politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Welcome to the Tuesday PB Nighthawks cafe
So the lockdown conitnues and looks set to be with us in the UK for at least another three weeks. What is quite remarkable is how well the public, that is all of us, are putting up with it.
Yes, so far people have put up with it relatively well. We're probably well placed to manage through 8-10 weeks. Beyond that? I don't think anywhere would handle that hugely gracefully.
People aware pulling together and making the best of it. Fatigue will set in, though. I get quite cross seeing people flout the rules while we make sacrifices.
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
I'm still trying to get my head around the apocalyptic footage we've seen in Italy and Spain, versus the apparent calm here, and yet the death tolls look like they'll come out broadly similar and our daily numbers look comparably bad.
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
It depends how they get paid / take their pay. If they are paid via PAYE it's not a problem to use the scheme, if they take their money via dividends it's likely the furlough amount wouldn't be £2500 but closer to £600 or so.
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
Not everyone has to be furloughed. It's only based on whether you would otherwise have work for the employee.
Though, as Peston blogged today, this means government cash is crowding out COVID entrepreneurship because of "the CBA factor"!
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
There is an upper salary limit. I read that its 50k
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
It depends how they get paid / take their pay. If they are paid via PAYE it's not a problem to use the scheme, if they take their money via dividends it's likely the furlough amount wouldn't be £2500 but closer to £600 or so.
Why would they get anything if they take their money as dividends? Are you assuming they take a salary equal to their personal allowance?
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
It depends how they get paid / take their pay. If they are paid via PAYE it's not a problem to use the scheme, if they take their money via dividends it's likely the furlough amount wouldn't be £2500 but closer to £600 or so.
Why would they get anything if they take their money as dividends? Are you assuming they take a salary equal to their personal allowance?
Yes i think thats generally what they do. No tax on that then less tax via dividends beyond that.
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
I'm still trying to get my head around the apocalyptic footage we've seen in Italy and Spain, versus the apparent calm here, and yet the death tolls look like they'll come out broadly similar and our daily numbers look comparably bad.
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
Something else I'm missing entirely?
I've no idea on this one.
Italian ICUs were overwhelmed, UK ICUs are not, don't know about Spain, UK not. Death rate embodies a whole lot of things that are prior to the virus itself - UK people aged 80+ may be sicker on average than Italian people aged 80+ - or heavier - no Med diet. What did for Italy was that the ICUs were overwhelmed and people of all ages started dying.
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
I'm still trying to get my head around the apocalyptic footage we've seen in Italy and Spain, versus the apparent calm here, and yet the death tolls look like they'll come out broadly similar and our daily numbers look comparably bad.
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
Something else I'm missing entirely?
I've no idea on this one.
"Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference..."
I do wonder if this is it.
Maybe there's a genetic marker that predisposes some people to a poor outcome regardless of the intervention.
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
I'm still trying to get my head around the apocalyptic footage we've seen in Italy and Spain, versus the apparent calm here, and yet the death tolls look like they'll come out broadly similar and our daily numbers look comparably bad.
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
Something else I'm missing entirely?
I've no idea on this one.
Are the italian numbers , like the UK, just hospital deaths?
Just a thought that if the hospitals were packed to the gunnels how many people were turned away or never went to the hospital and ended up dying at home?
so the numbers look similar but one side has a higher number of home deaths than the other side?
Suspect we wont know till the statto's have had a chance to pull apart the mortality numbers at some point down the line.
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
I'm still trying to get my head around the apocalyptic footage we've seen in Italy and Spain, versus the apparent calm here, and yet the death tolls look like they'll come out broadly similar and our daily numbers look comparably bad.
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
Something else I'm missing entirely?
I've no idea on this one.
Italian ICUs were overwhelmed, UK ICUs are not, don't know about Spain, UK not. Death rate embodies a whole lot of things that are prior to the virus itself - UK people aged 80+ may be sicker on average than Italian people aged 80+ - or heavier - no Med diet. What did for Italy was that the ICUs were overwhelmed and people of all ages started dying.
Its incredible they started off with 12,000 ventilators and still got overwhemed.
We started off with 5,500 and have managed to get up to 8,400 and have succeeded so far in not being overwhelmed touch wood so far
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
This is basically me at the moment.
My packer has been furloughed and my shop/shipping manager WFH. So guess who did the picking and packing today?!
Luckily we're still doing about 30% of the business we usually do - so we can maintain this position and I can keep the majority of my staff on throughout. Just....
On the relatively greater support for Lockdown in the UK.
It needs to be noted that the folk memory of the blitz and collective home front endeavour for good is common to remainers and leavers, even though we interpret it differently. Even if it has served us remainers badly in the recent past, it stands us all in good stead here.
The European folk memory, which in many places is of everyone being in the resistance: perhaps not quite so useful to current circumstances.
But, it is one point of difference amongst many other at least as practical things, good or ill, that we are doing to combat Coronavirus, so do not take it as an 'its the war spirit wot won it' comment - it simply helps.
The NHS seems to be helping people die efficiently and in an orderly way. Process is outstanding, the outcomes not so great.
I am told my local Trust is using 31 of 32 Ventilators on C19 patients today. Its initial ventilator capacity was 22 and it has ramped up by using those in Theatres but cant go beyond 32 due to pipe capacity
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
I'm still trying to get my head around the apocalyptic footage we've seen in Italy and Spain, versus the apparent calm here, and yet the death tolls look like they'll come out broadly similar and our daily numbers look comparably bad.
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
Something else I'm missing entirely?
I've no idea on this one.
Are the italian numbers , like the UK, just hospital deaths?
Just a thought that if the hospitals were packed to the gunnels how many people were turned away or never went to the hospital and ended up dying at home?
so the numbers look similar but one side has a higher number of home deaths than the other side?
Suspect we wont know till the statto's have had a chance to pull apart the mortality numbers at some point down the line.
Hospitals are not operating normally, they are only dealing with Covid 19, other very serious illnesses and maternity. Everything else has been cancelled. Also the number of people attending A & E is way down. This has led to a huge number of beds becoming available for use for Covid 19 patients, hence the NHS is coping. In fact many hospitals are much quieter than normal.
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
Indeed the Government and NHS have done brilliantly at ramping up capacity
They have indeed. On balance though, there is a long litany of bad decisions and non-decisions to set against that. Tonight's UK roll call of 778 deaths in hospitals (alone) is once again the highest in any country outside the US. That's been the case for several days now.
Germany started in the same position as us and made the right calls. Tonight they are recording 100 deaths and their cases are on a clear downward trend.
New York City's death toll was revised to over 10,000 on Tuesday to include 3,700 deaths that are presumed to be due to the novel coronavirus but never tested, the city health department said.
"Behind every death is a friend, a family member, a loved one. We are focused on ensuring that every New Yorker who died because of COVID-19 gets counted," said Health Commissioner Dr. Oxiris Barbot.
The 10,000 figure includes all coronavirus deaths since March 11.
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
This is basically me at the moment.
My packer has been furloughed and my shop/shipping manager WFH. So guess who did the picking and packing today?!
Luckily we're still doing about 30% of the business we usually do - so we can maintain this position and I can keep the majority of my staff on throughout. Just....
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
Not everyone has to be furloughed. It's only based on whether you would otherwise have work for the employee.
Though, as Peston blogged today, this means government cash is crowding out COVID entrepreneurship because of "the CBA factor"!
I think the CBA factor is definitely at play here...appreciate that a lot of jobs are being saved, but yes - there must be a lot of expertise and effort going to waste because, why not just take the money and soak up the sun?
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
I'm still trying to get my head around the apocalyptic footage we've seen in Italy and Spain, versus the apparent calm here, and yet the death tolls look like they'll come out broadly similar and our daily numbers look comparably bad.
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
Something else I'm missing entirely?
I've no idea on this one.
Italian ICUs were overwhelmed, UK ICUs are not, don't know about Spain, UK not. Death rate embodies a whole lot of things that are prior to the virus itself - UK people aged 80+ may be sicker on average than Italian people aged 80+ - or heavier - no Med diet. What did for Italy was that the ICUs were overwhelmed and people of all ages started dying.
100% agree that there are many determinants of health outcomes and the healthcare aspect is only one, though it is probably the biggest determinant of "appearance of grisly chaos vs efficiency".
Re "the ICUs were overwhelmed and people of all ages started dying", that was certainly the narrative we got from the news media. But have a look at this link (data only up to end of March unfortunately)
There it doesn't look so clear-cut to me. Even in Italy the vast majority of deaths are among the old, so deaths among the young aren't what's driving mortality. And in proportionate terms, their mortality rate per million population in the different age bands are not massively out of line, proportionately, with other countries. So, dunno.
(The standardised Diamond Princess figures there are appallingly grim.)
Thanks to the other PBers for all the other replies too - obviously this is something multifactorial but it still puzzles me.
Italian ICUs were overwhelmed, UK ICUs are not, don't know about Spain, UK not. Death rate embodies a whole lot of things that are prior to the virus itself - UK people aged 80+ may be sicker on average than Italian people aged 80+ - or heavier - no Med diet. What did for Italy was that the ICUs were overwhelmed and people of all ages started dying.
Its incredible they started off with 12,000 ventilators and still got overwhemed.
We started off with 5,500 and have managed to get up to 8,400 and have succeeded so far in not being overwhelmed touch wood so far
Of course, it was super-heavily localised in Italy, and from there it hit other European regions roughly in proportion to the Italian population (I'm beginning to sound like SeanT here). So the national statistics are kind of misleading. Large cities connected to Italy + care homes + healthcare workers explain a lot of the overall positive tests in Europe. There are some places where the first two categories are not so common, or where they don't count cases in care homes.
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
This is basically me at the moment.
My packer has been furloughed and my shop/shipping manager WFH. So guess who did the picking and packing today?!
Luckily we're still doing about 30% of the business we usually do - so we can maintain this position and I can keep the majority of my staff on throughout. Just....
This is a lot of bookshops at the moment. And I can imagine part of you is very envious of your furloughed worker...
Based on 2400 ventilators / 4000 available for COVID patients and Italian ICU numbers, I back of an enveloped a distress point of 30 cases/100000 people
If we can now say 7200/8400 are available to COVID, distress point is closer to 100 cases/100000. On Sky's figures, we are close and concentration of most hotspots around core cities doesn't hinder in this respect.
On the relatively greater support for Lockdown in the UK.
It needs to be noted that the folk memory of the blitz and collective home front endeavour for good is common to remainers and leavers, even though we interpret it differently. Even if it has served us remainers badly in the recent past, it stands us all in good stead here.
The European folk memory, which in many places is of everyone being in the resistance: perhaps not quite so useful to current circumstances.
But, it is one point of difference amongst many other at least as practical things, good or ill, that we are doing to combat Coronavirus, so do not take it as an 'its the war spirit wot won it' comment - it simply helps.
Agreed. This week the German Bundespraesident made it clear "this isn't a war, soldiers don't stand against soldiers". Whereas Macron was very clear it *was* a war.
This definitely is a war. And we have a wartime economy to prove it...
Based on 2400 ventilators / 4000 available for COVID patients and Italian ICU numbers, I back of an enveloped a distress point of 30 cases/100000 people
If we can now say 7200/8400 are available to COVID, distress point is closer to 100 cases/100000. On Sky's figures, we are close and concentration of most hotspots around core cities doesn't hinder in this respect.
And yet the Nightingale hospitals are hardly being used?
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
This is basically me at the moment.
My packer has been furloughed and my shop/shipping manager WFH. So guess who did the picking and packing today?!
Luckily we're still doing about 30% of the business we usually do - so we can maintain this position and I can keep the majority of my staff on throughout. Just....
This is a lot of bookshops at the moment. And I can imagine part of you is very envious of your furloughed worker...
Yep - thank god for online, in short. We've just launched a new website, today, too - which was pretty good timing. My job as well as running the biz is largely the buying, travelling and pricing new stock - all of which is on hold at the moment given there is no buying or travelling.
Some of my competitors have simply shut up shop for the duration, everyone furloughed. But I can't actually imagine ever not doing some work. Rare books would be my passion if it weren't my job. The idea of furloughing myself seems unthinkable, and I'd definitely be the last to be furloughed...but if things get really bad, or it is a really long lockdown, I suspect many like me would have to for reasons of cash flow...
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
This is basically me at the moment.
My packer has been furloughed and my shop/shipping manager WFH. So guess who did the picking and packing today?!
Luckily we're still doing about 30% of the business we usually do - so we can maintain this position and I can keep the majority of my staff on throughout. Just....
This is a lot of bookshops at the moment. And I can imagine part of you is very envious of your furloughed worker...
Yep - thank god for online, in short. We've just launched a new website, today, too - which was pretty good timing. My job as well as running the biz is largely the buying, travelling and pricing new stock - all of which is on hold at the moment given there is no buying or travelling.
Some of my competitors have simply shut up shop for the duration, everyone furloughed. But I can't actually imagine ever not doing some work. Rare books would be my passion if it weren't my job. The idea of furloughing myself seems unthinkable, and I'd definitely be the last to be furloughed...but if things get really bad, or it is a really long lockdown, I suspect many like me would have to for reasons of cash flow...
The only crumb of comfort I can offer is that you will be first out of the blocks when things get back to normal. And if things *don't* get back to normal, you'll have some sort of competitive advantage for having continued to trade.
You have to have faith that this is the right decision, and I wish you all the very best.
It may well be that the news media narrative about Italy was wrong, outright overblown, or that we are simply used to the idea of mass death now. It is not unknown that Italian people discuss matters of public interest with great passion and emphasis. They also have a more crass / muckraking media, that takes a less patriotic line than the UK equivalents like the Sun / Mail / Times.
In Italy, overwhelming of the ICUs was very localised. Bergamo and one or two other places.
Gedi digital, an Italian tracker, has annoyed me by varying its graphs too much, but the regional variation in mortality from Umbria at 4% to Lombardy at around 18% is quite stark. (Bottom chart, at least today)
One interesting observation - small businesses which have furloughed employees (to get their wages covered) but the owners are still struggling on and running a skeleton business operation. Are business owners allowed to consider themselves as 'employees' and thus able to furlough themselves at 80% of...whatever they would usually pay themselves?
This is basically me at the moment.
My packer has been furloughed and my shop/shipping manager WFH. So guess who did the picking and packing today?!
Luckily we're still doing about 30% of the business we usually do - so we can maintain this position and I can keep the majority of my staff on throughout. Just....
This is a lot of bookshops at the moment. And I can imagine part of you is very envious of your furloughed worker...
Yep - thank god for online, in short. We've just launched a new website, today, too - which was pretty good timing. My job as well as running the biz is largely the buying, travelling and pricing new stock - all of which is on hold at the moment given there is no buying or travelling.
Some of my competitors have simply shut up shop for the duration, everyone furloughed. But I can't actually imagine ever not doing some work. Rare books would be my passion if it weren't my job. The idea of furloughing myself seems unthinkable, and I'd definitely be the last to be furloughed...but if things get really bad, or it is a really long lockdown, I suspect many like me would have to for reasons of cash flow...
The only crumb of comfort I can offer is that you will be first out of the blocks when things get back to normal. And if things *don't* get back to normal, you'll have some sort of competitive advantage for having continued to trade.
You have to have faith that this is the right decision, and I wish you all the very best.
Thats really kind, thank you. And the same to you. Retail is tough at the moment, but the world was built by people who KBO!
The NHS seems to be helping people die efficiently and in an orderly way. Process is outstanding, the outcomes not so great.
Indeed. The disparity is a very legitimate line of enquiry.
I don't think that it is brutal rationing of ICU/ventilators. Our age spectrum in ICU is not very different to other nations reports. Neither are Britons sicker or fatter, or not by enough.
I hypothesise, and it is just a guess, is that the stay at home and self medicate approach is causing a lot of late presentations, too far gone to reverse.
Countries that encourage early diagnosis and treatment may well be receiving patients a day or two earlier, less distressed, less hypotensive, and more amenable to recovery with supportive measures.
It could be possible to look at this by looking at admission bloods, oxygen stats etc, or by looking at time to death from admission.
If Boris had left it another day or two, before going to Tommy's, would he be pushing up daisies?
The NHS seems to be helping people die efficiently and in an orderly way. Process is outstanding, the outcomes not so great.
Indeed. The disparity is a very legitimate line of enquiry.
I don't think that it is brutal rationing of ICU/ventilators. Our age spectrum in ICU is not very different to other nations reports. Neither are Britons sicker or fatter, or not by enough.
I hypothesise, and it is just a guess, is that the stay at home and self medicate approach is causing a lot of late presentations, too far gone to reverse.
Countries that encourage early diagnosis and treatment may well be receiving patients a day or two earlier, less distressed, less hypotensive, and more amenable to recovery with supportive measures.
It could be possible to look at this by looking at admission bloods, oxygen stats etc, or by looking at time to death from admission.
If Boris had left it another day or two, before going to Tommy's, would he be pushing up daisies?
Talking of oxygen stats, are any of the home oxygen testing monitors worth it?
Based on 2400 ventilators / 4000 available for COVID patients and Italian ICU numbers, I back of an enveloped a distress point of 30 cases/100000 people
If we can now say 7200/8400 are available to COVID, distress point is closer to 100 cases/100000. On Sky's figures, we are close and concentration of most hotspots around core cities doesn't hinder in this respect.
And yet the Nightingale hospitals are hardly being used?
I'm waiting any day for Piers "virology expert" Morgan to attack them as white elephants and vanity projects.
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
I'm still trying to get my head around the apocalyptic footage we've seen in Italy and Spain, versus the apparent calm here, and yet the death tolls look like they'll come out broadly similar and our daily numbers look comparably bad.
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
Something else I'm missing entirely?
I've no idea on this one.
Italian ICUs were overwhelmed, UK ICUs are not, don't know about Spain, UK not. Death rate embodies a whole lot of things that are prior to the virus itself - UK people aged 80+ may be sicker on average than Italian people aged 80+ - or heavier - no Med diet. What did for Italy was that the ICUs were overwhelmed and people of all ages started dying.
In Italy, Lombardy has absolutely dominated the statistics.
The NHS seems to be helping people die efficiently and in an orderly way. Process is outstanding, the outcomes not so great.
Indeed. The disparity is a very legitimate line of enquiry.
I don't think that it is brutal rationing of ICU/ventilators. Our age spectrum in ICU is not very different to other nations reports. Neither are Britons sicker or fatter, or not by enough.
I hypothesise, and it is just a guess, is that the stay at home and self medicate approach is causing a lot of late presentations, too far gone to reverse.
Countries that encourage early diagnosis and treatment may well be receiving patients a day or two earlier, less distressed, less hypotensive, and more amenable to recovery with supportive measures.
It could be possible to look at this by looking at admission bloods, oxygen stats etc, or by looking at time to death from admission.
If Boris had left it another day or two, before going to Tommy's, would he be pushing up daisies?
Talking of oxygen stats, are any of the home oxygen testing monitors worth it?
I think so. Mine was £15 so little more than a thermometer. I have checked it against machines at work and the accuracy is good.
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
I'm still trying to get my head around the apocalyptic footage we've seen in Italy and Spain, versus the apparent calm here, and yet the death tolls look like they'll come out broadly similar and our daily numbers look comparably bad.
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
Something else I'm missing entirely?
I've no idea on this one.
Italian ICUs were overwhelmed, UK ICUs are not, don't know about Spain, UK not. Death rate embodies a whole lot of things that are prior to the virus itself - UK people aged 80+ may be sicker on average than Italian people aged 80+ - or heavier - no Med diet. What did for Italy was that the ICUs were overwhelmed and people of all ages started dying.
In Italy, Lombardy has absolutely dominated the statistics.
We should really be talking about Northern Italy and the rest, or even just Lombardy and the rest, when you compare to regions like Veneto. Admittedly, Lombardy is something like 50% greater Milan, but it is clearly affecting Bergamo and other parts as well.
The NHS seems to be helping people die efficiently and in an orderly way. Process is outstanding, the outcomes not so great.
Indeed. The disparity is a very legitimate line of enquiry.
I don't think that it is brutal rationing of ICU/ventilators. Our age spectrum in ICU is not very different to other nations reports. Neither are Britons sicker or fatter, or not by enough.
I hypothesise, and it is just a guess, is that the stay at home and self medicate approach is causing a lot of late presentations, too far gone to reverse.
Countries that encourage early diagnosis and treatment may well be receiving patients a day or two earlier, less distressed, less hypotensive, and more amenable to recovery with supportive measures.
It could be possible to look at this by looking at admission bloods, oxygen stats etc, or by looking at time to death from admission.
If Boris had left it another day or two, before going to Tommy's, would he be pushing up daisies?
Talking of oxygen stats, are any of the home oxygen testing monitors worth it?
I think so. Mine was £15 so little more than a thermometer. I have checked it against machines at work and the accuracy is good.
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
I'm still trying to get my head around the apocalyptic footage we've seen in Italy and Spain, versus the apparent calm here, and yet the death tolls look like they'll come out broadly similar and our daily numbers look comparably bad.
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
Something else I'm missing entirely?
I've no idea on this one.
Italian ICUs were overwhelmed, UK ICUs are not, don't know about Spain, UK not. Death rate embodies a whole lot of things that are prior to the virus itself - UK people aged 80+ may be sicker on average than Italian people aged 80+ - or heavier - no Med diet. What did for Italy was that the ICUs were overwhelmed and people of all ages started dying.
In Italy, Lombardy has absolutely dominated the statistics.
IMO we are much more likely to find out post crisis when time and greater depth of data are available; more likely only, not certain.
People are used to being told what to do by the authorities and are trained to assume that they will handle any crisis, such as terrorists ("See It Say It Sorted").
In three months' time there will be more familiarity with daily admissions, deaths, and the routines of queueing at the shops, wearing face masks, etc.
I don't think the public are putting up with the lockdown out of acquiescence to the government. They are accepting it for now because they are too scared to continue their normal lives, but this will change in time.
The NHS seems to be helping people die efficiently and in an orderly way. Process is outstanding, the outcomes not so great.
Indeed. The disparity is a very legitimate line of enquiry.
I don't think that it is brutal rationing of ICU/ventilators. Our age spectrum in ICU is not very different to other nations reports. Neither are Britons sicker or fatter, or not by enough.
I hypothesise, and it is just a guess, is that the stay at home and self medicate approach is causing a lot of late presentations, too far gone to reverse.
Countries that encourage early diagnosis and treatment may well be receiving patients a day or two earlier, less distressed, less hypotensive, and more amenable to recovery with supportive measures.
It could be possible to look at this by looking at admission bloods, oxygen stats etc, or by looking at time to death from admission.
If Boris had left it another day or two, before going to Tommy's, would he be pushing up daisies?
Talking of oxygen stats, are any of the home oxygen testing monitors worth it?
I have used one after being hospitalised with pneumonia in successive winters. I find it reassuring and have once self administered extra diuretics to pee more and get my numbers back in line. Trends are all.
I really do think the Chinese funnel system is a better way to manage any further wave.
Fever clinic - Isolation hospital - bloods, CT scan and covid 19 swab - stay until discharge with 2 negative swabs plus 14 days quarantine - if deterioration then to Acute hospital.
The system breaks the transmission before the household all get it, thereby decreasing overall numbers, and cases that worsen get identified early and transferred.
That is how the Nightingales should be used. Obviously need better, faster testing too.
I really do think the Chinese funnel system is a better way to manage any further wave.
Fever clinic - Isolation hospital - bloods, CT scan and covid 19 swab - stay until discharge with 2 negative swabs plus 14 days quarantine - if deterioration then to Acute hospital.
The system breaks the transmission before the household all get it, thereby decreasing overall numbers, and cases that worsen get identified early and transferred.
That is how the Nightingales should be used. Obviously need better, faster testing too.
I don't disagree, but a bit like the South Korean surveillance for contact tracing, are the British public going to be happy to pop down the clinic with the knowledge if they are found to have it, that they won't be going back to their comfortable bed, with 50" OLED tv, internet, Netflix, etc, they will be on a camp bed in a conference centre for the next 2-3 weeks.
I have a feeling a lot of people won't be happy at that prospect.
I really do think the Chinese funnel system is a better way to manage any further wave.
Fever clinic - Isolation hospital - bloods, CT scan and covid 19 swab - stay until discharge with 2 negative swabs plus 14 days quarantine - if deterioration then to Acute hospital.
The system breaks the transmission before the household all get it, thereby decreasing overall numbers, and cases that worsen get identified early and transferred.
That is how the Nightingales should be used. Obviously need better, faster testing too.
How much can we trust Chinese data? Won't they want to paint themselves in the best possible light?
Coronavirus: Labour calls for lockdown exit strategy this week (1 hour ago)
The government said talking about an exit before the virus had reached its peak risks confusing the public.
In a letter to Dominic Raab, who is deputising for Prime Minister Boris Johnson while he continues his recovery from coronavirus, Sir Keir offered Labour's support for an extension.
But he said: "The question for Thursday therefore is no longer about whether the lockdown should be extended, but about what the government's position is on how and when it can be eased in due course and on what criteria that decision will be taken."
Millions of people had "played their part" and made sacrifices, he added, and "in return, the government needs to be open and transparent with the public about how it believes the lockdown will ease and eventually end".
Sir Keir warned the "silent pressures" on communities across the UK "cannot be underestimated", and said that to maintain morale and hope "people need a sense of what comes next".
He urged Mr Raab to commit to setting out the criteria the government will use to inform how and when it intends to ease the lockdown.
And he called on the government to publish an exit strategy now or in the coming week; and to outline the sectors and core public services that are most likely to see restrictions eased.
I mean, I do want the government to be thinking about its exit strategy from the lockdown, and for the crisis in the round, but is this really the right time to commit to exactly what they'll do? If they could do so with certainty then I can see it would help people (especially businesses) plan and prepare. But they can't, so that advantage doesn't apply, whereas several disadvantages do.
Firstly, the end of lockdown will clearly be a very trial and error, iterative, feedback-loop-driven affair. Secondly, since ours is not about to end in the immediate future, I'd much rather we got the benefit of watching what happens as other countries experiment with getting out of their lockdowns before we say how we'll get out of our own. Committing to a strategy prematurely just means you'll get accused of U-turns later. And thirdly, if we do end up with government talking up getting out of the lockdown, and then ending up - as seems inevitable - toing-and-froing about it, I don't think it's going to help people's spirits or compliance.
Frankly I suspect if Starmer were PM he'd not be in a hurry to commit to anything either. But as Leader of the Opposition, maybe it's a cheap win - makes you look more decisive than an indecisive government, gets people who are struggling with the lockdown to see that you understand their frustrations, get the opportunity to slap the government down on any plan it might foolishly lay out and then end up pulling back from.
I really do think the Chinese funnel system is a better way to manage any further wave.
Fever clinic - Isolation hospital - bloods, CT scan and covid 19 swab - stay until discharge with 2 negative swabs plus 14 days quarantine - if deterioration then to Acute hospital.
The system breaks the transmission before the household all get it, thereby decreasing overall numbers, and cases that worsen get identified early and transferred.
That is how the Nightingales should be used. Obviously need better, faster testing too.
How much can we trust Chinese data? Won't they want to paint themselves in the best possible light?
All countries do that.
Perhaps, just possibly, because of their previous experience of SARS, they knew the importance of strict measures, and had a worked out process.
I reckon he'll definitely withdraw from NATO if he gets his second term. He'll replace it with a series of bilateral defence deals which means he can bestow or withhold favour on a country by country basis as whim dictates.
Is Trump just giving shout outs to companies now? Bizarre.
He does it most days. I am actually surprised he doesn't have a NASCAR style suit with all the corporate logos on and a board behind him like they have when interviewing the footballers.
I really do think the Chinese funnel system is a better way to manage any further wave.
Fever clinic - Isolation hospital - bloods, CT scan and covid 19 swab - stay until discharge with 2 negative swabs plus 14 days quarantine - if deterioration then to Acute hospital.
The system breaks the transmission before the household all get it, thereby decreasing overall numbers, and cases that worsen get identified early and transferred.
That is how the Nightingales should be used. Obviously need better, faster testing too.
I don't disagree, but a bit like the South Korean surveillance for contact tracing, are the British public going to be happy to pop down the clinic with the knowledge if they are found to have it, that they won't be going back to their comfortable bed, with 50" OLED tv, internet, Netflix, etc, they will be on a camp bed in a conference centre for the next 2-3 weeks.
I have a feeling a lot of people won't be happy at that prospect.
Sure, but that is the way to manage the condition. The South Koreans manage to quarantine at home, but with much more monitoring. Most importantly have easy access to rapid testing, so that people know whether to isolate or not.
There are times where we really do need to learn from other countries, rather than re-invent the wheel, so that it is a British wheel.
I really do think the Chinese funnel system is a better way to manage any further wave.
Fever clinic - Isolation hospital - bloods, CT scan and covid 19 swab - stay until discharge with 2 negative swabs plus 14 days quarantine - if deterioration then to Acute hospital.
The system breaks the transmission before the household all get it, thereby decreasing overall numbers, and cases that worsen get identified early and transferred.
That is how the Nightingales should be used. Obviously need better, faster testing too.
How much can we trust Chinese data? Won't they want to paint themselves in the best possible light?
All countries do that.
Perhaps, just possibly, because of their previous experience of SARS, they knew the importance of strict measures, and had a worked out process.
That is why Wuhan is returning to normal.
Are you actually employed by China?
Are you denying that Wuhan is returning to normal?
Is Trump just giving shout outs to companies now? Bizarre.
He does it most days. I am actually surprised he doesn't have a NASCAR style suit with all the corporate logos on and a board behind him like they have when interviewing the footballers.
He's clinically obese to be fair, but surely even with that he hasn't space for ALL these names.
I really do think the Chinese funnel system is a better way to manage any further wave.
Fever clinic - Isolation hospital - bloods, CT scan and covid 19 swab - stay until discharge with 2 negative swabs plus 14 days quarantine - if deterioration then to Acute hospital.
The system breaks the transmission before the household all get it, thereby decreasing overall numbers, and cases that worsen get identified early and transferred.
That is how the Nightingales should be used. Obviously need better, faster testing too.
I don't disagree, but a bit like the South Korean surveillance for contact tracing, are the British public going to be happy to pop down the clinic with the knowledge if they are found to have it, that they won't be going back to their comfortable bed, with 50" OLED tv, internet, Netflix, etc, they will be on a camp bed in a conference centre for the next 2-3 weeks.
I have a feeling a lot of people won't be happy at that prospect.
Sure, but that is the way to manage the condition. The South Koreans manage to quarantine at home, but with much more monitoring. Most importantly have easy access to rapid testing, so that people know whether to isolate or not.
There are times where we really do need to learn from other countries, rather than re-invent the wheel, so that it is a British wheel.
I don't disagree, my issue how will the British public react e.g. at the start we tried the please try and social distance, don't go down the pub etc and people for 2-3 weeks still carried on as normal, including bloody oldies who were most at risk.
So we have to go the enforced lockdown route (something clearly Boris really didn't want to do) and still today we have people playing cricket, having parties etc (albeit in fairly small numbers).
I can see a lot of people thinking I will just hide at home rather than having to go and live in a dorm in a conference centre. As a nation, we have become rather soft and we like our creature comforts. That was what the concern by the egg-heads that the public mentally just couldn't manage 3 months in total hard lockdown.
Is Trump just giving shout outs to companies now? Bizarre.
He does it most days. I am actually surprised he doesn't have a NASCAR style suit with all the corporate logos on and a board behind him like they have when interviewing the footballers.
He's clinically obese to be fair, but surely even with that he hasn't space for ALL these names.
Crap documentary, but I envision something like this,
I really do think the Chinese funnel system is a better way to manage any further wave.
Fever clinic - Isolation hospital - bloods, CT scan and covid 19 swab - stay until discharge with 2 negative swabs plus 14 days quarantine - if deterioration then to Acute hospital.
The system breaks the transmission before the household all get it, thereby decreasing overall numbers, and cases that worsen get identified early and transferred.
That is how the Nightingales should be used. Obviously need better, faster testing too.
How much can we trust Chinese data? Won't they want to paint themselves in the best possible light?
All countries do that.
Perhaps, just possibly, because of their previous experience of SARS, they knew the importance of strict measures, and had a worked out process.
WHO declared it a "Public Health Emergency of International significance" on 23rd Jan.
A month later Trump was still calling it a hoax.
Clearly Trump was not monitoring its advice.
Calling it a "Public Health Emergency of International significance", which is meaningless and doesn't trigger any real escalation in preparation, was done deliberately to avoid officially designating it a pandemic. To be fair this is not just about pressure from China, there's also the feeling they jumped the gun calling SARS a pandemic so quickly given it burnt itself out.
Both things can be true at the same time, neither the WHO nor Trump have covered themselves in glory.
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
I'm still trying to get my head around the apocalyptic footage we've seen in Italy and Spain, versus the apparent calm here, and yet the death tolls look like they'll come out broadly similar and our daily numbers look comparably bad.
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
Something else I'm missing entirely?
I've no idea on this one.
I’ve been thinking that if the whole of the media, Piers Morgan, every celeb who wants ‘likes’ on twitter, and state propaganda are onside, it must be overhyped. But not sure how
Now I’m seeing the whole thing as a kind of detective show on tv. I can never tell whodunnit while it’s being played out, but at the end they go through it but by bit and it all seems obvious in hindsight. There must be some known unknown that we just haven’t twigged yet
WHO declared it a "Public Health Emergency of International significance" on 23rd Jan.
A month later Trump was still calling it a hoax.
Clearly Trump was not monitoring its advice.
This is one instance. I'm really looking for info on its track record generally and where that is publicly available. People are impressed by grand titles (BMA?) which often hide a truth.
I wouldn't report mild symptoms if the outcome were an indefinite stay in HMP Nightingale. CFR 0.1% among young people, dominated by diabetics and other immuno-suppressed people, I would take my chances.
I really do think the Chinese funnel system is a better way to manage any further wave.
Fever clinic - Isolation hospital - bloods, CT scan and covid 19 swab - stay until discharge with 2 negative swabs plus 14 days quarantine - if deterioration then to Acute hospital.
The system breaks the transmission before the household all get it, thereby decreasing overall numbers, and cases that worsen get identified early and transferred.
That is how the Nightingales should be used. Obviously need better, faster testing too.
I don't disagree, but a bit like the South Korean surveillance for contact tracing, are the British public going to be happy to pop down the clinic with the knowledge if they are found to have it, that they won't be going back to their comfortable bed, with 50" OLED tv, internet, Netflix, etc, they will be on a camp bed in a conference centre for the next 2-3 weeks.
I have a feeling a lot of people won't be happy at that prospect.
Sure, but that is the way to manage the condition. The South Koreans manage to quarantine at home, but with much more monitoring. Most importantly have easy access to rapid testing, so that people know whether to isolate or not.
There are times where we really do need to learn from other countries, rather than re-invent the wheel, so that it is a British wheel.
There is a cultural aspect in play here. I believe South Koreans have human rights as a lower interest than we do.
WHO declared it a "Public Health Emergency of International significance" on 23rd Jan.
That was over 3 weeks after the WHO had been informed of the seriousness of the situation by Taiwan.
I don't actually agree with pulling the funding for the WHO. It needs reform not destruction. But it has certainly failed in its basic duties over this pandemic - which it is worth noting the WHO refused to declare until 11th March.
I really do think the Chinese funnel system is a better way to manage any further wave.
Fever clinic - Isolation hospital - bloods, CT scan and covid 19 swab - stay until discharge with 2 negative swabs plus 14 days quarantine - if deterioration then to Acute hospital.
The system breaks the transmission before the household all get it, thereby decreasing overall numbers, and cases that worsen get identified early and transferred.
That is how the Nightingales should be used. Obviously need better, faster testing too.
How much can we trust Chinese data? Won't they want to paint themselves in the best possible light?
All countries do that.
Perhaps, just possibly, because of their previous experience of SARS, they knew the importance of strict measures, and had a worked out process.
That is why Wuhan is returning to normal.
Are you actually employed by China?
Are you denying that Wuhan is returning to normal?
WHO declared it a "Public Health Emergency of International significance" on 23rd Jan.
A month later Trump was still calling it a hoax.
Clearly Trump was not monitoring its advice.
Calling it a "Public Health Emergency of International significance", which is meaningless and doesn't trigger any real escalation in preparation, was done deliberately to avoid officially designating it a pandemic. To be fair this is not just about pressure from China, there's also the feeling they jumped the gun calling SARS a pandemic so quickly given it burnt itself out.
Both things can be true at the same time, neither the WHO nor Trump have covered themselves in glory.
But I think Trump is much more already exposed than the WHO is - that's awful English, for which I apologise, but we are discussing Trump so .....
I think the other remarkable thing is that we are not (yet at least) seeing pictures of people dying in hospital corridors due to lack of ICU beds.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
I'm still trying to get my head around the apocalyptic footage we've seen in Italy and Spain, versus the apparent calm here, and yet the death tolls look like they'll come out broadly similar and our daily numbers look comparably bad.
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
Something else I'm missing entirely?
I've no idea on this one.
I’ve been thinking that if the whole of the media, Piers Morgan, every celeb who wants ‘likes’ on twitter, and state propaganda are onside, it must be overhyped. But not sure how
Now I’m seeing the whole thing as a kind of detective show on tv. I can never tell whodunnit while it’s being played out, but at the end they go through it but by bit and it all seems obvious in hindsight. There must be some known unknown that we just haven’t twigged yet
Comments
I get quite cross seeing people flout the rules while we make sacrifices.
That the Excel facility is hardly being used is surely a good sign?
Long may it continue.
Cant really see now how we can come out after the 12 weeks now in fact how can we come out before a vaccine is found
Depressing stuff
Differential media coverage, particularly with respect to access to the chaotic bits? Or the coffins?
Do overcrowded ICUs and people not even being admitted actually make no substantial difference unless it's really really bad - up to a certain point perhaps only those with near-zero chance of survival, or those who were likely to get better anyway so didn't really require an ICU bed (but had one been free, might have been given one "just in case"), were missing out over there?
Do scenes look better here just because, although cases are somewhat concentrated in London and a few other places, they're still relatively more spread out than Italy/Spain?
Something else I'm missing entirely?
I've no idea on this one.
Though, as Peston blogged today, this means government cash is crowding out COVID entrepreneurship because of "the CBA factor"!
There is an upper salary limit. I read that its 50k
Only slot we have been able to get for over a week
I do wonder if this is it.
Maybe there's a genetic marker that predisposes some people to a poor outcome regardless of the intervention.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52243605
Just a thought that if the hospitals were packed to the gunnels how many people were turned away or never went to the hospital and ended up dying at home?
so the numbers look similar but one side has a higher number of home deaths than the other side?
Suspect we wont know till the statto's have had a chance to pull apart the mortality numbers at some point down the line.
Edit: Defintely!
We started off with 5,500 and have managed to get up to 8,400 and have succeeded so far in not being overwhelmed touch wood so far
My packer has been furloughed and my shop/shipping manager WFH. So guess who did the picking and packing today?!
Luckily we're still doing about 30% of the business we usually do - so we can maintain this position and I can keep the majority of my staff on throughout. Just....
It needs to be noted that the folk memory of the blitz and collective home front endeavour for good is common to remainers and leavers, even though we interpret it differently. Even if it has served us remainers badly in the recent past, it stands us all in good stead here.
The European folk memory, which in many places is of everyone being in the resistance: perhaps not quite so useful to current circumstances.
But, it is one point of difference amongst many other at least as practical things, good or ill, that we are doing to combat Coronavirus, so do not take it as an 'its the war spirit wot won it' comment - it simply helps.
Germany started in the same position as us and made the right calls. Tonight they are recording 100 deaths and their cases are on a clear downward trend.
"Behind every death is a friend, a family member, a loved one. We are focused on ensuring that every New Yorker who died because of COVID-19 gets counted," said Health Commissioner Dr. Oxiris Barbot.
The 10,000 figure includes all coronavirus deaths since March 11.
https://twitter.com/darrengrimes_/status/1250179286675456000?s=21
Re "the ICUs were overwhelmed and people of all ages started dying", that was certainly the narrative we got from the news media. But have a look at this link (data only up to end of March unfortunately)
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2020/04/09/adjusting-covid-19-expectations-to-the-age-profile-of-deaths/
There it doesn't look so clear-cut to me. Even in Italy the vast majority of deaths are among the old, so deaths among the young aren't what's driving mortality. And in proportionate terms, their mortality rate per million population in the different age bands are not massively out of line, proportionately, with other countries. So, dunno.
(The standardised Diamond Princess figures there are appallingly grim.)
Thanks to the other PBers for all the other replies too - obviously this is something multifactorial but it still puzzles me.
If we can now say 7200/8400 are available to COVID, distress point is closer to 100 cases/100000. On Sky's figures, we are close and concentration of most hotspots around core cities doesn't hinder in this respect.
This definitely is a war. And we have a wartime economy to prove it...
Some of my competitors have simply shut up shop for the duration, everyone furloughed. But I can't actually imagine ever not doing some work. Rare books would be my passion if it weren't my job. The idea of furloughing myself seems unthinkable, and I'd definitely be the last to be furloughed...but if things get really bad, or it is a really long lockdown, I suspect many like me would have to for reasons of cash flow...
If he just keeps walking, we can fund the NHS on his donations alone!
You have to have faith that this is the right decision, and I wish you all the very best.
Gedi digital, an Italian tracker, has annoyed me by varying its graphs too much, but the regional variation in mortality from Umbria at 4% to Lombardy at around 18% is quite stark. (Bottom chart, at least today)
https://lab.gedidigital.it/gedi-visual/2020/coronavirus-i-contagi-in-italia/?ref=RHPPTP-BH-I250551341-C12-P4-S1.8-T2
I don't think that it is brutal rationing of ICU/ventilators. Our age spectrum in ICU is not very different to other nations reports. Neither are Britons sicker or fatter, or not by enough.
I hypothesise, and it is just a guess, is that the stay at home and self medicate approach is causing a lot of late presentations, too far gone to reverse.
Countries that encourage early diagnosis and treatment may well be receiving patients a day or two earlier, less distressed, less hypotensive, and more amenable to recovery with supportive measures.
It could be possible to look at this by looking at admission bloods, oxygen stats etc, or by looking at time to death from admission.
If Boris had left it another day or two, before going to Tommy's, would he be pushing up daisies?
In three months' time there will be more familiarity with daily admissions, deaths, and the routines of queueing at the shops, wearing face masks, etc.
I don't think the public are putting up with the lockdown out of acquiescence to the government. They are accepting it for now because they are too scared to continue their normal lives, but this will change in time.
Fever clinic - Isolation hospital - bloods, CT scan and covid 19 swab - stay until discharge with 2 negative swabs plus 14 days quarantine - if deterioration then to Acute hospital.
The system breaks the transmission before the household all get it, thereby decreasing overall numbers, and cases that worsen get identified early and transferred.
That is how the Nightingales should be used. Obviously need better, faster testing too.
I have a feeling a lot of people won't be happy at that prospect.
A month later Trump was still calling it a hoax.
Clearly Trump was not monitoring its advice.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52287920
Coronavirus: Labour calls for lockdown exit strategy this week (1 hour ago)
The government said talking about an exit before the virus had reached its peak risks confusing the public.
In a letter to Dominic Raab, who is deputising for Prime Minister Boris Johnson while he continues his recovery from coronavirus, Sir Keir offered Labour's support for an extension.
But he said: "The question for Thursday therefore is no longer about whether the lockdown should be extended, but about what the government's position is on how and when it can be eased in due course and on what criteria that decision will be taken."
Millions of people had "played their part" and made sacrifices, he added, and "in return, the government needs to be open and transparent with the public about how it believes the lockdown will ease and eventually end".
Sir Keir warned the "silent pressures" on communities across the UK "cannot be underestimated", and said that to maintain morale and hope "people need a sense of what comes next".
He urged Mr Raab to commit to setting out the criteria the government will use to inform how and when it intends to ease the lockdown.
And he called on the government to publish an exit strategy now or in the coming week; and to outline the sectors and core public services that are most likely to see restrictions eased.
I mean, I do want the government to be thinking about its exit strategy from the lockdown, and for the crisis in the round, but is this really the right time to commit to exactly what they'll do? If they could do so with certainty then I can see it would help people (especially businesses) plan and prepare. But they can't, so that advantage doesn't apply, whereas several disadvantages do.
Firstly, the end of lockdown will clearly be a very trial and error, iterative, feedback-loop-driven affair. Secondly, since ours is not about to end in the immediate future, I'd much rather we got the benefit of watching what happens as other countries experiment with getting out of their lockdowns before we say how we'll get out of our own. Committing to a strategy prematurely just means you'll get accused of U-turns later. And thirdly, if we do end up with government talking up getting out of the lockdown, and then ending up - as seems inevitable - toing-and-froing about it, I don't think it's going to help people's spirits or compliance.
Frankly I suspect if Starmer were PM he'd not be in a hurry to commit to anything either. But as Leader of the Opposition, maybe it's a cheap win - makes you look more decisive than an indecisive government, gets people who are struggling with the lockdown to see that you understand their frustrations, get the opportunity to slap the government down on any plan it might foolishly lay out and then end up pulling back from.
Perhaps, just possibly, because of their previous experience of SARS, they knew the importance of strict measures, and had a worked out process.
That is why Wuhan is returning to normal.
There are times where we really do need to learn from other countries, rather than re-invent the wheel, so that it is a British wheel.
So we have to go the enforced lockdown route (something clearly Boris really didn't want to do) and still today we have people playing cricket, having parties etc (albeit in fairly small numbers).
I can see a lot of people thinking I will just hide at home rather than having to go and live in a dorm in a conference centre. As a nation, we have become rather soft and we like our creature comforts. That was what the concern by the egg-heads that the public mentally just couldn't manage 3 months in total hard lockdown.
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/over-500-000-zoom-accounts-sold-on-hacker-forums-the-dark-web/
Both things can be true at the same time, neither the WHO nor Trump have covered themselves in glory.
Now I’m seeing the whole thing as a kind of detective show on tv. I can never tell whodunnit while it’s being played out, but at the end they go through it but by bit and it all seems obvious in hindsight. There must be some known unknown that we just haven’t twigged yet
I don't actually agree with pulling the funding for the WHO. It needs reform not destruction. But it has certainly failed in its basic duties over this pandemic - which it is worth noting the WHO refused to declare until 11th March.
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1250168740873986050?s=20
Utter madness, and not just from Trump!