We still seem to have kept very close to Italy + 14, at least going by the daily announced deaths.
That would be surprising considering we have (a) a less healthy population (b) a higher proportion in urban areas and (c) had a less strict lockdown.
Maybe it’s because Italian houses are smaller on average? (If they are, which I don’t know for sure.)
Italy has a higher proportion of the population over 70, though.
Italy also has a large elderly population that go to mass.
Now, I could be wrong, but I suspect the communion cup might as well be called the covid-19 cup.
I thought only the Priest drank the wine in Roman Catholic services.
Lay people haven't drunk from the cup in RC ceremonies since Vatican 2 in the 60'a I'm 53, born and brought up.Catholic. Have never once drank at a Communion.
On the previous thread some people were commenting on a particularly large range of predicted results. The largest range I know of involves Graham’s Number. When it was first published in the early 70s it was then the largest number ever used in a mathematical proof. It is a number so large the the visible universe is too small to write out the number which is the number of digits needed to write out the number. If you could somehow know the number then the information contained in it would cause your brain to collapse as a black hole (and that is not an exaggeration). This was not the answer to the problem though, it was nearly the upper bound. The lower bound was....
3.
Graham's number is so large that any physics-based analogies massively understate its scale
But not that big...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Busy_beaver ...Likewise, we know that S(10) > Σ(10) > 3 ↑↑↑ 3 is a gigantic number and S(17) > Σ(17) > G, where G is Graham's number - an enormous number. Thus, even if we knew, say, S(30), it is completely unreasonable to run any machine that number of steps. There is not enough computational capacity in the known part of the universe to have performed even S(6) operations directly...
Yep. The busy beaver sequence grows faster than any computable sequence. So no matter how imaginative Knuth and Graham were in coming up with big-number notation, there's no possible series of instructions they can write to generate a sequence of large numbers that wouldn't eventually be overtaken by BB.
5G is a bad idea in my opinion because smartphone addiction is a bad thing and 5G can only make the addiction even worse than it is now.
The poor chap with the red flag will get puffed out too.
We should never forget the women whose uteruses (uteri?) fell out after going 50mph+ on a train. At the going down of the sun and in the morning we will remember them.
Perhaps we should make womb for them on a memorial.
From the article posted by isam on the previous thread:
"...looking at the experience of other countries, it is not clear that a lockdown caused the epidemic to reverse, and if Sweden suggests that sensible hygiene and modest distancing measures are likely just as effective as draconian lockdown; and covid-19 deaths per day are clearly levelling off in the UK; and there is clear evidence of a matching slowdown in reliable forward indicators"
Poor conclusion. Look at the curves and the start of decrease comes in exactly when it should - 5-7 days after lockdown. They take a single high score on 10th of March as being indicative of the peak. Which can just be a single bad day - which is why rolling averages are used for proper analyses. The top of the curve other than that is the 13/14 of March (which aren't exceptionally out of the curve around them) and it starts to slowly subside from the 17th onwards (other than one bad day on the 20th).
The US data is worthless without being broken down by State and correlated with stay-at-home data for each State (it just says "before most stay-at-home orders were issued).
The Swedish data shows very little (other than that their per-capita death rate per day is now greater than ours); we can see the weekend effect that we've commented on before.
I really really want things to go back to how they were before, but I am really worried we'll end up in a second, longer and deeper lockdown if we get this wrong. I'd rather take three months at the level we are now with dwindling down for three months afterwards than two months lockdown, three weeks out, and six months deeper lockdown. Because that would really mess with us psychologically and definitely scar the economy, but many people seem to be trying to convince themselves there's no problem.
On the previous thread some people were commenting on a particularly large range of predicted results. The largest range I know of involves Graham’s Number. When it was first published in the early 70s it was then the largest number ever used in a mathematical proof. It is a number so large the the visible universe is too small to write out the number which is the number of digits needed to write out the number. If you could somehow know the number then the information contained in it would cause your brain to collapse as a black hole (and that is not an exaggeration). This was not the answer to the problem though, it was nearly the upper bound. The lower bound was...
3.
Graham's number is so large that any physics-based analogies massively understate its scale
Tree(g64) is reasonably large.
Given that Tree(3) is bigger than g64, then yes...
Yep. The busy beaver sequence grows faster than any computable sequence. So no matter how imaginative Knuth and Graham were in coming up with big-number notation, there's no possible series of instructions they can write to generate a sequence of large numbers that wouldn't eventually be overtaken by BB.
Now that's the sort of banter I remember flying around the union bar at Imperial after a few jars. Fond memories.
These figures are not discouraging. But we all recognise the picture we have is very partial. Hopefully all we be rather clearer by the start of May. Happily, we know nothing will change before then anyway. Once decisions are made it will be on the basis of a rather fuller picture than we have at the moment.
Anyone have any guesses how many infections there have been in the UK? It's certainly far larger than the official figures. My current guess - and I stress guess - is 10-20 million. Whatever the figure is it will clearly increase substantially before lockdown ends, even if it ends in May.
From the article posted by isam on the previous thread:
"...looking at the experience of other countries, it is not clear that a lockdown caused the epidemic to reverse, and if Sweden suggests that sensible hygiene and modest distancing measures are likely just as effective as draconian lockdown; and covid-19 deaths per day are clearly levelling off in the UK; and there is clear evidence of a matching slowdown in reliable forward indicators"
Poor conclusion. Look at the curves and the start of decrease comes in exactly when it should - 5-7 days after lockdown. They take a single high score on 10th of March as being indicative of the peak. Which can just be a single bad day - which is why rolling averages are used for proper analyses. The top of the curve other than that is the 13/14 of March (which aren't exceptionally out of the curve around them) and it starts to slowly subside from the 17th onwards (other than one bad day on the 20th).
The US data is worthless without being broken down by State and correlated with stay-at-home data for each State (it just says "before most stay-at-home orders were issued).
The Swedish data shows very little (other than that their per-capita death rate per day is now greater than ours); we can see the weekend effect that we've commented on before.
I really really want things to go back to how they were before, but I am really worried we'll end up in a second, longer and deeper lockdown if we get this wrong. I'd rather take three months at the level we are now with dwindling down for three months afterwards than two months lockdown, three weeks out, and six months deeper lockdown. Because that would really mess with us psychologically and definitely scar the economy, but many people seem to be trying to convince themselves there's no problem.
With all that said, we may be able to have a less stringent lockdown going forwards.
If the death rate has peaked on the 8th-9th of April (which is still provisional, but looking slightly firm by now), it indicates that the social distancing measures introduced in the week before the lockdown were having an effect.
If that level of social distancing (where restaurants can do take-aways, people work from home where and when they can, and so forth) can lead to a levelling of the death rate, then the full lockdown should lead to a reduction in the death rate.
If the full lockdown is held until the death rate drops significantly, then progressive loosening can be done to keep it from shooting up again. It'd have to be sterner than Sweden's (their death rate is still climbing), but less than our current one. Difficult line to walk, but there's hope that there is at least a line there .
We’ll only know we’ve passed the peak about 3/4 weeks after the peak.
But I’m quietly encouraged with recent figures, if pleased is the right adjective for several hundred of my fellow countrymen dying each day.
We passed the peak on the 8th - no evidence that day wasn't the peak.
Says the gullible idiot who believed China’s figures whilst the rest of us were dubious.
But he's right - there's no evidence that that day wasn't the peak. But the evidence that that day WAS the peak is a little light as yet. Happily, by the time the decision is made, there will be far more evidence.
On the previous thread some people were commenting on a particularly large range of predicted results. The largest range I know of involves Graham’s Number. When it was first published in the early 70s it was then the largest number ever used in a mathematical proof. It is a number so large the the visible universe is too small to write out the number which is the number of digits needed to write out the number. If you could somehow know the number then the information contained in it would cause your brain to collapse as a black hole (and that is not an exaggeration). This was not the answer to the problem though, it was nearly the upper bound. The lower bound was...
3.
Sounds like this ‘professional judgement’ system the drunken imbeciles Department of Education expect us to come up with in the next six weeks.
I’m currently very glad I did not get the Head of Department job when I applied for it.
It’s a shambles. It’s such a joke that I’ve emailed my friends in academia to tell them grades this year will simply be meaningless.
Of course, any grades from AQA are meaningless anyway, but it will apply to all four exam boards this year.
Why will they be meaningless? My daughter`s school has confirmed that her GCSE grades will be based on assessed work and mock result. And each teacher has been asked to rank each pupil in the class from best to worst. The school has been told that the school`s exam performance in previous years will also be considered.
This seems the best they can do in the circumstances I guess.
The upshot for my daughter is this, I`d expect her to end up with a grade one higher on each subject as compared to her mock results. If this doesn`t happen I shall be appealing as it seems to me that the mocks (which were proper exams under exam conditions) represents the best guide of all.
Because not all schools do mocks, not all schools who do mocks base them on exam papers, and the standard of marking is not consistent in classroom assessments.
So what I grade at 3 or 4 in the school I work in would be an 8 at the school I live closest to (that’s not a joke, I’ve inspected some of their work and was appalled).
As for previous years, that’s even more worrying as it assumes consistency between cohorts. Last year my highest grade was a C and I was glad to get that because they were all without exception lazy thickos. This year 50% should be A or B because they are bright and hardworking. Are they to be penalised because last year my ablest students thought a page of handwriting was enough for a 30 mark essay?
I was off at a crucial time last year, with an operation and some weeks of recuperation (I wasn't totally with it when I got back but didn't realise that until later). Sadly it did take most down a grade or so from where they should have been. I doubt they'd base it on subject results. How could they when different staff will be taking many of the classes anyway? It will probably be looking at the school's overall grades for the last three years or something like that.
The overmarking in many of the less rigorous schools might be offset by that.
Re: The headline article. This probably isn't far off, though one stat man I've followed for a few weeks reckons we are now just about peaking. Looking at peaks elsewhere, the top is a flat line that lasts a while. The government knows and hopes things have hit that point already but it is doing it's best to play it all down deliberately.
Realistically they will hold things in place until after one of the two May bank holidays, then release the brakes assuming that the necessary NHS temporary capacity is in place. Better to have forked out on the ventilators and a bunch of super facilities and leave them sitting. I know here in NI of a number of locations around the region on the notice list for Nightingale service and not one has got the call. If the deaths and admission loading start to show a consistent decline even if that decline isn't massive, they will look to move things forward.
PS just to reflect the fact that PPE is a global issue, i read reports that places in Germany had to make appeals for it, places in Japan had to make appeals for it. Most places have had some problems, so we need to get over it.
Our organisation is assuming that 'return to normal' will take until September if restrictions really start to ease notably in June.
These figures are not discouraging. But we all recognise the picture we have is very partial. Hopefully all we be rather clearer by the start of May. Happily, we know nothing will change before then anyway. Once decisions are made it will be on the basis of a rather fuller picture than we have at the moment.
Anyone have any guesses how many infections there have been in the UK? It's certainly far larger than the official figures. My current guess - and I stress guess - is 10-20 million. Whatever the figure is it will clearly increase substantially before lockdown ends, even if it ends in May.
My guess would be one tenth of yours. Maybe slightly more - 3m? 4m?
If it's 20m it means the mortality rate is tiny and we will have mass immunity soon - so game over.
This is more meaningful than it seems at first sight.
That may be his view, but what about the rest of the Cabinet?
The rest of the Cabinet are now stuck with it. This will be quoted back to the government ad nauseam.
It is also a hostage to fortune that should never have been given. Uncomfortable though it may be, some lockdown measures may need to be lifted before it is completely safe.
This is more meaningful than it seems at first sight.
If taken to its logical extreme that means lockdown will never be lifted.
Agreed. I don't think its even a logical extreme, either. It is just the natural conclusion of that argument, not even remotely extreme. I think that's the mental trap that the government risk manoeuvring into. They *will* be blamed for any additional death once there's any change in restriction.
This is more meaningful than it seems at first sight.
That may be his view, but what about the rest of the Cabinet?
The rest of the Cabinet are now stuck with it. This will be quoted back to the government ad nauseam.
Then either Hancock has dropped a clanger, or he has done this deliberately to block off the arguments about the economic and mental health disaster that is looming.
On the previous thread some people were commenting on a particularly large range of predicted results. The largest range I know of involves Graham’s Number. When it was first published in the early 70s it was then the largest number ever used in a mathematical proof. It is a number so large the the visible universe is too small to write out the number which is the number of digits needed to write out the number. If you could somehow know the number then the information contained in it would cause your brain to collapse as a black hole (and that is not an exaggeration). This was not the answer to the problem though, it was nearly the upper bound. The lower bound was...
3.
Graham's number is so large that any physics-based analogies massively understate its scale
For anybody who wants to know more here is a video with Graham himself explaining it.
This is more meaningful than it seems at first sight.
That may be his view, but what about the rest of the Cabinet?
The rest of the Cabinet are now stuck with it. This will be quoted back to the government ad nauseam.
It is also a hostage to fortune that should never have been given. Uncomfortable though it may be, some lockdown measures may need to be lifted before it is completely safe.
With all that said, we may be able to have a less stringent lockdown going forwards.
If the death rate has peaked on the 8th-9th of April (which is still provisional, but looking slightly firm by now), it indicates that the social distancing measures introduced in the week before the lockdown were having an effect.
If that level of social distancing (where restaurants can do take-aways, people work from home where and when they can, and so forth) can lead to a levelling of the death rate, then the full lockdown should lead to a reduction in the death rate.
If the full lockdown is held until the death rate drops significantly, then progressive loosening can be done to keep it from shooting up again. It'd have to be sterner than Sweden's (their death rate is still climbing), but less than our current one. Difficult line to walk, but there's hope that there is at least a line there .
Here's a paper on modelling that line (which suggests following the more black and white policy):
Modelling, state estimation, and optimal control for the US COVID-19 outbreak https://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.06291.pdf ...This work investigated dynamic optimization strategies to characterize and control the US COVID-19 outbreak, by minimizing the socioeconomic cost associated with containment strate- gies and testing. The results provide several overarching conclusions. The quarantining of infected subjects is the most important of the considered mitigation strategies and should be maximized at all times. Additionally, periods of social distancing help to flatten the peak by preventing exposure from asymptomatic and unconfirmed cases. Screening and testing for the disease are key immediately preceding periods of relaxed social distancing, in order to minimize the number of unconfirmed infections during periods of so- cial mobility. Early action has much larger effects than later interventions, even as the later interventions are more drastic. Optimal policies are highly dependent on estimates of “hidden states,” i.e., the asymptomatic and unconfirmed cases. Moving horizon (periodically updated) policies and state estimation should be used to mitigate inaccuracies in the model and counts of asymptomatic/unconfirmed cases, by accounting for new data as they becomes available. The “on-off” policies identified as optimal are likely the easiest to implement in practical policy and to convey to the general population (as opposed to a policy where the social distancing parameters would take values between their upper and lower bounds). Their implementation would simply alternate between the strictest possible limitations, followed by periods of relative freedom of movement....
This is more meaningful than it seems at first sight.
If taken to its logical extreme that means lockdown will never be lifted.
Agreed. I don't think its even a logical extreme, either. It is just the natural conclusion of that argument, not even remotely extreme. I think that's the mental trap that the government risk manoeuvring into. They *will* be blamed for any additional death once there's any change in restriction.
They media tried that with when the lockdown was initiated, asking how many additional deaths because you waited an extra day or two. The public don't seem to be buying into that narrative, rather understanding this is basically an impossible situation to get 100% of things right, especially when it comes to precise timings.
This is more meaningful than it seems at first sight.
If taken to its logical extreme that means lockdown will never be lifted.
Exactly. Well, until there is a perfect vaccine.
The point is that leaving the house is never safe. I might be run over by a bus. Or bitten by a dog. Or contract influenza. Or slip on a patch of ice and break my neck. Or be shot resisting a mugger.
Of course, there are dangers in the house as well. My gas supply might ignite, for example. But generally they are a bit lower.
So it is a silly statement. It is about balancing risk. Ultimately, there will come a time when lifting lockdown is less dangerous - will cause fewer avoidable deaths - than keeping it in place. The trick will be to spot it.
Chris Whitty thinks deaths not caught up with weekend BH lag yet if i heard right.
Same as Vallance saying he expected the peak to start next week and last 2 weeks, a few days ago, it sounded like a mealy mouthed attempt to distract from the topic of this thread rather than a sincere expectation to me. The weekend bounce back has previously come on the Tuesday. Today's Wednesday and there was no bounce-back after the bank holiday, which fits with the fact there was far less of a weekend lull this time, but leaves expecting a bounce-back tomorrow pretty speculative rather than evidence based.
These figures are not discouraging. But we all recognise the picture we have is very partial. Hopefully all we be rather clearer by the start of May. Happily, we know nothing will change before then anyway. Once decisions are made it will be on the basis of a rather fuller picture than we have at the moment.
Anyone have any guesses how many infections there have been in the UK? It's certainly far larger than the official figures. My current guess - and I stress guess - is 10-20 million. Whatever the figure is it will clearly increase substantially before lockdown ends, even if it ends in May.
My guess would be one tenth of yours. Maybe slightly more - 3m? 4m?
If it's 20m it means the mortality rate is tiny and we will have mass immunity soon - so game over.
It might be 5-10% or so in London but most places will probably be lower. In other places like Bergamo they've been finding about 15%, so maybe that sort of figure in London's hostpots (Parliament, media and such).
Obviously Hitch doesn't come on PB where various posters were breathlessly noting Sweden's death rate when it was comparatively low. They're not doing that now of course.
This is more meaningful than it seems at first sight.
If taken to its logical extreme that means lockdown will never be lifted.
Agreed. I don't think its even a logical extreme, either. It is just the natural conclusion of that argument, not even remotely extreme. I think that's the mental trap that the government risk manoeuvring into. They *will* be blamed for any additional death once there's any change in restriction.
I think you underestimate the willingness of the population to live with imperfection. What hopefully you get is a large voluntary change in behaviour anyway post the strict restriction conditions; people will be more hygiene aware, they will keep distances and they will have things like more distance/home working, more staying at home if they have the sniffles and so on.
Sure not everyone will do it but if you get a notable double figure percentage of the population do it then you already have some barrier.
At some point the immediate testing issue will resolve, be it one shot home testing kits and so on and people will use them. As a result I think you will be already reducing risk after things are lifted.
All I'd be really keen to see is the shops allowing a bit more capacity in and more people getting back to work.
These figures are not discouraging. But we all recognise the picture we have is very partial. Hopefully all we be rather clearer by the start of May. Happily, we know nothing will change before then anyway. Once decisions are made it will be on the basis of a rather fuller picture than we have at the moment.
Anyone have any guesses how many infections there have been in the UK? It's certainly far larger than the official figures. My current guess - and I stress guess - is 10-20 million. Whatever the figure is it will clearly increase substantially before lockdown ends, even if it ends in May.
My guess would be one tenth of yours. Maybe slightly more - 3m? 4m?
If it's 20m it means the mortality rate is tiny and we will have mass immunity soon - so game over.
Thanks, me old tin o' beans. I do believe - after my original prognostications of doom - that the death rate is pretty tiny and that millions have been infected without knowing it. But I have no more insight into this than you do.
Anecdata: back in mid-December, my two oldest daughters (9 and 8) were both quite ill - not worryingly so, but as ill as they've ever been. All the symptoms were of Covid19. Had it happened three months later I'd be convinced that they'd had it. But Decemmber? Still, it seems highly likely the virus was in Hubei and Lombardy some months before it was officially recognised - possibly Manchester too?! It would be nice to think that my oldest two had had it and my youngest and my wife and I were asymptomatic, and that it is therefore now out of the way for our family.
A counter-view to a theory suggested recently (though it doesn't refer to the hypercoagulation suggested in that account as a mechanism driving vasoconstriction).
COVID-19 Lung Injury is Not High Altitude Pulmonary Edema https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ham.2020.0055 ...This is a fundamentally different phenomenon than that seen in ARDS due to COVID-19, in which viral-mediated inflammatory responses are the primary pathophysiological mechanism; alveolar epithelial inflammation and dysfunction impair surfactant function and alveolar fluid clearance, leading to alveolar collapse and/or filling and, as a result, significant ventilation-perfusion mismatch. (Thompson et al., 2017) The resulting hypoxemia may not be accompanied by reduced compliance in the acute phase of presentation but such problems often develop as ARDS progresses. Observed increases in pulmonary artery pressure are a consequence of, rather than a cause of alveolar edema. Systemic viremia can also cause nonpulmonary organ dysfunction, a phenomenon not seen in HAPE...
These figures are not discouraging. But we all recognise the picture we have is very partial. Hopefully all we be rather clearer by the start of May. Happily, we know nothing will change before then anyway. Once decisions are made it will be on the basis of a rather fuller picture than we have at the moment.
Anyone have any guesses how many infections there have been in the UK? It's certainly far larger than the official figures. My current guess - and I stress guess - is 10-20 million. Whatever the figure is it will clearly increase substantially before lockdown ends, even if it ends in May.
My guess would be one tenth of yours. Maybe slightly more - 3m? 4m?
If it's 20m it means the mortality rate is tiny and we will have mass immunity soon - so game over.
Thanks, me old tin o' beans. I do believe - after my original prognostications of doom - that the death rate is pretty tiny and that millions have been infected without knowing it. But I have no more insight into this than you do.
Anecdata: back in mid-December, my two oldest daughters (9 and 8) were both quite ill - not worryingly so, but as ill as they've ever been. All the symptoms were of Covid19. Had it happened three months later I'd be convinced that they'd had it. But Decemmber? Still, it seems highly likely the virus was in Hubei and Lombardy some months before it was officially recognised - possibly Manchester too?! It would be nice to think that my oldest two had had it and my youngest and my wife and I were asymptomatic, and that it is therefore now out of the way for our family.
There was an influenza surge in December, there was a chart showing positive tests for it in schools/hospitals etc. then (don't know who posted it, I do remember that the schools figure was coloured blue (or maybe purple!). I fear that there are a lot of people who are going to be disappointed that this is what it was.
Chris Whitty thinks deaths not caught up with weekend BH lag yet if i heard right.
Same as Vallance saying he expected the peak to start next week and last 2 weeks, a few days ago, it sounded like a mealy mouthed attempt to distract from the topic of this thread rather than a sincere expectation to me. The weekend bounce back has previously come on the Tuesday. Today's Wednesday and there was no bounce-back after the bank holiday, which fits with the fact there was far less of a weekend lull this time, but leaves expecting a bounce-back tomorrow pretty speculative rather than evidence based.
Either the experts are right, or you are.
I would prefer it to be you but lets see.
I am very surprised but very pleased deaths today only bounced up to 761 any number below 900 tomorrow will show we have peaked surely
These figures are not discouraging. But we all recognise the picture we have is very partial. Hopefully all we be rather clearer by the start of May. Happily, we know nothing will change before then anyway. Once decisions are made it will be on the basis of a rather fuller picture than we have at the moment.
Anyone have any guesses how many infections there have been in the UK? It's certainly far larger than the official figures. My current guess - and I stress guess - is 10-20 million. Whatever the figure is it will clearly increase substantially before lockdown ends, even if it ends in May.
My guess would be one tenth of yours. Maybe slightly more - 3m? 4m?
If it's 20m it means the mortality rate is tiny and we will have mass immunity soon - so game over.
Thanks, me old tin o' beans. I do believe - after my original prognostications of doom - that the death rate is pretty tiny and that millions have been infected without knowing it. But I have no more insight into this than you do.
Anecdata: back in mid-December, my two oldest daughters (9 and 8) were both quite ill - not worryingly so, but as ill as they've ever been. All the symptoms were of Covid19. Had it happened three months later I'd be convinced that they'd had it. But Decemmber? Still, it seems highly likely the virus was in Hubei and Lombardy some months before it was officially recognised - possibly Manchester too?! It would be nice to think that my oldest two had had it and my youngest and my wife and I were asymptomatic, and that it is therefore now out of the way for our family.
If there were a significant number of cases so early on, why did we not see any deaths with the characteristic lung injuries ? Would be pretty hard to miss, surely ?
A modern ethics question. My son was doing an online maths exam today on a part of the course they had not covered. He received 3 text messages asking how to do the log question. Should he have told them? His answer was to tell them how to do it but not the answer.
What exams taken in this way is supposed to tell the examiner board is simply beyond me but the Highers don’t cover metaphysics.
I would have advised against it, put it that way. Because that may now be used to determine their Highers grade even though they didn’t know how to do it.
Although it shows he is a nice person.
He could have told them the answer without undue effect on his own prospects. There are 5 million Scots and they all die at age 50 for ease of arithmetic, so there are 100,000 Scots at each age, so 100,000 doing the same exam. If three of them score an extra point or ten on their maths higher, it will not alter the grade of any of the other 99,997 students doing the same exam.
Obviously Hitch doesn't come on PB where various posters were breathlessly noting Sweden's death rate when it was comparatively low. They're not doing that now of course.
Sweden also projecting a 4% drop in GDP and rise in unemployment. Its not really one or the other, more like both.
Chris Whitty thinks deaths not caught up with weekend BH lag yet if i heard right.
Same as Vallance saying he expected the peak to start next week and last 2 weeks, a few days ago, it sounded like a mealy mouthed attempt to distract from the topic of this thread rather than a sincere expectation to me. The weekend bounce back has previously come on the Tuesday. Today's Wednesday and there was no bounce-back after the bank holiday, which fits with the fact there was far less of a weekend lull this time, but leaves expecting a bounce-back tomorrow pretty speculative rather than evidence based.
Either the experts are right, or you are.
I would prefer it to be you but lets see.
I am very surprised but very pleased deaths today only bounced up to 761 any number below 900 tomorrow will show we have peaked surely
I don't think experts are wrong - I think they're doing their job which is saying what it has been agreed people need to hear. Right now that means they're both part of a team effort to push back against attempts to get detail on ending lockdown until the Government wants to give it.
Obviously Hitch doesn't come on PB where various posters were breathlessly noting Sweden's death rate when it was comparatively low. They're not doing that now of course.
Sweden also projecting a 4% drop in GDP and rise in unemployment. Its not really one or the other, more like both.
Yes because there's no difference between a 4% drop and a 35% drop......
Obviously Hitch doesn't come on PB where various posters were breathlessly noting Sweden's death rate when it was comparatively low. They're not doing that now of course.
Sweden also projecting a 4% drop in GDP and rise in unemployment. Its not really one or the other, more like both.
Yes because there's no difference between a 4% drop and a 35% drop......
it depends whether you are looking at annualised or quarterly figures.
These figures are not discouraging. But we all recognise the picture we have is very partial. Hopefully all we be rather clearer by the start of May. Happily, we know nothing will change before then anyway. Once decisions are made it will be on the basis of a rather fuller picture than we have at the moment.
Anyone have any guesses how many infections there have been in the UK? It's certainly far larger than the official figures. My current guess - and I stress guess - is 10-20 million. Whatever the figure is it will clearly increase substantially before lockdown ends, even if it ends in May.
My guess would be one tenth of yours. Maybe slightly more - 3m? 4m?
If it's 20m it means the mortality rate is tiny and we will have mass immunity soon - so game over.
Thanks, me old tin o' beans. I do believe - after my original prognostications of doom - that the death rate is pretty tiny and that millions have been infected without knowing it. But I have no more insight into this than you do.
Anecdata: back in mid-December, my two oldest daughters (9 and 8) were both quite ill - not worryingly so, but as ill as they've ever been. All the symptoms were of Covid19. Had it happened three months later I'd be convinced that they'd had it. But Decemmber? Still, it seems highly likely the virus was in Hubei and Lombardy some months before it was officially recognised - possibly Manchester too?! It would be nice to think that my oldest two had had it and my youngest and my wife and I were asymptomatic, and that it is therefore now out of the way for our family.
Not impossible but maybe January/February looks more likely. I know some people who had sustained symptoms coming into late February/early March that would fit perfectly, proper fortnight worth of problems in each in every case, but at that stage of course it didn't raise an eyebrow of the GPs who ended up in two of those cases prescribing inhalers to help with breathing.
Ask every one of those people now and they reckon they had it.
A counter-view to a theory suggested recently (though it doesn't refer to the hypercoagulation suggested in that account as a mechanism driving vasoconstriction).
COVID-19 Lung Injury is Not High Altitude Pulmonary Edema https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ham.2020.0055 ...This is a fundamentally different phenomenon than that seen in ARDS due to COVID-19, in which viral-mediated inflammatory responses are the primary pathophysiological mechanism; alveolar epithelial inflammation and dysfunction impair surfactant function and alveolar fluid clearance, leading to alveolar collapse and/or filling and, as a result, significant ventilation-perfusion mismatch. (Thompson et al., 2017) The resulting hypoxemia may not be accompanied by reduced compliance in the acute phase of presentation but such problems often develop as ARDS progresses. Observed increases in pulmonary artery pressure are a consequence of, rather than a cause of alveolar edema. Systemic viremia can also cause nonpulmonary organ dysfunction, a phenomenon not seen in HAPE...
There is an interesting seminar on coagulopathy of Covid19 here:
These figures are not discouraging. But we all recognise the picture we have is very partial. Hopefully all we be rather clearer by the start of May. Happily, we know nothing will change before then anyway. Once decisions are made it will be on the basis of a rather fuller picture than we have at the moment.
Anyone have any guesses how many infections there have been in the UK? It's certainly far larger than the official figures. My current guess - and I stress guess - is 10-20 million. Whatever the figure is it will clearly increase substantially before lockdown ends, even if it ends in May.
My guess would be one tenth of yours. Maybe slightly more - 3m? 4m?
If it's 20m it means the mortality rate is tiny and we will have mass immunity soon - so game over.
Thanks, me old tin o' beans. I do believe - after my original prognostications of doom - that the death rate is pretty tiny and that millions have been infected without knowing it. But I have no more insight into this than you do.
Anecdata: back in mid-December, my two oldest daughters (9 and 8) were both quite ill - not worryingly so, but as ill as they've ever been. All the symptoms were of Covid19. Had it happened three months later I'd be convinced that they'd had it. But Decemmber? Still, it seems highly likely the virus was in Hubei and Lombardy some months before it was officially recognised - possibly Manchester too?! It would be nice to think that my oldest two had had it and my youngest and my wife and I were asymptomatic, and that it is therefore now out of the way for our family.
If there were a significant number of cases so early on, why did we not see any deaths with the characteristic lung injuries ? Would be pretty hard to miss, surely ?
Well there were significant numbers of cases of something which in retrospect looks very Covidy in Lombardy and Hubei in the last quarter of last year. In Manchester? Probably not. But I'm clinging to that hope...
All the days are the same for me in the lockdown; so can anyone explain why the Bank Holiday should continue to have its ususal salience, given that there has been no slacking off over the Easter weekend as staff went away for a break. Why SHOULD the numbers be different over a "Bank Holiday" that never was?
Was speaking to a nurse yesterday. For some departments its very quiet all their normal patients have been cancelled. Other areas "its like a warzone".
From what Hancock just said i dont really understand how it can be like a warzone sounds like there are plenty of excess beds
Chris Whitty thinks deaths not caught up with weekend BH lag yet if i heard right.
Extraordinary that in the midst of a mass death event where a large portion of the economy is shut down there is lack of reporting resources at the weekend / Bank Holiday. These are massively important figures, not some incidental.
All the days are the same for me in the lockdown; so can anyone explain why the Bank Holiday should continue to have its ususal salience, given that there has been no slacking off over the Easter weekend as staff went away for a break. Why SHOULD the numbers be different over a "Bank Holiday" that never was?
That's the kind of thinking that cancels the tea break, just because the Russians have launched 2500 warhead nuclear first strike.
Was speaking to a nurse yesterday. For some departments its very quiet all their normal patients have been cancelled. Other areas "its like a warzone".
From what Hancock just said i dont really understand how it can be like a warzone sounds like there are plenty of excess beds
Hotspots. Since you can't tell where they are going to be - either you move patients across the country or you need excess capacity everywhere.
All the days are the same for me in the lockdown; so can anyone explain why the Bank Holiday should continue to have its ususal salience, given that there has been no slacking off over the Easter weekend as staff went away for a break. Why SHOULD the numbers be different over a "Bank Holiday" that never was?
That's the kind of thinking that cancels the tea break, just because the Russians have launched 2500 warhead nuclear first strike.
That would be silly.
After all, you can’t have your tea break after the warheads have hit. You need to get it in first.
Chris Whitty thinks deaths not caught up with weekend BH lag yet if i heard right.
Extraordinary that in the midst of a mass death event where a large portion of the economy is shut down there is lack of reporting resources at the weekend / Bank Holiday. These are massively important figures, not some incidental.
Chris Whitty thinks deaths not caught up with weekend BH lag yet if i heard right.
Extraordinary that in the midst of a mass death event where a large portion of the economy is shut down there is lack of reporting resources at the weekend / Bank Holiday. These are massively important figures, not some incidental.
Absolutely right, I simply can't understand why, if the figures are recorded at the same time every day, as they surely should be, then they should be 100% accurate.
This guy might be better served using his time to try and save and/or diversify his businesses rather than frantically tweeting.
Just saying.....
He really is a moron. Here he is trying to conclude that most cases are asymptomatic from a study where they tested people within a few days of likely exposure, before symptoms had a chance to develop:
Was speaking to a nurse yesterday. For some departments its very quiet all their normal patients have been cancelled. Other areas "its like a warzone".
From what Hancock just said i dont really understand how it can be like a warzone sounds like there are plenty of excess beds
It is possible to be both.
ICU is stressed, and so are the medical wards, but many areas are running skeleton emergency services. A lot of staff have moved across from theatres to ICU, both medical and nursing staff.
Clinics and staff for long term conditions are very quiet as a result, with empty wards. This isn't the right time to have your knee replaced, or your annual diabetes review, or pacemaker battery changed.
Was speaking to a nurse yesterday. For some departments its very quiet all their normal patients have been cancelled. Other areas "its like a warzone".
From what Hancock just said i dont really understand how it can be like a warzone sounds like there are plenty of excess beds
It is possible to be both.
ICU is stressed, and so are the medical wards, but many areas are running skeleton emergency services. A lot of staff have moved across from theatres to ICU, both medical and nursing staff.
Clinics and staff for long term conditions are very quiet as a result, with empty wards. This isn't the right time to have your knee replaced, or your annual diabetes review, or pacemaker battery changed.
I understand all that but the phrase "warzone"?
The NHS is used to being very very busy surely.
ITU was at or near full capacity many many times from where i sat
Was speaking to a nurse yesterday. For some departments its very quiet all their normal patients have been cancelled. Other areas "its like a warzone".
From what Hancock just said i dont really understand how it can be like a warzone sounds like there are plenty of excess beds
It is possible to be both.
ICU is stressed, and so are the medical wards, but many areas are running skeleton emergency services. A lot of staff have moved across from theatres to ICU, both medical and nursing staff.
Clinics and staff for long term conditions are very quiet as a result, with empty wards. This isn't the right time to have your knee replaced, or your annual diabetes review, or pacemaker battery changed.
I understand all that but the phrase "warzone"?
The NHS is used to being very very busy surely
I have never known ICU to be so busy, taking over our main operating theatres (which took a couple of weeks to prepare). As the time on ventilators is usually several weeks, I would expect those numbers to go up, even post peak.
Leicester has one of the lower per capita rates in the Midlands BTW.
This guy might be better served using his time to try and save and/or diversify his businesses rather than frantically tweeting.
Just saying.....
He really is a moron. Here he is trying to conclude that most cases are asymptomatic from a study where they tested people within a few days of likely exposure, before symptoms had a chance to develop:
I do feel some empathy for him from back during my first degree when my experiment results were a bit skew-whiff. The searching through my entire analytical toolkit and scouring of areas of data trying to make the results fit a given theory rather than the more approved way of doing it the other way around...
Was speaking to a nurse yesterday. For some departments its very quiet all their normal patients have been cancelled. Other areas "its like a warzone".
From what Hancock just said i dont really understand how it can be like a warzone sounds like there are plenty of excess beds
Hotspots. Since you can't tell where they are going to be - either you move patients across the country or you need excess capacity everywhere.
Big supermarkets in areas with bigger than average families.
As far as Leicester goes, it looks as if our peak (hospital) deaths was 6 April.
I think that Social Care is a week or two behind though, and will suffer over the next week or so.
Right very positive stuff about NHS deaths in Leicester then
Looking at the chart, we are a little over half the national rate. I think that you must be in "Joined Up Derbyshire STP" at a little over the national rate.
The biggest hotspot at present seems to be Newcastle and around.
Chris Whitty thinks deaths not caught up with weekend BH lag yet if i heard right.
Extraordinary that in the midst of a mass death event where a large portion of the economy is shut down there is lack of reporting resources at the weekend / Bank Holiday. These are massively important figures, not some incidental.
The government will almost certainly have better figures. Deaths aren’t included in the public figures until relatives have been notified. But the hospitals will presumably have privately reported to the government the actual numbers well before then.
Chris Whitty thinks deaths not caught up with weekend BH lag yet if i heard right.
Extraordinary that in the midst of a mass death event where a large portion of the economy is shut down there is lack of reporting resources at the weekend / Bank Holiday. These are massively important figures, not some incidental.
The government will almost certainly have better figures. Deaths aren’t included in the public figures until relatives have been notified. But the hospitals will presumably have privately reported to the government the actual numbers well before then.
No, I think the data is generally a bit lumpy for the government too.
Chris Whitty thinks deaths not caught up with weekend BH lag yet if i heard right.
Extraordinary that in the midst of a mass death event where a large portion of the economy is shut down there is lack of reporting resources at the weekend / Bank Holiday. These are massively important figures, not some incidental.
The government will almost certainly have better figures. Deaths aren’t included in the public figures until relatives have been notified. But the hospitals will presumably have privately reported to the government the actual numbers well before then.
How long can it take to phone and tell the relative that the person they waved off to hospital is dead?
I'd be hugely underwhelmed if my wife died in hospital and I wasn't told until 3 or 4 days later because it was a weekend.
I can understand there are difficulties in sudden deaths in finding the relatives but not in cases like this where they presumably have had some time before death to locate the relative.
Good of Eastern Europeans to be coming over to help the agriculture sector . With so many Brits not working you’d think they’d be out there happy for the work.
At least this is a good test for next year when all those hardworking Eastern Europeans are going to be told they’re taking the jobs of hardworking Brits and told to get lost .
China has imposed restrictions on the publication of academic research on the origins of the novel coronavirus, according to a central government directive and online notices published by two Chinese universities, that have since been removed from the web. Under the new policy, all academic papers on Covid-19 will be subject to extra vetting before being submitted for publication. Studies on the origin of the virus will receive extra scrutiny and must be approved by central government officials, according to the now-deleted posts.
As far as Leicester goes, it looks as if our peak (hospital) deaths was 6 April.
I think that Social Care is a week or two behind though, and will suffer over the next week or so.
Right very positive stuff about NHS deaths in Leicester then
Looking at the chart, we are a little over half the national rate. I think that you must be in "Joined Up Derbyshire STP" at a little over the national rate.
The biggest hotspot at present seems to be Newcastle and around.
Some comfort to see Devon has the lowest deaths after being the first (Italian school ski-trip caused) hot-spot. I think folks here hunkered down harder and faster because of that - the results would seem to support it. We are running at around 1/15th of the rate in the Black Country.
We must also have one of the highest average ages in the country - a further incentive for Devon residents to keep the hell out of Dodge.
This guy might be better served using his time to try and save and/or diversify his businesses rather than frantically tweeting.
Just saying.....
He really is a moron. Here he is trying to conclude that most cases are asymptomatic from a study where they tested people within a few days of likely exposure, before symptoms had a chance to develop:
I do feel some empathy for him from back during my first degree when my experiment results were a bit skew-whiff. The searching through my entire analytical toolkit and scouring of areas of data trying to make the results fit a given theory rather than the more approved way of doing it the other way around...
I had a student who screwed up, edited a wikipedia article to provide helpful ‘evidence’ and expected to get away with it! Top marks for creativity, though.
Comments
I'm 53, born and brought up.Catholic. Have never once drank at a Communion.
Look at the curves and the start of decrease comes in exactly when it should - 5-7 days after lockdown.
They take a single high score on 10th of March as being indicative of the peak. Which can just be a single bad day - which is why rolling averages are used for proper analyses. The top of the curve other than that is the 13/14 of March (which aren't exceptionally out of the curve around them) and it starts to slowly subside from the 17th onwards (other than one bad day on the 20th).
The US data is worthless without being broken down by State and correlated with stay-at-home data for each State (it just says "before most stay-at-home orders were issued).
The Swedish data shows very little (other than that their per-capita death rate per day is now greater than ours); we can see the weekend effect that we've commented on before.
I really really want things to go back to how they were before, but I am really worried we'll end up in a second, longer and deeper lockdown if we get this wrong. I'd rather take three months at the level we are now with dwindling down for three months afterwards than two months lockdown, three weeks out, and six months deeper lockdown. Because that would really mess with us psychologically and definitely scar the economy, but many people seem to be trying to convince themselves there's no problem.
The 9th April release had 140 for April the 8th.
Happily, we know nothing will change before then anyway. Once decisions are made it will be on the basis of a rather fuller picture than we have at the moment.
Anyone have any guesses how many infections there have been in the UK? It's certainly far larger than the official figures. My current guess - and I stress guess - is 10-20 million. Whatever the figure is it will clearly increase substantially before lockdown ends, even if it ends in May.
Date of death 9/4 - deaths reported on first 3 days = 562
Date of death 11/4 - deaths reported on first 3 days = 575
So we're saying the peak was 8/4, but deaths on 11/4 may well be higher than deaths on 9/4?!
I'm afraid that doesn't look very clear cut to me. Numbers could easily be a random walk along a plateau.
If the death rate has peaked on the 8th-9th of April (which is still provisional, but looking slightly firm by now), it indicates that the social distancing measures introduced in the week before the lockdown were having an effect.
If that level of social distancing (where restaurants can do take-aways, people work from home where and when they can, and so forth) can lead to a levelling of the death rate, then the full lockdown should lead to a reduction in the death rate.
If the full lockdown is held until the death rate drops significantly, then progressive loosening can be done to keep it from shooting up again. It'd have to be sterner than Sweden's (their death rate is still climbing), but less than our current one. Difficult line to walk, but there's hope that there is at least a line there
.
Bless the Guardian, it wants to help.
This is more meaningful than it seems at first sight.
Happily, by the time the decision is made, there will be far more evidence.
The overmarking in many of the less rigorous schools might be offset by that.
Realistically they will hold things in place until after one of the two May bank holidays, then release the brakes assuming that the necessary NHS temporary capacity is in place. Better to have forked out on the ventilators and a bunch of super facilities and leave them sitting. I know here in NI of a number of locations around the region on the notice list for Nightingale service and not one has got the call. If the deaths and admission loading start to show a consistent decline even if that decline isn't massive, they will look to move things forward.
PS just to reflect the fact that PPE is a global issue, i read reports that places in Germany had to make appeals for it, places in Japan had to make appeals for it. Most places have had some problems, so we need to get over it.
Our organisation is assuming that 'return to normal' will take until September if restrictions really start to ease notably in June.
If it's 20m it means the mortality rate is tiny and we will have mass immunity soon - so game over.
I don't think its even a logical extreme, either. It is just the natural conclusion of that argument, not even remotely extreme.
I think that's the mental trap that the government risk manoeuvring into. They *will* be blamed for any additional death once there's any change in restriction.
"Insufficient demand for testing at the weekend"
Meanwhile people are dying untested
Some kind of sick joke, insufficient demand my arse.
Modelling, state estimation, and optimal control for the US COVID-19 outbreak
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.06291.pdf
...This work investigated dynamic optimization strategies to characterize and control the US COVID-19 outbreak, by minimizing the socioeconomic cost associated with containment strate- gies and testing. The results provide several overarching conclusions.
The quarantining of infected subjects is the most important of the considered mitigation strategies and should be maximized at all times. Additionally, periods of social distancing help to flatten the peak by preventing exposure from asymptomatic and unconfirmed cases. Screening and testing for the disease are key immediately preceding periods of relaxed social distancing, in order to minimize the number of unconfirmed infections during periods of so- cial mobility. Early action has much larger effects than later interventions, even as the later interventions are more drastic. Optimal policies are highly dependent on estimates of “hidden states,” i.e., the asymptomatic and unconfirmed cases. Moving horizon (periodically updated) policies and state estimation should be used to mitigate inaccuracies in the model and counts of asymptomatic/unconfirmed cases, by accounting for new data as they becomes available.
The “on-off” policies identified as optimal are likely the easiest to implement in practical policy and to convey to the general population (as opposed to a policy where the social distancing parameters would take values between their upper and lower bounds). Their implementation would simply alternate between the strictest possible limitations, followed by periods of relative freedom of movement....
Thank goodness Scotland still has proper journalists at the Courier and P&J.
Of course, there are dangers in the house as well. My gas supply might ignite, for example. But generally they are a bit lower.
So it is a silly statement. It is about balancing risk. Ultimately, there will come a time when lifting lockdown is less dangerous - will cause fewer avoidable deaths - than keeping it in place. The trick will be to spot it.
News is getting boring - need something new to make it more entertaining to attract attention of viewers.
Nobody in the public actually needs to know about future strategy for lifting lockdown.
It generally dislikes thinking, and doesn't understand the topics of medicine or science.
Of course they want something to happen. Something to change. Something to complain about.
Too fast, too slow, not enough, too much.
Sure not everyone will do it but if you get a notable double figure percentage of the population do it then you already have some barrier.
At some point the immediate testing issue will resolve, be it one shot home testing kits and so on and people will use them. As a result I think you will be already reducing risk after things are lifted.
All I'd be really keen to see is the shops allowing a bit more capacity in and more people getting back to work.
I do believe - after my original prognostications of doom - that the death rate is pretty tiny and that millions have been infected without knowing it.
But I have no more insight into this than you do.
Anecdata: back in mid-December, my two oldest daughters (9 and 8) were both quite ill - not worryingly so, but as ill as they've ever been. All the symptoms were of Covid19. Had it happened three months later I'd be convinced that they'd had it. But Decemmber? Still, it seems highly likely the virus was in Hubei and Lombardy some months before it was officially recognised - possibly Manchester too?! It would be nice to think that my oldest two had had it and my youngest and my wife and I were asymptomatic, and that it is therefore now out of the way for our family.
COVID-19 Lung Injury is Not High Altitude Pulmonary Edema
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ham.2020.0055
...This is a fundamentally different phenomenon than that seen in ARDS due to COVID-19, in which viral-mediated inflammatory responses are the primary pathophysiological mechanism; alveolar epithelial inflammation and dysfunction impair surfactant function and alveolar fluid clearance, leading to alveolar collapse and/or filling and, as a result, significant ventilation-perfusion mismatch. (Thompson et al., 2017) The resulting hypoxemia may not be accompanied by reduced compliance in the acute phase of presentation but such problems often develop as ARDS progresses. Observed increases in pulmonary artery pressure are a consequence of, rather than a cause of alveolar edema. Systemic viremia can also cause nonpulmonary organ dysfunction, a phenomenon not seen in HAPE...
I would prefer it to be you but lets see.
I am very surprised but very pleased deaths today only bounced up to 761 any number below 900 tomorrow will show we have peaked surely
Would be pretty hard to miss, surely ?
I think France is predicting an 8% contraction.
Ask every one of those people now and they reckon they had it.
https://academy.isth.org/isth/2020/covid-19/291581/marcel.levi.26.beverley.jane.hunt.thrombosis.thromboprophylaxis.26.coagulopathy.html?f
Just saying.....
From what Hancock just said i dont really understand how it can be like a warzone sounds like there are plenty of excess beds
After all, you can’t have your tea break after the warheads have hit. You need to get it in first.
https://twitter.com/AlistairHaimes/status/1250456243484975108
ICU is stressed, and so are the medical wards, but many areas are running skeleton emergency services. A lot of staff have moved across from theatres to ICU, both medical and nursing staff.
Clinics and staff for long term conditions are very quiet as a result, with empty wards. This isn't the right time to have your knee replaced, or your annual diabetes review, or pacemaker battery changed.
I think that Social Care is a week or two behind though, and will suffer over the next week or so.
The NHS is used to being very very busy surely.
ITU was at or near full capacity many many times from where i sat
Leicester has one of the lower per capita rates in the Midlands BTW.
The searching through my entire analytical toolkit and scouring of areas of data trying to make the results fit a given theory rather than the more approved way of doing it the other way around...
Looking at the chart, we are a little over half the national rate. I think that you must be in "Joined Up Derbyshire STP" at a little over the national rate.
The biggest hotspot at present seems to be Newcastle and around.
I'd be hugely underwhelmed if my wife died in hospital and I wasn't told until 3 or 4 days later because it was a weekend.
I can understand there are difficulties in sudden deaths in finding the relatives but not in cases like this where they presumably have had some time before death to locate the relative.
At least this is a good test for next year when all those hardworking Eastern Europeans are going to be told they’re taking the jobs of hardworking Brits and told to get lost .
What a surprise
We must also have one of the highest average ages in the country - a further incentive for Devon residents to keep the hell out of Dodge.