Apologies for the long comment, but I think there are some reasons to be hopeful at present.
There are some interesting tweets from top quality epidemiologists this morning talking about an Infection Mortality Rate of well under 1% (0.1-0.3% numbers have been bandied about). This compares to the symptomatic Morality Rate, which now seems to be being accepted to be around 1.2% (papers from Harvard / Oxford / Hong Kong are all consistent around this).
Now, this does not change anything about how this can overwhelm a health system if all of these infections happen at once - the situation we have here (and across Europe / N. America) now. However, if this were to be spread out over a longer period (say a year) - due to rapid testing / contact tracing via mobile phones or other technology - it would not overwhelm the health system and would have an overall mortality rate that would be much more tolerable. There would be some excess deaths but it would be more akin to flu over the course of a year (which of course does kill people across all age groups). Together with better therapeutics we can genuinely get on top of this moving forward.
The trick, and it is critical, is to get new infections down to a sufficiently low level that we can implement these S. Korea like measures discussed above in order to spread infections over a longer period and to make it manageable for the NHS. I'm confident that this is where all governments in western Europe are heading and also confident - on the basis of what has happened in S. Korea - that it can be successful.
If we are able to move towards this phase - where we have a low, but constant, number of deaths per week - we can get back to a fairly good degree of normality much sooner. This does not mean we will not need to minimise numbers of people in pubs / clubs for a period - we clearly will - but it does suggest a clear and coherent way forward.
It will, of course, require individuals to comply with this, but I think relative to permanent lock-down it is so much more preferable that this will indeed be the case. There will of course be some tragic deaths but perhaps no more than succumb, over a year, to a bad flu season, which is something we live with as a society.
In some cases, patients have been told not to come into hospital as they could catch the virus, although they may already have had it. Apparently, some private hospitals may be used as cancer treatment centres.
At this moment I have 3 appointments between 10 and 30 April: a eye examination, an insulin pump consultation, and a bone marrow biopsy.
No idea what will happen.
In theory I can drop the eye exam, as I just had the enhanced Specsaver's checkup, and do the pump chat over a video link.
Not sure how I feel about the hollow hatpin insertion, but this has already been delayed twice.
>Ydoethur >FFS. >It’s KEIR Starmer. >Not Keith. Not Kier. Not Kevin.
So Labour continue their tradition that those with penises always come ahead of those with vaginas.
But I think it is fair to say that this time they made the right choice of those available.
Has there been a female candidate who should have won? Cooper? Kendall? Eagle?
How can I put this? Win, perhaps not. But since no female candidate has ever been placed ahead of a man - even when the men included Prescott (up against the incumbent leader, let it not be forgotten) and Jeremy Corbyn, something seems a bit weird.
I hate to say it because I really enjoy David's pieces but that is one of the worst examples of normalisation that I have seen for a while.
I don't think David or indeed many others have picked up on the scale of what is coming. This month the best part of 100k businesses are forecast to go bankrupt. They won't officially go bankrupt because the courts are shut but they will cease to trade and make payment of their liabilities. Unemployment is about to increase by at least 2m, probably more. The majority of coffee shops, hairdressers and small shops will never open again or, if they do it will be a closing down sale. Our high street, already in a precarious state, will be utterly devastated. Those not in the public sector or with very large employers are about to suffer a major drop in income even if they retain their employment. Many self employed will never pay the tax they will be due on last years income.
Rishi Sunak has produced, with the BoE, one of the boldest and innovative action plans in the world. It will not be enough. Nothing would be enough for the devastation that is to come. God knows what will be left to be picked up on. What is certain is that there will be mountainous government debt, probable inflation, a collapse in GDP worse than the 30s and a completely different landscape where essential businesses are kept going with a level of government support and control that McDonnell would never have dreamed of.
This may prove a world where the government that has to handle this shit storm is simply swept away as Labour was in 2010 but 5x worse. Or it may not if Boris and Rishi are seen to be doing the best that could realistically be done. Either way its really not going to matter a damn what Starmer gets up to.
That is an excellent post, which lays out how the economic catastrophe has been underplayed and/or not understood. I would add that I think that many still underestimate the health consequences of Covid-19. At some point we are going to realise that the best working hypothesis to adopt is that we are (almost) all going to get this virus at some point and the death toll will be awful.
Herd immunity got a very bad press and was dropped like a hot potato but the truth is that it is that or a vaccine. This virus is not going away. I am also troubled about @Foxy's comment the other day that many who survive this virus have permanently damaged lungs. I agree that the longer term health consequences of this are yet to play out.
Yes - and until that vaccine is rolled out, those at risk will effectively have to live under some form of lockdown.
I learnt yesterday that my current GP practice and my new one (given that I will be stuck here for a year at least) are arguing about who should give me an asthma review. Without it no prescription and without that no inhalers which is not an optimal position to be in at such a time. I am hoping that this will get sorted on Monday. Stress is not great for asthmatics.
As a fellow sufferer I sympathise. However you should be able to find a nearby pharmacy who will sell you a blue Ventolin/Salbutamol reliever inhaler if necessary. Sadly GP practices have a poor reputation for arguing about this sort of thing.
And good morning everyone. Hope those who have gardens can enjoy them today! Sympathies to those who live in flats or similar residences
Thanks will try that. I have not yet changed practices. I will try and get a telephone asthma review with my existing one before changing. I was due to have one in person at the start of this year and had planned to go down for it until the virus hit. My current GP was going to speak to the new practice to sort something out. The issue seems to be that the new practice has cancelled routine asthma reviews and says that the old practice should just send an electronic prescription. The old one won’t do that without an asthma review. I’m hopeful something will get resolved.
It does seem daft to leave someone with impaired lung capacity without medicine at a time like this.....
True, though he does not have the negatives of Corbyn either. Dull but serious can win, eg Attlee, Francois Hollande so Tories should not get too complacent, especially after 10 years in power
"Dull" may be just what this country needs once it's had its fill of Johnson. After all, many thought Theresa May was the leader we needed and she doesn't exactly exude charisma.
Eh, he seems fine to me. He doesn't fill me with excitement but I don't get the view he is especially boring or terrible. He seems, presentationally, middle of the road, default. It will be interesting to see how he develops as a leader. Even Corbyn altered more over time than people thought.
Apologies for the long comment, but I think there are some reasons to be hopeful at present.
There are some interesting tweets from top quality epidemiologists this morning talking about an Infection Mortality Rate of well under 1% (0.1-0.3% numbers have been bandied about). This compares to the symptomatic Morality Rate, which now seems to be being accepted to be around 1.2% (papers from Harvard / Oxford / Hong Kong are all consistent around this).
Now, this does not change anything about how this can overwhelm a health system if all of these infections happen at once - the situation we have here (and across Europe / N. America) now. However, if this were to be spread out over a longer period (say a year) - due to rapid testing / contact tracing via mobile phones or other technology - it would not overwhelm the health system and would have an overall mortality rate that would be much more tolerable. There would be some excess deaths but it would be more akin to flu over the course of a year (which of course does kill people across all age groups). Together with better therapeutics we can genuinely get on top of this moving forward.
The trick, and it is critical, is to get new infections down to a sufficiently low level that we can implement these S. Korea like measures discussed above in order to spread infections over a longer period and to make it manageable for the NHS. I'm confident that this is where all governments in western Europe are heading and also confident - on the basis of what has happened in S. Korea - that it can be successful.
If we are able to move towards this phase - where we have a low, but constant, number of deaths per week - we can get back to a fairly good degree of normality much sooner. This does not mean we will not need to minimise numbers of people in pubs / clubs for a period - we clearly will - but it does suggest a clear and coherent way forward.
It will, of course, require individuals to comply with this, but I think relative to permanent lock-down it is so much more preferable that this will indeed be the case. There will of course be some tragic deaths but perhaps no more than succumb, over a year, to a bad flu season, which is something we live with as a society.
Which reinforces the importance of mass antibody testing, quickly.
Extended lockdowns are going to kill large parts of the economy stone dead. The trade off for reducing deaths is huge economic dislocation. Plotting a way forward has to be done very soon, and it cannot be done without much better information.
"Dull" may be just what this country needs once it's had its fill of Johnson. After all, many thought Theresa May was the leader we needed and she doesn't exactly exude charisma.
Mrs May showed why you shouldn't pick a dull unispiring leader.
But Labour had nobody else - Keith was the only one who wasn't a daft student Citizen Smith knobend.
I hate to say it because I really enjoy David's pieces but that is one of the worst examples of normalisation that I have seen for a while.
I don't think David or indeed many others have picked up on the scale of what is coming. This month the best part of 100k businesses are forecast to go bankrupt. They won't officially go bankrupt because the courts are shut but they will cease to trade and make payment of their liabilities. Unemployment is about to increase by at least 2m, probably more. The majority of coffee shops, hairdressers and small shops will never open again or, if they do it will be a closing down sale. Our high street, already in a precarious state, will be utterly devastated. Those not in the public sector or with very large employers are about to suffer a major drop in income even if they retain their employment. Many self employed will never pay the tax they will be due on last years income.
Rishi Sunak has produced, with the BoE, one of the boldest and innovative action plans in the world. It will not be enough. Nothing would be enough for the devastation that is to come. God knows what will be left to be picked up on. What is certain is that there will be mountainous government debt, probable inflation, a collapse in GDP worse than the 30s and a completely different landscape where essential businesses are kept going with a level of government support and control that McDonnell would never have dreamed of.
This may prove a world where the government that has to handle this shit storm is simply swept away as Labour was in 2010 but 5x worse. Or it may not if Boris and Rishi are seen to be doing the best that could realistically be done. Either way its really not going to matter a damn what Starmer gets up to.
The End Times.....
But I suspect you are near the truth. One thing you missed is the structure of the govt.s compensation / support scheme for Small Business is such that, for many, it is inaccessible. I noted the other day that word of this had reached The Snake and he issued instructions to the financial system that Things Must Change. Whether they change quickly enough (or sufficiently) remains to be seen.
People are great problem solvers. I expect, in the short term, an increase in barter / favours / money-under-the-counter / black market trading because it is quick, easy and answers immediate needs
Sunak’s big mistake is to make help available through banks via loans. The help should be grants and directly. It’s a misdiagnosis of the problem since, as you and I and others have said, the lost income is never coming back. The help is too indirect. Banks have sought to take advantage. And it plays into a perception that Tories’ first instinct is to help banks rather than those actually affected. That last point is, to me, a point of vulnerability which an intelligent Labour opposition would exploit.
For balance, whilst I very much agree with you on the preferred method the flip side is the UKs support to businesses has been amongst the most generous in the world.
Apologies for the long comment, but I think there are some reasons to be hopeful at present.
There are some interesting tweets from top quality epidemiologists this morning talking about an Infection Mortality Rate of well under 1% (0.1-0.3% numbers have been bandied about). This compares to the symptomatic Morality Rate, which now seems to be being accepted to be around 1.2% (papers from Harvard / Oxford / Hong Kong are all consistent around this).
Now, this does not change anything about how this can overwhelm a health system if all of these infections happen at once - the situation we have here (and across Europe / N. America) now. However, if this were to be spread out over a longer period (say a year) - due to rapid testing / contact tracing via mobile phones or other technology - it would not overwhelm the health system and would have an overall mortality rate that would be much more tolerable. There would be some excess deaths but it would be more akin to flu over the course of a year (which of course does kill people across all age groups). Together with better therapeutics we can genuinely get on top of this moving forward.
The trick, and it is critical, is to get new infections down to a sufficiently low level that we can implement these S. Korea like measures discussed above in order to spread infections over a longer period and to make it manageable for the NHS. I'm confident that this is where all governments in western Europe are heading and also confident - on the basis of what has happened in S. Korea - that it can be successful.
If we are able to move towards this phase - where we have a low, but constant, number of deaths per week - we can get back to a fairly good degree of normality much sooner. This does not mean we will not need to minimise numbers of people in pubs / clubs for a period - we clearly will - but it does suggest a clear and coherent way forward.
It will, of course, require individuals to comply with this, but I think relative to permanent lock-down it is so much more preferable that this will indeed be the case. There will of course be some tragic deaths but perhaps no more than succumb, over a year, to a bad flu season, which is something we live with as a society.
Which reinforces the importance of mass antibody testing, quickly.
Extended lockdowns are going to kill large parts of the economy stone dead. The trade off for reducing deaths is huge economic dislocation. Plotting a way forward has to be done very soon, and it cannot be done without much better information.
Actually, for this strategy to work you need to scale up the testing to see if you have the live virus (antigen testing / PCR testing). The antibody may not be present at sufficiently high levels in those who have just been infected. So it requires both. But these developments are happening across the world, so a good reason to think this strategy can work.
"Dull" may be just what this country needs once it's had its fill of Johnson. After all, many thought Theresa May was the leader we needed and she doesn't exactly exude charisma.
Mrs May showed why you shouldn't pick a dull unispiring leader.
But Labour had nobody else - Keith was the only one who wasn't a daft student Citizen Smith knobend.
Leadership will change Starmer as it changes all who reach the pinnacle. Let's see how he performs in 12 months or 24 months rather than judging him on some words on a Saturday morning when few are listening or interested.
All joking aside, hopefully it is telling that the very last word of Starmer's victory speech was 'government', as a sign of where his focus will be. Not on building a lovely mass movement as a goal in itself.
"Dull" may be just what this country needs once it's had its fill of Johnson. After all, many thought Theresa May was the leader we needed and she doesn't exactly exude charisma.
Mrs May showed why you shouldn't pick a dull unispiring leader.
But Labour had nobody else - Keith was the only one who wasn't a daft student Citizen Smith knobend.
"Dull" may be just what this country needs once it's had its fill of Johnson. After all, many thought Theresa May was the leader we needed and she doesn't exactly exude charisma.
Mrs May showed why you shouldn't pick a dull unispiring leader.
But Labour had nobody else - Keith was the only one who wasn't a daft student Citizen Smith knobend.
Leadership will change Starmer as it changes all who reach the pinnacle. Let's see how he performs in 12 months or 24 months rather than judging him on some words on a Saturday morning when few are listening or interested.
I suppose Loto is the pinnacle for Labour leaders not called Blair.
To be controversial, the Chinese idea of holding a 3-minute silence to remember the dead of this virus isn't the worst idea I've ever heard.
Yes, we must honour the living and especially those in the front line of this war but we mustn't forget the victims and their families.
The Chinese should hold a 30 minute silence, given how they've under-reported this thing so far.
Well, that's not very helpful so let's get back to the substantive - do you think some form of national commemoration for the dead is or will be appropriate?
I don`t think that Raynor has much more credibility to be honest.
Rayner’s record at education was distinctly mixed. Excellent on lifelong learning and FE, reasonable on primary, positively hapless on secondary.
But she definitely has the ability to think and to speak. She could well be one to surprise on the upside.
She is the friend of a friend whose judgement I trust, and he rates her very highly. I will observe with interest.
Her personal experience of secondary wasn't good, but she's someone who benefited considerably from lifelong learning and FE. It's a sector which has suffered severely during the past 10 years.
So Labour continue their tradition that those with penises always come ahead of those with vaginas.
But I think it is fair to say that this time they made the right choice of those available.
Given coronavirus Starmer is head and shoulders best suited for Labour. A boring steady course will work fine if the country turns on the govt. If the country stick with the govt no Labour leader was going to win anyway.
If coronavirus had not occurred it is possible Nandy or Phillips would have had more chance of winning the next election through offering something different.
"Dull" may be just what this country needs once it's had its fill of Johnson. After all, many thought Theresa May was the leader we needed and she doesn't exactly exude charisma.
Mrs May showed why you shouldn't pick a dull unispiring leader.
But Labour had nobody else - Keith was the only one who wasn't a daft student Citizen Smith knobend.
I don`t think that Raynor has much more credibility to be honest.
Rayner’s record at education was distinctly mixed. Excellent on lifelong learning and FE, reasonable on primary, positively hapless on secondary.
But she definitely has the ability to think and to speak. She could well be one to surprise on the upside.
She is the friend of a friend whose judgement I trust, and he rates her very highly. I will observe with interest.
Her personal experience of secondary wasn't good, but she's someone who benefited considerably from lifelong learning and FE. It's a sector which has suffered severely during the past 10 years.
Again though, it’s not her experience but her policies I am talking about.
I just worry that if you get secondary wrong - which she would have done - it makes it a great deal harder to claw back through LL later on. It’s like building a house but forgetting to put in deep foundations.
I did a lot of work, including retraining of my own, through the WEA at one point. It was noticeable that those of us who did well at school found the course far easier and indeed, by the finish I was working with others.
Comments
There are some interesting tweets from top quality epidemiologists this morning talking about an Infection Mortality Rate of well under 1% (0.1-0.3% numbers have been bandied about). This compares to the symptomatic Morality Rate, which now seems to be being accepted to be around 1.2% (papers from Harvard / Oxford / Hong Kong are all consistent around this).
Now, this does not change anything about how this can overwhelm a health system if all of these infections happen at once - the situation we have here (and across Europe / N. America) now. However, if this were to be spread out over a longer period (say a year) - due to rapid testing / contact tracing via mobile phones or other technology - it would not overwhelm the health system and would have an overall mortality rate that would be much more tolerable. There would be some excess deaths but it would be more akin to flu over the course of a year (which of course does kill people across all age groups). Together with better therapeutics we can genuinely get on top of this moving forward.
The trick, and it is critical, is to get new infections down to a sufficiently low level that we can implement these S. Korea like measures discussed above in order to spread infections over a longer period and to make it manageable for the NHS. I'm confident that this is where all governments in western Europe are heading and also confident - on the basis of what has happened in S. Korea - that it can be successful.
If we are able to move towards this phase - where we have a low, but constant, number of deaths per week - we can get back to a fairly good degree of normality much sooner. This does not mean we will not need to minimise numbers of people in pubs / clubs for a period - we clearly will - but it does suggest a clear and coherent way forward.
It will, of course, require individuals to comply with this, but I think relative to permanent lock-down it is so much more preferable that this will indeed be the case. There will of course be some tragic deaths but perhaps no more than succumb, over a year, to a bad flu season, which is something we live with as a society.
https://images.app.goo.gl/X5rKq48YmezAcu7aA
It does seem daft to leave someone with impaired lung capacity without medicine at a time like this.....
Delivery really
Like
Blair's pacing
Only shit
The last ten years can't have been much fun for him.
Clement Attlee
Harold Wilson
James Callaghan
Tony Blair
Gordon Brown
Keir Starmer
And I do want labour to provide a genuine opposition
Dull but serious can win, eg Attlee, Francois Hollande so Tories should not get too complacent, especially after 10 years in power
Johnson is hardly dull, but equally he’s not very competent.
Corbyn and Duncan Smith were both dull and totally incompetent.
Starmer’s record as DPP was less than stellar. However, nobody has ever done well in it and just surviving may have been a sign of ability.
Keir Starmer 275,750 (56.2%)
Rebecca Long-Bailey 135,218 (27.6%)
Lisa Nandy 79,597 (16.2%)
But she definitely has the ability to think and to speak. She could well be one to surprise on the upside.
She is the friend of a friend whose judgement I trust, and he rates her very highly. I will observe with interest.
Penis 100%
Vagina 0%
Extended lockdowns are going to kill large parts of the economy stone dead. The trade off for reducing deaths is huge economic dislocation. Plotting a way forward has to be done very soon, and it cannot be done without much better information.
But Labour had nobody else - Keith was the only one who wasn't a daft student Citizen Smith knobend.
Yes, we must honour the living and especially those in the front line of this war but we mustn't forget the victims and their families.
he been
taking
public speaking
lessons frommmmmmmmm
Peston?
52% for Rayner (BBC)
My, how we've changed you ;-)
It's a sector which has suffered severely during the past 10 years.
Gawd help Labour.
Tory leadership election result
Prick 100%
Cnut 100%.
My mate wants to go out for a run...
What a fucking Muppet.
#JezzaIsStillMyLabourLeader
Of course, it might well kill off humanity's ambitions to establish a Galactic Empire.... other planets will have their own viruses (virii?)
If coronavirus had not occurred it is possible Nandy or Phillips would have had more chance of winning the next election through offering something different.
edit: referring to Peston, of course
I just worry that if you get secondary wrong - which she would have done - it makes it a great deal harder to claw back through LL later on. It’s like building a house but forgetting to put in deep foundations.
I did a lot of work, including retraining of my own, through the WEA at one point. It was noticeable that those of us who did well at school found the course far easier and indeed, by the finish I was working with others.
Few thought he was even a starter.
There were many in life who were smarter.
But he finished PM,
A CH, an OM,
An earl and a Knight of the Garter.