we 'need' a new election. Not sure why.
There was a couple walking their dog (we exchanged a 'good morning') and a woman without a dog.
One of our neighbours was doing some early morning pruning, wearing what looked like a Hazmat suit.
https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/1244888581891600392
The Chinese campaign of disinformation and deception over this virus is very well documented and acknowledged at the highest levels in our security services and our government.
Have a look in the mirror man.
"At the start of 2017, China announced that it would invest $360 billion in renewable energy by 2020 and scrap plans to build 85 coal-fired power plants. In March, Chinese authorities reported that the country was already exceeding official targets for energy efficiency, carbon intensity, and the share of clean energy sources."
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/08/how-china-is-leading-the-renewable-energy-revolution
.. and that's without thanking China for our cheap solar panels.
Of course it's not enough!
Con - 33
Lab - 30
Ukip - 18
LD - 10
If our security services are that easy to fool, then clearly they need to up their game.
On Jan 31st the FCO advised against all non essential travel to China, and arranged evacuation flights with quarantine. Clearly the government new the risks of the disease.
So you’re not just playing for the 0.6% but the rights and freedom to enjoy the 100.6%.
Johnson has gone up in my estimation. I think he wants to do the best he can in dealing with this epidemic. It's the first time I have thought that about anything he's ever done.
However, surely the best thing we can do, left or right, is to get behind them now that they are up to speed? I am currently happy with Boris' handling of the situation and he has my support, even approval.
The 2020 election: Gove vs. Cooper, started with the Tories 15pts behind and now delayed indefinitely due to Coronavirus.
But after two decades of rapid expansion, sales fell in 2018 by 6% to 22.7 million units.
The most recent figures show that New Energy Vehicles (NEVs) - a category which includes electric and hybrid models - has defied that trend, growing substantially over the past year."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46745472
For clarity, despite my username and 'Song' being a common Chinese name I am not Chinese, but I am attached to the use of Facts.
I for one will be very interested to hear more about that pandemic planning exercise from a few years back.
The second more worrying interpretation is that it knows it hasn't sourced nearly as much equipment as it should have done and it's getting its excuses in early.
I think you should do some more reading up on the political, economic and diplomatic actions of the Chinese government on this virus over the last 4 months before you comment further.
It is not surprising that politicians were flat footed, they have no experience or preparation for these events, and that is true across the world.
If it had gone the other way, there would have been a massively reduced UKIP et al pitch - they'd had their vote and lost. What would be the pitch - the people got it wrong and they want another vote? Too close to the Irish revote thing....
That was the intent of the referendum in the first place - to kill off Out for a generation.
If Cameron had won it, he would have been unassailable.
It took like the real numbers are perhaps up to 40x what they claim. That isn't just a bit of massaging.
The models that are built require decent estimates of a whole load of factors, and if you lie about some of the base numbers, the whole thing will be off.
I can also believe to some extent that Western governments thought that the population density, high smoking rates, high pollution and poorer health, probably would mean that demand in the West would be lower.
The fact that basically every Western government have basically had the same outlook on this says something. The only real difference across Europe is that Germany have managed to ramp up their testing to a much larger extent than anywhere else, but they started with a much bigger case of things like PCR machines.
South Korea is really the only large state that was very early with a response, one because of closeness to China and two because they have been through SARs and MERs, so they are tended to act to the other extreme.
Delegation is one of the key skills in actually running things. The macho garbage about leaders personally running everything is horse manure - I associate it with the propaganda of truly dictatorial regimes. Look at Fat Boy in North Korea for the extreme version of that trope.
There is a further takeaway. Observe the silence of the site's Leavers. Not a peep from them. They either prefer to back up the government than be seen to be insufficiently Europhobic or agree with its priorities. The pathological hatred of the EU runs deep in them.
These youths will not die, but quite a lot of them will get ill, and quite a lot of them will know relatives to get ill and die.
Given the probable continuing chaos, I just wonder if they'd have been better not trying to lockdown at all.
(It was exceptionally badly done, declared overnight, for ALL citizens, without warning... or apparently planning.)
In a review based on 650 seats the Cons will likely gain seats as there will be new seats created in the shires e.g. Berks, Bucks, Oxon each gain one. The main area of Tory losses will be Wales, which loses its over representation
"The epidemic doubling time was 6.4 days"...well that clearly isn't what we are seeing in the West.
As I say, pretty much every Western's government was the same at in January and February. That suggest they all came to basically the same conclusion based on early data.
And given the lack of any real plans in Italy and Spain, they still didn't think it was going to be a problem.
It does seem like the UK put in place a range of plans very early on. The difference is a bit longer we thought it was more likely it would be on the lesser end of severity until the Italy numbers.
Besides fewer cars on the road at night.
Has it really been five years?
While it's entirely possible/very likely that the Chinese have played fast and loose with the numbers infected (for example, they don't count detected cases who are asymptomatic), the idea that they misled the world as to the seriousness of this isn't tenable.
It's undeniable that there was a coverup by local officials at the start of the outbreak, but following that the scale of the response (which was discussed on here at the time in some detail) gave a quite early warning of how serious they thought it was.
That their nearest neighbours reacted almost immediately, and have suffered least from the pandemic, is confirmation of that.
Its second explanation was that it couldn't take part due to an admin error. There has been plenty of evidence to demonstrate that that this explanation is completely false.
Lies are interesting because of the reasons why people lied in that particular way.
Question for the brains trusts - if we were in such an alternate timeline, and a GE was effectively mandated within about six weeks, what would really happen? How would it be delayed?
But lots of the other planning seems very good. The expanding NHS capacity, the plans to get retired staff back in, the likes of the Excel centre, the ratcheting approach to lockdown.
This is a fearful illness
So I am a presumptive case of Covid-19 waiting for Toronto Public Health to confirm (that seems like it is taking forever). I was wondering when I typed this post if there is actually a stigma to having Covid-19 but who cares. I am stuck at home, isolated, sick as hell and wondering when this is going to end. I have been hospitalized to get oxygen, my fever hit 40.1(104+). I now get winded going from the living room to the bathroom, my chest is tight, I feel like I have glass shards in my lungs, I have lost my sense of smell and taste. This has been hell and I am 10 days in. Nobody wants this! It is not a hoax, no one is immune, this is killing people! Be scared. People need to take this seriously and stay the fuck home. You do not want to be responsible for giving this to someone you love. People please start listening!!
However, news on the economic front is also grim and getting worse. There is a risk that the government could leave it too late to restart the economy. I cannot visualise where the UK economy will be in a year or two, especially if no vaccine is found. Fortunately, there is a reasonable chance that a vaccine can be developed.
The situation in countries which are implementing a less effective lockdown than the UK will be very informative. I would include in these Sweden, Iran and India. Right now the government is gathering information. Then later, before the end of this year, the government will have to make some very difficult decisions.
Some key questions have not been answered. What is the mortality rate of the virus? What will be the effectiveness of a safe vaccine that can be developed? What is the lessor of two evils: a coronavirus epidemic and economic devastation caused by a lockdown?
The UK government can hardly stand up and saying we are being selfish bastards and not going to share with Italy when their people are dying from a lack of them.
Incidentally, I am not at all sure I agree with you that the Tories would suffer major losses in Wales. On the 600 notional boundaries Labour took an absolute pounding - eight down due largely to consolidation in the Valleys - but the Tories only lost two. The score would have been Lab 14, Tory 12, PC 2 and 2 toss-ups.
So I went back to shut the gate and spotted another dog walker and a car.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30243-7/fulltext
Estimates an infection mortality rate of 0.66%
The disappointment is he didn't move to Phuket.