Once the daily death totals start dropping the pressure to lift the lockdown will be immense.
The govt need to get out in front of this from Tuesday.
I am only hearing such notions of pressure from:
- The whining press - You - Peter Hitchens
Every person I've spoken to this week expects it to last until at least the middle of May, and doesn't really mind.
How many were teenagers ?
We've a 16 year old boy and an 18 year old girl in this house, both coping reasonably well so far. He spends most of his time on his PC and exercising in the house, while she suns herself in the garden and video chats with her friends. They're in good spirits and understand very well the need for the lockdown. My main worry is with their disengagement with education, especially for my lad now that his GCSEs have been cancelled.
Aha, you’ve got it. We will never go back to the normal we had and things will change out of all recognition. People will lose and gain fortunes, businesses will shutter only to be replaced by new businesses. People will need to take on different roles and, indeed, completely different jobs. The world will have had to press the reset button and, in the meantime, many lives will have been saved. People are still desperately clinging to what they had, whereas a change of mindset is needed.
I don't wholly agree. I argued at the beginning of this that no job or business had a right to exist and that even in good times many businesses fail.
We've been through this cycle before - the decline of manufacturing industry led to wholesale job losses and business failures and communities transformed but new business and entrepreneurs emerged, new skills were developed and taught.
The end of mining is another salutary example of how communities can adapt to massive economic change.
Throughout history, events (predictable or otherwise) have challenged human ingenuity and adaptation - this will be no different. Much will go on as before but some aspects of life, as you say, won't be the same. We may value some things more and realise that other things we previously held in esteem weren't deserving of that.
The truth is I'd rather be alive and take my chances in the new world than be buried in the ruins of the old. Perhaps, more than anything else, we'll all value life a bit more and be able to talk about death a bit more too.
Also worth remembering that, even if there is a 25 % permanent shrinkage in the UK economy, that takes us back to the mid 90's, which didn't feel poor at the time. And unlike World War 2, the productive equipment won't get blown up by enemy bombs; it will still be there. And unlike the Great Depression, there is enough productivity even now to ensure food, health and safety for the whole population- though I'd really not want to be in the USA right now. Yes, there's a cost to the lockdown. But it's ironic seeing some people go all Project Fear about it.
It didn;t feel poor at the time because government debt was a tiny fraction of what it is now, and what it will be after Sunak's giveaways.
That will have to be serviced.
Without wishing to sound like an MMT adherent, does Japan feel poorer to you because of the level of government debt?
Have you seen how stagnant Japan's economy has become?? So yes.
If we're going to lament when it goes up, we are surely allowed a tiny cheer when it goes down. Of course it is just one day, but this time there is no weekend effect.
New deaths were predicted to peak this Easter Weekend.
Inshallah!
Call me a crank ('we all do - everyone') but I think this could be due to the full moon. I was very relieved that Boris got through the full moon. It has a very powerful effect that few are aware of these days.
If 'these circumstances' or ones like them continue to be prevalent, there is no point in staying in the EU anyway - the whole reason for extending the transition period is to get a great trade deal and try to maintain some of the 'benefits'. As there are presently zero benefits, and the EU is proving to be about as useful to be a member of in this situation as tits on a fish, I'm unsure as to the argument for continuing to lob in our hard-earned groat. We should quite literally 'fund our NHS' with that money instead.
If we're going to lament when it goes up, we are surely allowed a tiny cheer when it goes down. Of course it is just one day, but this time there is no weekend effect.
New deaths were predicted to peak this Easter Weekend.
Inshallah!
Call me a crank ('we all do - everyone') but I think this could be due to the full moon. I was very relieved that Boris got through the full moon. It has a very powerful effect that few are aware of these days.
My mother worked as a secretary in a doctors' surgery and she claimed that the full moon did have an effect on some people's mental health. There were patients with mental problems who became noticeably worse whenever there was a full moon.
I am reliably informed by parents of young kids that they go apeshit during a full moon too. And 'legend has it' that deaths from natural causes go up a lot. I had trouble sleeping on the eve of this recent one (when Bojo got taken in) and I know a lot of people the same, and the next night (full moon) too.
Slightly better, although it's always difficult to describe a number of deaths as a positive thing.
Let's hope that decline doesn't make people complacent, going into the weekend.
If hearing that ~900 people a day are still dying of this doesn't make people think twice, I am not sure what will.
I don't think people really understand that number, what it would be if transmission were not suppressed, and the secondary effects once we outstrip our ability to grow capacity to deal with it.
Add that to the fact that deaths are a lagging indicator, and exceptionalism (I am special/have a special circumstance) and it is a proven recipe for disaster.
Of the 765 new hospital deaths announced today by NHS England, 140 occurred on April 8 while 568 took place between April 1 and April 7.
WUT ????
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
It's the same pattern each day. This isn't a change today, so we are comparing like with like. There was a excellent tweet yesterday showing a matrix of "date of death" vs" date reported".
Of the 765 new hospital deaths announced today by NHS England, 140 occurred on April 8 while 568 took place between April 1 and April 7.
WUT ????
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
No, only 140 completed paperwork submitted. I am sure somebody can link to the tweet that shows the table of recorded deaths by day, and the vast bulk is always 3-4 days previous.
The government needs to explain its strategy - if it has one. Permanent lockdown is obviously unsustainable, so how will it judge when to lift it, at least partially?
I’m in the fortunate position of being able to bear even a stringent lockdown for a long period without too much difficulty. Others are not so lucky.
'Others are not so lucky' must be the understatement of the year.
Thousands of businesses are going to go to the wall permanently by the end of April. unemployment is going to explode, having goodness knows what effects on the millions holed up in tiny flats in our country.
In the end, its an enormous judgement call that takes a real leader to make. The only answer for me is to restart the economy now and use the money the build up NHS corona capacity more and faster.
Whether you realise it or not you are arguing for the mitigation strategy that was forecast to cost 250,000 lives.
If 'these circumstances' or ones like them continue to be prevalent, there is no point in staying in the EU anyway - the whole reason for extending the transition period is to get a great trade deal and try to maintain some of the 'benefits'. As there are presently zero benefits, and the EU is proving to be about as useful to be a member of in this situation as tits on a fish, I'm unsure as to the argument for continuing to lob in our hard-earned groat. We should quite literally 'fund our NHS' with that money instead.
One thing puzzling me is how do those who want a swift end to the lockdown square their views with the supposed love for 'our NHS'. I mean an early end to the lockdown adds to the dangers faced by nurses, doctors, cleaners, checkout staff in the supermarkets....... How can they be so selfish and callous?
No an early end to the lockdown means we might actually have some money to bolster their resources further, even after we have given them this breathing space to ramp up capacity.
It also means they can send their children to school or nursery again, something many NHS workers must be worried about.
One thing puzzling me is how do those who want a swift end to the lockdown square their views with the supposed love for 'our NHS'. I mean an early end to the lockdown adds to the dangers faced by nurses, doctors, cleaners, checkout staff in the supermarkets....... How can they be so selfish and callous?
No an early end to the lockdown means we might actually have some money to bolster their resources further, even after we have given them this breathing space to ramp up capacity.
It also means they can send their children to school or nursery again, something many NHS workers must be worried about.
You sound like the PFA guy spinning that players should not take , a pay cut as the Govt would get less in taxes.
A perfectly legitimate point by someone who has spent his life paying for the schoolsnhopitals via his taxes. Some of the money he gets finds its way here from abroad, making him an invisible earnings asset.
The more most people make, the more the government gets. The Billionaires, not so much. But the top 1% pay 27% of all the income tax nevertheless.
And the biggest makers are reasonably wealthy middle class people who pay their taxes here but who generate at least part of that money from abroad.
If we're going to lament when it goes up, we are surely allowed a tiny cheer when it goes down. Of course it is just one day, but this time there is no weekend effect.
New deaths were predicted to peak this Easter Weekend.
Inshallah!
Call me a crank ('we all do - everyone') but I think this could be due to the full moon. I was very relieved that Boris got through the full moon. It has a very powerful effect that few are aware of these days.
My mother worked as a secretary in a doctors' surgery and she claimed that the full moon did have an effect on some people's mental health. There were patients with mental problems who became noticeably worse whenever there was a full moon.
I am reliably informed by parents of young kids that they go apeshit during a full moon too. And 'legend has it' that deaths from natural causes go up a lot. I had trouble sleeping on the eve of this recent one (when Bojo got taken in) and I know a lot of people the same, and the next night (full moon) too.
Did you wake up lying in field with a bloodied mouth and ripped clothes by chance?
Of the 765 new hospital deaths announced today by NHS England, 140 occurred on April 8 while 568 took place between April 1 and April 7.
WUT ????
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
No, only 140 completed paperwork submitted. I am sure somebody can link to the tweet that shows the table of recorded deaths by day, and the vast bulk is always 3-4 days previous.
So are all these graphs of deaths per day updated to reflect those revisions ?
I don't see the slightest chance of the lockdown being ended, or anything like it, anytime soon. No government is going to consciously take a decision which three weeks later results in a sharp rise in avoidable deaths.
On the most optimistic scenario, what we might see is a refinement of the rules, which at the moment are a blunt instrument. The experts currently have only a vague understanding of the transmission vectors for this disease; we don't actually know, for example, whether it is much transmitted by viruses persisting on hard surfaces, nor whether there is really any danger in people going to the park even if they do pass within a metre or so of each other. The question of whether it is important to close schools is also unclear. Can we even risk the approach, advocated by some, of greatly relaxing the rules for the young and fit, whilst keeping very strict rules for the more vulnerable?
We just don't know the answers to questions like these, and realistically it is going to be murky for at least some weeks to come. Perhaps then, with more research results coming through, and more experience in other countries, it will be clearer. In the meantime the government will have to err on the side of caution. We all need to be patient.
The government needs to explain its strategy - if it has one. Permanent lockdown is obviously unsustainable, so how will it judge when to lift it, at least partially?
I’m in the fortunate position of being able to bear even a stringent lockdown for a long period without too much difficulty. Others are not so lucky.
'Others are not so lucky' must be the understatement of the year.
Thousands of businesses are going to go to the wall permanently by the end of April. unemployment is going to explode, having goodness knows what effects on the millions holed up in tiny flats in our country.
In the end, its an enormous judgement call that takes a real leader to make. The only answer for me is to restart the economy now and use the money the build up NHS corona capacity more and faster.
Whether you realise it or not you are arguing for the mitigation strategy that was forecast to cost 250,000 lives.
a forecast that was made by a man who then withdrew it.
My wife had a message today..... text or WhatsApp or something, which has replaced, and extended the range of, gossip over the garden wall...... from a friend who live close to a small-ish caravan park on the South coast. Apparently said park is now filling up. It has one or two permanent residents so it can't close, as other I know of have done. What will happen later in the weekend I know not.
If we're going to lament when it goes up, we are surely allowed a tiny cheer when it goes down. Of course it is just one day, but this time there is no weekend effect.
New deaths were predicted to peak this Easter Weekend.
Inshallah!
Call me a crank ('we all do - everyone') but I think this could be due to the full moon. I was very relieved that Boris got through the full moon. It has a very powerful effect that few are aware of these days.
My mother worked as a secretary in a doctors' surgery and she claimed that the full moon did have an effect on some people's mental health. There were patients with mental problems who became noticeably worse whenever there was a full moon.
I am reliably informed by parents of young kids that they go apeshit during a full moon too. And 'legend has it' that deaths from natural causes go up a lot. I had trouble sleeping on the eve of this recent one (when Bojo got taken in) and I know a lot of people the same, and the next night (full moon) too.
Did you wake up lying in field with a bloodied mouth and ripped clothes by chance?
Of the 765 new hospital deaths announced today by NHS England, 140 occurred on April 8 while 568 took place between April 1 and April 7.
WUT ????
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
No, only 140 completed paperwork submitted. I am sure somebody can link to the tweet that shows the table of recorded deaths by day, and the vast bulk is always 3-4 days previous.
So are all these graphs of deaths per day updated to reflect those revisions ?
The ones the media keep showing, AFAIK they don't. The pure number is just inputted into their chart on the day it is released, but they don't do per capita either. So they are basically bullshit in terms of the sort of comparisons they try to make.
The academic on twitter does though.
There are lots of ways they could do better, but I would have thought something like rolling say 3-day average of deaths on the days they occurred. No idea if in other countries if it is possible to know the exact day of death.
Maybe it's time to ban smoking on the grounds that it makes CV worse, not only affecting you (which you can tax for) but puts other people at risk who need the ICU bed more. Not now, but in the near future.
The government needs to explain its strategy - if it has one. Permanent lockdown is obviously unsustainable, so how will it judge when to lift it, at least partially?
I’m in the fortunate position of being able to bear even a stringent lockdown for a long period without too much difficulty. Others are not so lucky.
'Others are not so lucky' must be the understatement of the year.
Thousands of businesses are going to go to the wall permanently by the end of April. unemployment is going to explode, having goodness knows what effects on the millions holed up in tiny flats in our country.
In the end, its an enormous judgement call that takes a real leader to make. The only answer for me is to restart the economy now and use the money the build up NHS corona capacity more and faster.
Whether you realise it or not you are arguing for the mitigation strategy that was forecast to cost 250,000 lives.
a forecast that was made by a man who then withdrew it.
If we're going to lament when it goes up, we are surely allowed a tiny cheer when it goes down. Of course it is just one day, but this time there is no weekend effect.
New deaths were predicted to peak this Easter Weekend.
Inshallah!
Call me a crank ('we all do - everyone') but I think this could be due to the full moon. I was very relieved that Boris got through the full moon. It has a very powerful effect that few are aware of these days.
My mother worked as a secretary in a doctors' surgery and she claimed that the full moon did have an effect on some people's mental health. There were patients with mental problems who became noticeably worse whenever there was a full moon.
I am reliably informed by parents of young kids that they go apeshit during a full moon too. And 'legend has it' that deaths from natural causes go up a lot. I had trouble sleeping on the eve of this recent one (when Bojo got taken in) and I know a lot of people the same, and the next night (full moon) too.
My late wife was GP but post graduation did two years A&E. She loathed working around the full moon because there were any number of v disturbed people who would turn up... As a GP i would often go out wihh her if she was worried about the patient and ut was a full moon. I would just sit in the car. It gave her some reassurance.
Of the 765 new hospital deaths announced today by NHS England, 140 occurred on April 8 while 568 took place between April 1 and April 7.
WUT ????
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
No, only 140 completed paperwork submitted. I am sure somebody can link to the tweet that shows the table of recorded deaths by day, and the vast bulk is always 3-4 days previous.
So are all these graphs of deaths per day updated to reflect those revisions ?
I suspect the net effect would be the same. You are allocating deaths reported on one day to a number of days before, so I suspect the "reported" chart is just a slightly lagged version of the "date of death" chart.
Once the daily death totals start dropping the pressure to lift the lockdown will be immense.
The govt need to get out in front of this from Tuesday.
I am only hearing such notions of pressure from:
- The whining press - You - Peter Hitchens
Every person I've spoken to this week expects it to last until at least the middle of May, and doesn't really mind.
How many were teenagers ?
We've a 16 year old boy and an 18 year old girl in this house, both coping reasonably well so far. He spends most of his time on his PC and exercising in the house, while she suns herself in the garden and video chats with her friends. They're in good spirits and understand very well the need for the lockdown. My main worry is with their disengagement with education, especially for my lad now that his GCSEs have been cancelled.
Teenage grandchildren behaving similarly, although, parents report, increasing complaints of boredom. But, like Mr E's children, all ours have gardens. Agree about the educational disengagement concern.
Maybe it's time to ban smoking on the grounds that it makes CV worse, not only affecting you (which you can tax for) but puts other people at risk who need the ICU bed more. Not now, but in the near future.
Well, arguably it's a once-in-a-lifetime chance to do something like that while being reasonably sure the black market won't be able to fill the gap.
Of the 765 new hospital deaths announced today by NHS England, 140 occurred on April 8 while 568 took place between April 1 and April 7.
WUT ????
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
No, only 140 completed paperwork submitted. I am sure somebody can link to the tweet that shows the table of recorded deaths by day, and the vast bulk is always 3-4 days previous.
So are all these graphs of deaths per day updated to reflect those revisions ?
The ones the media keep showing, AFAIK they don't. The pure number is just inputted into their chart on the day it is released, but they don't do per capita either. So they are basically bullshit in terms of the sort of comparisons they try to make.
The academic on twitter does though.
The graphs reflect the reporting, a lot of reporting is delayed. The conclusion is that the graphs are understating what is happening in real time.
Of the 765 new hospital deaths announced today by NHS England, 140 occurred on April 8 while 568 took place between April 1 and April 7.
WUT ????
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
No, only 140 completed paperwork submitted. I am sure somebody can link to the tweet that shows the table of recorded deaths by day, and the vast bulk is always 3-4 days previous.
So are all these graphs of deaths per day updated to reflect those revisions ?
The ones the media keep showing, AFAIK they don't. The pure number is just inputted into their chart on the day it is released, but they don't do per capita either. So they are basically bullshit in terms of the sort of comparisons they try to make.
The academic on twitter does though.
The graphs reflect the reporting, a lot of reporting is delayed. The conclusion is that the graphs are understating what is happening in real time.
Conversely, they'll be overstating things on the other side of the curve.
US unemployment rise in 3 weeks now nearly double what was seen in the Great Depression. The usual voices on here acting like the only threat is to (their) health and ignoring how much misery and indirect death will be caused by the economic destruction being wrought is getting a little tired.
Anyhow, given it was made clear that school closures made very little difference to the rate of spread, and they are so significant in the overall economic impact, they should be top of the list for reversal, even if that means they come in and nothing else changes for a while.
Of the 765 new hospital deaths announced today by NHS England, 140 occurred on April 8 while 568 took place between April 1 and April 7.
WUT ????
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
No, only 140 completed paperwork submitted. I am sure somebody can link to the tweet that shows the table of recorded deaths by day, and the vast bulk is always 3-4 days previous.
So are all these graphs of deaths per day updated to reflect those revisions ?
The ones the media keep showing, AFAIK they don't. The pure number is just inputted into their chart on the day it is released, but they don't do per capita either. So they are basically bullshit in terms of the sort of comparisons they try to make.
The academic on twitter does though.
The graphs reflect the reporting, a lot of reporting is delayed. The conclusion is that the graphs are understating what is happening in real time.
Well lagging and prone to inconsistency...because obviously as the peak passes you they are still including deaths from up to 7 days ago and they aren't guaranteed to be uniformly distributed (even if the actual deaths were) e.g. there is clearly a slow down in completing the paper work over the weekend and thus why we get a lull on Monday and Tuesday.
Of the 765 new hospital deaths announced today by NHS England, 140 occurred on April 8 while 568 took place between April 1 and April 7.
WUT ????
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
No, only 140 completed paperwork submitted. I am sure somebody can link to the tweet that shows the table of recorded deaths by day, and the vast bulk is always 3-4 days previous.
So are all these graphs of deaths per day updated to reflect those revisions ?
I suspect the net effect would be the same. You are allocating deaths reported on one day to a number of days before, so I suspect the "reported" chart is just a slightly lagged version of the "date of death" chart.
It may well underestimate any drop initially - as old deaths continue to flow into the daily figures.
Then the drop may be quite dramatic as old deaths no longer appear.
I don't see the slightest chance of the lockdown being ended, or anything like it, anytime soon. No government is going to consciously take a decision which three weeks later results in a sharp rise in avoidable deaths.
On the most optimistic scenario, what we might see is a refinement of the rules, which at the moment are a blunt instrument. The experts currently have only a vague understanding of the transmission vectors for this disease; we don't actually know, for example, whether it is much transmitted by viruses persisting on hard surfaces, nor whether there is really any danger in people going to the park even if they do pass within a metre or so of each other. The question of whether it is important to close schools is also unclear. Can we even risk the approach, advocated by some, of greatly relaxing the rules for the young and fit, whilst keeping very strict rules for the more vulnerable?
We just don't know the answers to questions like these, and realistically it is going to be murky for at least some weeks to come. Perhaps then, with more research results coming through, and more experience in other countries, it will be clearer. In the meantime the government will have to err on the side of caution. We all need to be patient.
I disagree because the lockdown medicine is so toxic to the body it is being administered to The evidence is getting stronger that it is more toxic to the body than the virus.
Look at what the police in Britain are turning into. Look at those US unemployment numbers today. Look at the social situation in Spain and Italy.
Maybe it's time to ban smoking on the grounds that it makes CV worse, not only affecting you (which you can tax for) but puts other people at risk who need the ICU bed more. Not now, but in the near future.
Well, arguably it's a once-in-a-lifetime chance to do something like that while being reasonably sure the black market won't be able to fill the gap.
Does it make it worse? Were there not dark murmurings it was actually protective? It would not entirely shock me if a virus prefers to land on a juicy pink lung rather than have to burrow through layers of tar to get there.
Of the 765 new hospital deaths announced today by NHS England, 140 occurred on April 8 while 568 took place between April 1 and April 7.
WUT ????
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
No, only 140 completed paperwork submitted. I am sure somebody can link to the tweet that shows the table of recorded deaths by day, and the vast bulk is always 3-4 days previous.
So are all these graphs of deaths per day updated to reflect those revisions ?
The ones the media keep showing, AFAIK they don't. The pure number is just inputted into their chart on the day it is released, but they don't do per capita either. So they are basically bullshit in terms of the sort of comparisons they try to make.
The academic on twitter does though.
The graphs reflect the reporting, a lot of reporting is delayed. The conclusion is that the graphs are understating what is happening in real time.
Conversely, they'll be overstating things on the other side of the curve.
There will occur a crossover when the number of reported fatalities will be higher than the ones actually occuring. But as the numbers above show, we're quite some distance from that.
It's a cruel twist but the areas that are suffering most under the lockdown (High rise flat occupants with teenagers in London say) are probably those that are benefiting the most from it 'but for' the lockdown.
I don't see the slightest chance of the lockdown being ended, or anything like it, anytime soon. No government is going to consciously take a decision which three weeks later results in a sharp rise in avoidable deaths.
On the most optimistic scenario, what we might see is a refinement of the rules, which at the moment are a blunt instrument. The experts currently have only a vague understanding of the transmission vectors for this disease; we don't actually know, for example, whether it is much transmitted by viruses persisting on hard surfaces, nor whether there is really any danger in people going to the park even if they do pass within a metre or so of each other. The question of whether it is important to close schools is also unclear. Can we even risk the approach, advocated by some, of greatly relaxing the rules for the young and fit, whilst keeping very strict rules for the more vulnerable?
We just don't know the answers to questions like these, and realistically it is going to be murky for at least some weeks to come. Perhaps then, with more research results coming through, and more experience in other countries, it will be clearer. In the meantime the government will have to err on the side of caution. We all need to be patient.
I disagree because the lockdown medicine is so toxic to the body it is being administered to The evidence is getting stronger that it is more toxic to the body than the virus.
Look at what the police in Britain are turning into. Look at those US unemployment numbers today. Look at the social situation in Spain and Italy.
Lockdown is extremely toxic. Its too toxic.
The virus is also extremely toxic. Ask Mr Johnson.
The UK currently has the highest confirmed case fatality rate in the world at over 13%.
We are mostly only testing new hospitalisations, plus healthcare staff. I recall seeing somewhere that the death rate if you are hospitalised is around 10%
Of the 765 new hospital deaths announced today by NHS England, 140 occurred on April 8 while 568 took place between April 1 and April 7.
WUT ????
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
No, only 140 completed paperwork submitted. I am sure somebody can link to the tweet that shows the table of recorded deaths by day, and the vast bulk is always 3-4 days previous.
So are all these graphs of deaths per day updated to reflect those revisions ?
I suspect the net effect would be the same. You are allocating deaths reported on one day to a number of days before, so I suspect the "reported" chart is just a slightly lagged version of the "date of death" chart.
Which will mean that the reported peak will come some number of days after the true peak of fatalities.
It obviously takes a few days for doctors and coroners to add individual deaths to the statistics.
Once the daily death totals start dropping the pressure to lift the lockdown will be immense.
The govt need to get out in front of this from Tuesday.
I am only hearing such notions of pressure from:
- The whining press - You - Peter Hitchens
Every person I've spoken to this week expects it to last until at least the middle of May, and doesn't really mind.
How many were teenagers ?
We've a 16 year old boy and an 18 year old girl in this house, both coping reasonably well so far. He spends most of his time on his PC and exercising in the house, while she suns herself in the garden and video chats with her friends. They're in good spirits and understand very well the need for the lockdown. My main worry is with their disengagement with education, especially for my lad now that his GCSEs have been cancelled.
Some right-on people are needed to liberate you all from gender-stereotypes ;-) .
US unemployment rise in 3 weeks now nearly double what was seen in the Great Depression. The usual voices on here acting like the only threat is to (their) health and ignoring how much misery and indirect death will be caused by the economic destruction being wrought is getting a little tired.
Anyhow, given it was made clear that school closures made very little difference to the rate of spread, and they are so significant in the overall economic impact, they should be top of the list for reversal, even if that means they come in and nothing else changes for a while.
Those tent cities we see along highways in places like LA and San Francisco? filled with poor souls with serious drug dependency and mental and physical problems? goodness knows what the mortality rates are.
America being America, those will soon be everywhere.
The medicine is killing the patient faster than the virus.
I don't see the slightest chance of the lockdown being ended, or anything like it, anytime soon. No government is going to consciously take a decision which three weeks later results in a sharp rise in avoidable deaths.
On the most optimistic scenario, what we might see is a refinement of the rules, which at the moment are a blunt instrument. The experts currently have only a vague understanding of the transmission vectors for this disease; we don't actually know, for example, whether it is much transmitted by viruses persisting on hard surfaces, nor whether there is really any danger in people going to the park even if they do pass within a metre or so of each other. The question of whether it is important to close schools is also unclear. Can we even risk the approach, advocated by some, of greatly relaxing the rules for the young and fit, whilst keeping very strict rules for the more vulnerable?
We just don't know the answers to questions like these, and realistically it is going to be murky for at least some weeks to come. Perhaps then, with more research results coming through, and more experience in other countries, it will be clearer. In the meantime the government will have to err on the side of caution. We all need to be patient.
There will come a point where either the government starts to relax the rules - or people will stop listening and take matters into their own hands. Anyone who thinks this will be our new normal forever is mad.
But then the government and its advisors know that and were warning about that before the lockdown started.
Once the daily death totals start dropping the pressure to lift the lockdown will be immense. The govt need to get out in front of this from Tuesday.
I am only hearing such notions of pressure from: - The whining press - You - Peter Hitchens Every person I've spoken to this week expects it to last until at least the middle of May, and doesn't really mind.
They will start to mind when they see the length of the dole queues, the out of control public finances, the plunge in sterling, the massive depression....
And the riots... Mustn´t forget public disorder, Mr Mortimer.....
Of the 765 new hospital deaths announced today by NHS England, 140 occurred on April 8 while 568 took place between April 1 and April 7.
WUT ????
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
No, only 140 completed paperwork submitted. I am sure somebody can link to the tweet that shows the table of recorded deaths by day, and the vast bulk is always 3-4 days previous.
So are all these graphs of deaths per day updated to reflect those revisions ?
The ones the media keep showing, AFAIK they don't. The pure number is just inputted into their chart on the day it is released, but they don't do per capita either. So they are basically bullshit in terms of the sort of comparisons they try to make.
The academic on twitter does though.
The graphs reflect the reporting, a lot of reporting is delayed. The conclusion is that the graphs are understating what is happening in real time.
Welcome to the world of real daily updated data.
P.S. This comment is a response to the thread in general, not Matthias specifically.
There will come a point where either the government starts to relax the rules - or people will stop listening and take matters into their own hands. Anyone who thinks this will be our new normal forever is mad.
But then the government and its advisors know that and were warning about that before the lockdown started.
Agreed, but we're not there yet.
Equally, though, we're not going back to normal soon whatever the government does. Many people are going to continue to work from home if they can, avoid contact, and certainly avoid bars, restaurants, flights, cruise ships etc etc, until it's clearly safe again, irrespective of whether the rules are relaxed.
I've seen people estimating whether or not we'll have much herd immunity after the current wave has topped out.
For clarity, the proportion of the population that will be immune (and the R0 number we'd need to get the infectivity down to) can be easily worked out.
Amount infected (and presumed immune) is In Population of UK (66.65 million) is P Death rate from coronavirus is r Number dead is D
(NB: death rate must include asymptomatic and very mild infections. The current Case Fatality Rate ignores these. With asymptomatic cases taken into account, I've seen estimates of "A bit under 1%", "0.66%", and "0.37%", but the latter is the most optimistic one I've seen)
In = D / (P * r)
And the number to which we must decrease infectivity, Rt (at the moment, we aim to get this number below 1.0 to break away from the exponential) is given by 1/(1-In)
Examples: if 20,000 deaths are incurred in the current wave, the figures for three examples are: r=1%: In=3.0%, Rt=1.03 r=0.66%: In=4.5%, Rt=1.05 r=0.37%: In=8.1%, Rt=1.09
The UK currently has the highest confirmed case fatality rate in the world at over 13%.
Someone was saying on previous thread that there are 83 "not knowns" to every 1 known infection. If true, this would bring the UK death rate down to 0.16% (assuming all deaths are known).
As I posted last night, without a vaccine, and an exit plan, we are going to be living with this horrible situation potentially for years.
I think it's just wishful thinking that it's ripped through the population, with many asymptotics...the hotspots tell us where the disease is more prevalent and what it does.....
So, it's probably worked through 2-5% of the population...we flatten the curve and we stop community transition in it's tracks- so herd immunity would be years away too...
And it's just nonsense to present an either/or with the economy.....if the health system collapse we have no economy....
All the outcomes at this moment in time are shocking.....
There will come a point where either the government starts to relax the rules - or people will stop listening and take matters into their own hands. Anyone who thinks this will be our new normal forever is mad.
But then the government and its advisors know that and were warning about that before the lockdown started.
Agreed, but we're not there yet.
Equally, though, we're not going back to normal soon whatever the government does. Many people are going to continue to work from home if they can, avoid contact, and certainly avoid bars, restaurants, flights, cruise ships etc etc, until it's clearly safe again, irrespective of whether the rules are relaxed.
The rule breakers get disproportionate coverage by the press (understandably). I think people will carry on doing as they are asked for longer than the media might expect.
I've seen people estimating whether or not we'll have much herd immunity after the current wave has topped out.
For clarity, the proportion of the population that will be immune (and the R0 number we'd need to get the infectivity down to) can be easily worked out.
Amount infected (and presumed immune) is In Population of UK (66.65 million) is P Death rate from coronavirus is r Number dead is D
(NB: death rate must include asymptomatic and very mild infections. The current Case Fatality Rate ignores these. With asymptomatic cases taken into account, I've seen estimates of "A bit under 1%", "0.66%", and "0.37%", but the latter is the most optimistic one I've seen)
In = D / (P * r)
And the number to which we must decrease infectivity, Rt (at the moment, we aim to get this number below 1.0 to break away from the exponential) is given by 1/(1-In)
Examples: if 20,000 deaths are incurred in the current wave, the figures for three examples are: r=1%: In=3.0%, Rt=1.03 r=0.66%: In=4.5%, Rt=1.05 r=0.37%: In=8.1%, Rt=1.09
What exactly are you saying Rt represents here? As currently defined, as Ln tends to 1 (i.e. herd immunity is achieved), Rt rises and takes us further from 1.0. Indeed, unless the Ln became negative, which it can't, we could never get Rt below 1 as you've defined it.
If we're going to lament when it goes up, we are surely allowed a tiny cheer when it goes down. Of course it is just one day, but this time there is no weekend effect.
New deaths were predicted to peak this Easter Weekend.
Inshallah!
Call me a crank ('we all do - everyone') but I think this could be due to the full moon. I was very relieved that Boris got through the full moon. It has a very powerful effect that few are aware of these days.
My mother worked as a secretary in a doctors' surgery and she claimed that the full moon did have an effect on some people's mental health. There were patients with mental problems who became noticeably worse whenever there was a full moon.
I am reliably informed by parents of young kids that they go apeshit during a full moon too. And 'legend has it' that deaths from natural causes go up a lot. I had trouble sleeping on the eve of this recent one (when Bojo got taken in) and I know a lot of people the same, and the next night (full moon) too.
My late wife was GP but post graduation did two years A&E. She loathed working around the full moon because there were any number of v disturbed people who would turn up... As a GP i would often go out wihh her if she was worried about the patient and ut was a full moon. I would just sit in the car. It gave her some reassurance.
A friend who has drink and drug problems had his ups and downs secret recorded in a diary by his parents, and the meltdowns were often at full moons
I've seen people estimating whether or not we'll have much herd immunity after the current wave has topped out.
For clarity, the proportion of the population that will be immune (and the R0 number we'd need to get the infectivity down to) can be easily worked out.
Amount infected (and presumed immune) is In Population of UK (66.65 million) is P Death rate from coronavirus is r Number dead is D
(NB: death rate must include asymptomatic and very mild infections. The current Case Fatality Rate ignores these. With asymptomatic cases taken into account, I've seen estimates of "A bit under 1%", "0.66%", and "0.37%", but the latter is the most optimistic one I've seen)
In = D / (P * r)
And the number to which we must decrease infectivity, Rt (at the moment, we aim to get this number below 1.0 to break away from the exponential) is given by 1/(1-In)
Examples: if 20,000 deaths are incurred in the current wave, the figures for three examples are: r=1%: In=3.0%, Rt=1.03 r=0.66%: In=4.5%, Rt=1.05 r=0.37%: In=8.1%, Rt=1.09
What exactly are you saying Rt represents here? As currently defined, as Ln tends to 1 (i.e. herd immunity is achieved), Rt rises and takes us further from 1.0. Indeed, unless the Ln became negative, which it can't, we could never get Rt below 1 as you've defined it.
One should also be well aware that all calculations may change substantially if certain parameters need to be revised:
Something worth exploring in sunnier times might the continuing disparities in the fortunes of SNP and Plaid Cymru. In the first devolved elections of 1999 Plaid did really quite well and seemed quite a threat.
Well expressed header Mike. For people living in inner city high rises, this is a multitude of times worse than for those with gardens. A regressive, flat tax if you like.
I'm getting some wonderful videos from the medics and NHS staff in the front line.....my nephew is riding a wave of euphoria- he's saving lives- really high impact stuff. He's only 25- and I just think of him as that little boy running around my house in his Spiderman outfit....
The UK currently has the highest confirmed case fatality rate in the world at over 13%.
Someone was saying on previous thread that there are 83 "not knowns" to every 1 known infection. If true, this would bring the UK death rate down to 0.16% (assuming all deaths are known).
The more worrying statistic for me is that yesterday the UK had the highest number of daily deaths anywhere in the world bar the US (which is roughly five times our size). It doesn't inspire confidence, and I worry that after a litany of mistakes in the past couple of months, the UK authorities still haven't got a proper grip on things.
I've seen people estimating whether or not we'll have much herd immunity after the current wave has topped out.
For clarity, the proportion of the population that will be immune (and the R0 number we'd need to get the infectivity down to) can be easily worked out.
Amount infected (and presumed immune) is In Population of UK (66.65 million) is P Death rate from coronavirus is r Number dead is D
(NB: death rate must include asymptomatic and very mild infections. The current Case Fatality Rate ignores these. With asymptomatic cases taken into account, I've seen estimates of "A bit under 1%", "0.66%", and "0.37%", but the latter is the most optimistic one I've seen)
In = D / (P * r)
And the number to which we must decrease infectivity, Rt (at the moment, we aim to get this number below 1.0 to break away from the exponential) is given by 1/(1-In)
Examples: if 20,000 deaths are incurred in the current wave, the figures for three examples are: r=1%: In=3.0%, Rt=1.03 r=0.66%: In=4.5%, Rt=1.05 r=0.37%: In=8.1%, Rt=1.09
What exactly are you saying Rt represents here? As currently defined, as Ln tends to 1 (i.e. herd immunity is achieved), Rt rises and takes us further from 1.0. Indeed, unless the Ln became negative, which it can't, we could never get Rt below 1 as you've defined it.
Rt is the target R0 number.
If the natural R0 is, say, 2.5, then when In rises to the point that Rt is 2.5 or greater, we have achieved herd immunity. (this requires an In of 60% or greater)
If no-one is infected/immune, then In is zero and Rt is 1.0 (we must keep it no higher than 1.0)
At the moment, we need to social distance/lockdown to the point where we drive Rt down to 1.0 or below. At certain levels of immunity, we would be able to get away with driving Rt down to, say, 1.5 or below, or 2.0 or below, and so on. This allows for a graduated lifting of restrictions.
Maybe it's time to ban smoking on the grounds that it makes CV worse, not only affecting you (which you can tax for) but puts other people at risk who need the ICU bed more. Not now, but in the near future.
As a hopeless addict this is my biggest fear. It freaks me out to even think about not being able to smoke. At the same time it is something I would welcome with open arms. If cigarettes became unavailable I would not be able to use them and in time - and not so long either - I would be cured.
Caveat. Best if ALL nicotine products were to go. Otherwise you can kick the fags but suck the lozenges or chew the gum or whatever. In which case you are feeding the dependency not killing it.
I have had in mind for some time now a blog which covers things other than work stuff (which I do on my work website). It will be mainly about gardens (mine and others) and the joys of trying to rebuild a house, making a new life somewhere very different to where I have mostly lived plus, if I feel like it, books, music, stuff about Italy etc and photos. It’s mainly for me really - and my one imaginary interested reader with whom I having a serendipitous conversation remotely. Now is the obvious time to do this.
What it should be called though eludes me. I normally enjoy dreaming up titles. But am stuck.
One of my children rather unkindly suggested “Why I am Right about Everything” which made me laugh but is a bit long. “From London to the Lakes” was another but is a bit twee. Something witty and / or eccentric would be nice. But brain has turned to mush. So if anyone has any brilliant ideas please let me know me.
The UK currently has the highest confirmed case fatality rate in the world at over 13%.
Someone was saying on previous thread that there are 83 "not knowns" to every 1 known infection. If true, this would bring the UK death rate down to 0.16% (assuming all deaths are known).
The more worrying statistic for me is that yesterday the UK had the highest number of daily deaths anywhere in the world bar the US (which is roughly five times our size). It doesn't inspire confidence, and I worry that after a litany of mistakes in the past couple of months, the UK authorities still haven't got a proper grip on things.
You are comparing apples and oranges. Every country is at different points in the outbreak, every country is fighting to record the figures on a daily basis under the shear weight of everything going on, and all using different inclusions / exclusions.
It will be months if not years, before anybody can really make genuine comparisons.
I have had in mind for some time now a blog which covers things other than work stuff (which I do on my work website). It will be mainly about gardens (mine and others) and the joys of trying to rebuild a house, making a new life somewhere very different to where I have mostly lived plus, if I feel like it, books, music, stuff about Italy etc and photos. It’s mainly for me really - and my one imaginary interested reader with whom I having a serendipitous conversation remotely. Now is the obvious time to do this.
What it should be called though eludes me. I normally enjoy dreaming up titles. But am stuck.
One of my children rather unkindly suggested “Why I am Right about Everything” which made me laugh but is a bit long. “From London to the Lakes” was another but is a bit twee. Something witty and / or eccentric would be nice. But brain has turned to mush. So if anyone has any brilliant ideas please let me know me.
Aha, you’ve got it. We will never go back to the normal we had and things will change out of all recognition. People will lose and gain fortunes, businesses will shutter only to be replaced by new businesses. People will need to take on different roles and, indeed, completely different jobs. The world will have had to press the reset button and, in the meantime, many lives will have been saved. People are still desperately clinging to what they had, whereas a change of mindset is needed.
I don't wholly agree. I argued at the beginning of this that no job or business had a right to exist and that even in good times many businesses fail.
We've been through this cycle before - the decline of manufacturing industry led to wholesale job losses and business failures and communities transformed but new business and entrepreneurs emerged, new skills were developed and taught.
The end of mining is another salutary example of how communities can adapt to massive economic change.
Throughout history, events (predictable or otherwise) have challenged human ingenuity and adaptation - this will be no different. Much will go on as before but some aspects of life, as you say, won't be the same. We may value some things more and realise that other things we previously held in esteem weren't deserving of that.
The truth is I'd rather be alive and take my chances in the new world than be buried in the ruins of the old. Perhaps, more than anything else, we'll all value life a bit more and be able to talk about death a bit more too.
Also worth remembering that, even if there is a 25 % permanent shrinkage in the UK economy, that takes us back to the mid 90's, which didn't feel poor at the time. And unlike World War 2, the productive equipment won't get blown up by enemy bombs; it will still be there. And unlike the Great Depression, there is enough productivity even now to ensure food, health and safety for the whole population- though I'd really not want to be in the USA right now. Yes, there's a cost to the lockdown. But it's ironic seeing some people go all Project Fear about it.
On a per capita basis that probably takes us back to the mid 80s. I wasn't alive then but I'm almost certain there was a lot of poverty and unemployment. It's not like we can have a second banking and oil revolution to pay the bills again.
No, I was going per head. Sorry for not making that clear. But even the economic cost of lockdown takes us back to the 1980's, that's still a much more manageable problem than the other big problems that human societies have had to deal with.
Something worth exploring in sunnier times might the continuing disparities in the fortunes of SNP and Plaid Cymru. In the first devolved elections of 1999 Plaid did really quite well and seemed quite a threat.
Plaid don't do well outside of Welsh-speaking Wales (is there a name for this area like Ireland has the Gaeltacht?) The SNP has no such limitations.
The media really should be taking this and making it into a clear infographic.
It's pretty clear, the media, as a collective noun, don't understand charts. Hence the proliferation of narrative questions when the daily announcement actually contains interesting slides they could ask about if they had the confidence to think on their feet.
I have had in mind for some time now a blog which covers things other than work stuff (which I do on my work website). It will be mainly about gardens (mine and others) and the joys of trying to rebuild a house, making a new life somewhere very different to where I have mostly lived plus, if I feel like it, books, music, stuff about Italy etc and photos. It’s mainly for me really - and my one imaginary interested reader with whom I having a serendipitous conversation remotely. Now is the obvious time to do this.
What it should be called though eludes me. I normally enjoy dreaming up titles. But am stuck.
One of my children rather unkindly suggested “Why I am Right about Everything” which made me laugh but is a bit long. “From London to the Lakes” was another but is a bit twee. Something witty and / or eccentric would be nice. But brain has turned to mush. So if anyone has any brilliant ideas please let me know me.
Labour need new leaders in Wales and Scotland before the next election. Drakeford and Leonard were brought in to align with Corbyn, but there's a mismatch now he's gone.
I have had in mind for some time now a blog which covers things other than work stuff (which I do on my work website). It will be mainly about gardens (mine and others) and the joys of trying to rebuild a house, making a new life somewhere very different to where I have mostly lived plus, if I feel like it, books, music, stuff about Italy etc and photos. It’s mainly for me really - and my one imaginary interested reader with whom I having a serendipitous conversation remotely. Now is the obvious time to do this.
What it should be called though eludes me. I normally enjoy dreaming up titles. But am stuck.
One of my children rather unkindly suggested “Why I am Right about Everything” which made me laugh but is a bit long. “From London to the Lakes” was another but is a bit twee. Something witty and / or eccentric would be nice. But brain has turned to mush. So if anyone has any brilliant ideas please let me know me.
Thanks v much.
Go with your offsping's suggestion!
If too long, abridge a bit to "I'm right about everything".
I've seen people estimating whether or not we'll have much herd immunity after the current wave has topped out.
For clarity, the proportion of the population that will be immune (and the R0 number we'd need to get the infectivity down to) can be easily worked out.
Amount infected (and presumed immune) is In Population of UK (66.65 million) is P Death rate from coronavirus is r Number dead is D
(NB: death rate must include asymptomatic and very mild infections. The current Case Fatality Rate ignores these. With asymptomatic cases taken into account, I've seen estimates of "A bit under 1%", "0.66%", and "0.37%", but the latter is the most optimistic one I've seen)
In = D / (P * r)
And the number to which we must decrease infectivity, Rt (at the moment, we aim to get this number below 1.0 to break away from the exponential) is given by 1/(1-In)
Examples: if 20,000 deaths are incurred in the current wave, the figures for three examples are: r=1%: In=3.0%, Rt=1.03 r=0.66%: In=4.5%, Rt=1.05 r=0.37%: In=8.1%, Rt=1.09
What exactly are you saying Rt represents here? As currently defined, as Ln tends to 1 (i.e. herd immunity is achieved), Rt rises and takes us further from 1.0. Indeed, unless the Ln became negative, which it can't, we could never get Rt below 1 as you've defined it.
Rt is the target R0 number.
If the natural R0 is, say, 2.5, then when In rises to the point that Rt is 2.5 or greater, we have achieved herd immunity. (this requires an In of 60% or greater)
If no-one is infected/immune, then In is zero and Rt is 1.0 (we must keep it no higher than 1.0)
At the moment, we need to social distance/lockdown to the point where we drive Rt down to 1.0 or below. At certain levels of immunity, we would be able to get away with driving Rt down to, say, 1.5 or below, or 2.0 or below, and so on. This allows for a graduated lifting of restrictions.
Many thanks - my reading of original post didn't see any distinction between R0 and Rt being made - that explanation makes clear
Given the lousy PPE equipment or rather the lack of it that they're required to wear into battle, it's more like fighting against the odds in Boulton Paul Defiants or even Fairey Battles.
This is truly shocking given the absence of planning that it evidences:
"EU Corona-bonds look dead in the water"...its the problem when you have so many nations with completely different economies, debt levels, etc.
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKJqOtwu-9o
Massive problems here for the Euro. They're either going to have to agree something that looks like a fiscal union (with direct EU taxes) or the single currency is in serious trouble. Printing money was the easy option and they're not taking it.
The UK currently has the highest confirmed case fatality rate in the world at over 13%.
Someone was saying on previous thread that there are 83 "not knowns" to every 1 known infection. If true, this would bring the UK death rate down to 0.16% (assuming all deaths are known).
The more worrying statistic for me is that yesterday the UK had the highest number of daily deaths anywhere in the world bar the US (which is roughly five times our size). It doesn't inspire confidence, and I worry that after a litany of mistakes in the past couple of months, the UK authorities still haven't got a proper grip on things.
The most worrying is that the US’s supermodel, working from the pattern and trend of reported deaths, indicates the UK will have more than any other European country, whilst also down dialling the predicated death toll in the US. What pattern in the stats is it seeing that we are not?
Comments
You'll be hounded off the site by Eadric And The Doom Klan.
Add that to the fact that deaths are a lagging indicator, and exceptionalism (I am special/have a special circumstance) and it is a proven recipe for disaster.
So only 140 deaths yesterday in hospitals ?
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1248223276427628546?s=20
The more most people make, the more the government gets. The Billionaires, not so much. But the top 1% pay 27% of all the income tax nevertheless.
And the biggest makers are reasonably wealthy middle class people who pay their taxes here but who generate at least part of that money from abroad.
That is the government's gold mine, in effect.
On the most optimistic scenario, what we might see is a refinement of the rules, which at the moment are a blunt instrument. The experts currently have only a vague understanding of the transmission vectors for this disease; we don't actually know, for example, whether it is much transmitted by viruses persisting on hard surfaces, nor whether there is really any danger in people going to the park even if they do pass within a metre or so of each other. The question of whether it is important to close schools is also unclear. Can we even risk the approach, advocated by some, of greatly relaxing the rules for the young and fit, whilst keeping very strict rules for the more vulnerable?
We just don't know the answers to questions like these, and realistically it is going to be murky for at least some weeks to come. Perhaps then, with more research results coming through, and more experience in other countries, it will be clearer. In the meantime the government will have to err on the side of caution. We all need to be patient.
The academic on twitter does though.
There are lots of ways they could do better, but I would have thought something like rolling say 3-day average of deaths on the days they occurred. No idea if in other countries if it is possible to know the exact day of death.
https://twitter.com/neil_ferguson/status/1243294819952230402
Agree about the educational disengagement concern.
NEW THREAD???
Anyhow, given it was made clear that school closures made very little difference to the rate of spread, and they are so significant in the overall economic impact, they should be top of the list for reversal, even if that means they come in and nothing else changes for a while.
https://twitter.com/NidaQadirMD/status/1246953772657631235
Then the drop may be quite dramatic as old deaths no longer appear.
Which may be handy.
Look at what the police in Britain are turning into. Look at those US unemployment numbers today. Look at the social situation in Spain and Italy.
Lockdown is extremely toxic. Its too toxic.
This is also my anectotal experience here in Berlin.
It obviously takes a few days for doctors and coroners to add individual deaths to the statistics.
America being America, those will soon be everywhere.
The medicine is killing the patient faster than the virus.
But then the government and its advisors know that and were warning about that before the lockdown started.
P.S. This comment is a response to the thread in general, not Matthias specifically.
Equally, though, we're not going back to normal soon whatever the government does. Many people are going to continue to work from home if they can, avoid contact, and certainly avoid bars, restaurants, flights, cruise ships etc etc, until it's clearly safe again, irrespective of whether the rules are relaxed.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/09/two-thirds-of-public-think-uk-coronavirus-response-too-slow-poll
For clarity, the proportion of the population that will be immune (and the R0 number we'd need to get the infectivity down to) can be easily worked out.
Amount infected (and presumed immune) is In
Population of UK (66.65 million) is P
Death rate from coronavirus is r
Number dead is D
(NB: death rate must include asymptomatic and very mild infections. The current Case Fatality Rate ignores these. With asymptomatic cases taken into account, I've seen estimates of "A bit under 1%", "0.66%", and "0.37%", but the latter is the most optimistic one I've seen)
In = D / (P * r)
And the number to which we must decrease infectivity, Rt (at the moment, we aim to get this number below 1.0 to break away from the exponential) is given by 1/(1-In)
Examples: if 20,000 deaths are incurred in the current wave, the figures for three examples are:
r=1%: In=3.0%, Rt=1.03
r=0.66%: In=4.5%, Rt=1.05
r=0.37%: In=8.1%, Rt=1.09
https://twitter.com/BBCBreakfast/status/1247784868571836418?s=19
Not sure about the Spitfire analogy though.
I think it's just wishful thinking that it's ripped through the population, with many asymptotics...the hotspots tell us where the disease is more prevalent and what it does.....
So, it's probably worked through 2-5% of the population...we flatten the curve and we stop community transition in it's tracks- so herd immunity would be years away too...
And it's just nonsense to present an either/or with the economy.....if the health system collapse we have no economy....
All the outcomes at this moment in time are shocking.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKJqOtwu-9o
https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1248244879664111616?s=21
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3078840/coronavirus-low-antibody-levels-raise-questions-about
*fewer deaths per day than reported
*a broader, wider distribution of deaths than the 'headline' figures suggest
If the natural R0 is, say, 2.5, then when In rises to the point that Rt is 2.5 or greater, we have achieved herd immunity. (this requires an In of 60% or greater)
If no-one is infected/immune, then In is zero and Rt is 1.0 (we must keep it no higher than 1.0)
At the moment, we need to social distance/lockdown to the point where we drive Rt down to 1.0 or below.
At certain levels of immunity, we would be able to get away with driving Rt down to, say, 1.5 or below, or 2.0 or below, and so on. This allows for a graduated lifting of restrictions.
Caveat. Best if ALL nicotine products were to go. Otherwise you can kick the fags but suck the lozenges or chew the gum or whatever. In which case you are feeding the dependency not killing it.
I have had in mind for some time now a blog which covers things other than work stuff (which I do on my work website). It will be mainly about gardens (mine and others) and the joys of trying to rebuild a house, making a new life somewhere very different to where I have mostly lived plus, if I feel like it, books, music, stuff about Italy etc and photos. It’s mainly for me really - and my one imaginary interested reader with whom I having a serendipitous conversation remotely. Now is the obvious time to do this.
What it should be called though eludes me. I normally enjoy dreaming up titles. But am stuck.
One of my children rather unkindly suggested “Why I am Right about Everything” which made me laugh but is a bit long. “From London to the Lakes” was another but is a bit twee. Something witty and / or eccentric would be nice. But brain has turned to mush. So if anyone has any brilliant ideas please let me know me.
Thanks v much.
It will be months if not years, before anybody can really make genuine comparisons.
Grim.....
Nothing contentious there.
This is truly shocking given the absence of planning that it evidences:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/three-nurses-who-wear-bin-21837238