A friend speculates this is the time to commit low to medium level non violent/no sexual crimes, the justice system might not be able to cope, and you'll never get to trial, unless we go the way of North Britain.
Did you mean to write "not an option" ?
Yeah.
Checks notes.
Blames auto-correct noisy children distracting me.
This is the same Queen who hasn't donated a square foot of floor space in her myriad palaces to help test/treat her subjects during the pandemic?
I hear the Queen has made some of her resisdences available to the otherwise idle and feckless during the pandemic. I understand there is a former Falkland Conflict hero who has hit hard times who is currently a guest at Windsor Castle.
I wonder if the Vygon contract was won openly under EU procurement rules and whether restricting to domestic suppliers would have been allowed on national security/key infrastructure (/equivalent) grounds?
Apparently Starmer will do PMQs even though Boris is away. I like that. I kind of get why there's this thing where if the PM is away the LoTo likewise gets a deputy in, but he's still on the job, it's not like its an affront to ask questions of the non-PM
Plenty of precedent for that. I recall Kinnock as Opposition Leader asking questions to John Biffen in mid-80s when the latter stood in for Thatcher.
A friend speculates this is the time to commit low to medium level non violent/no sexual crimes, the justice system might not be able to cope, and you'll never get to trial, unless we go the way of North Britain.
Did you mean to write "not an option" ?
Yeah.
Checks notes.
Blames auto-correct noisy children distracting me.
Most of the issue like using bad technology that the rest of the world got away from in about 1992 to me.
I considered volunteering but I am not eligible as I had a slight temperature for 3 days in late March (less than 30 days ago). You have to be willing to take the risk of a possible enhanced immune response either to the vaccine or to the virus.
Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.
The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.
The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.
The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.
The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.
That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
Strange article.
If you don't need much of Plan B because Plan A worked, that is a sign of success, not failure.
The piece even attempts to link Nightingale to the Northwick Park "Critical Incident" in late March - which was resolved in 24 hours by a bit of cooperation with neighbouring hospitals.
And one reason they don't have the staff .. because the hospitals trying to pass the patients over have not managed to release staff who could care for them more efficiently at the Nightingale.
Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.
We ordered material manufactured by the highest quality (and most expensive) provider. We were their earliest and largest order so had priority. We assumed that given this was a reputable company located in a close ally and a fellow EU state we would have no issues with fulfilment.
"The US has been accused of redirecting 200,000 Germany-bound masks for its own use, in a move condemned as "modern piracy". "The local government in Berlin said the shipment of US-made masks was "confiscated" in Bangkok. "The FFP2 masks, which were ordered by Berlin's police force, did not reach their destination, it said."
Sunil, I believe that story has been totally debunked, although the Germans, taking a leaf from Trump's own book, continue to peddle it regardless of it being based on false 'facts'
Excuse me, but can you direct me towards any actual source of debunking? I haven't seen any retraction by the Berlin Police Force from their public statement at the time, that the stuff was ordered, payed for, and notification of delivery received, before it was confiscated while already loaded onto the plane.
Further, could you please point out to me any instance of "the Germans peddling these 'false facts' regardless", besides, maybe, this comment of mine?
3M is the only US company with N95 production facilities in the region, and hence the only company from which the US could have 'confiscated' the order. They have no record of the so-called Berlin order. The Mayor of Berlin later admitted that the order was with a German company, (and hence not susceptible to the US requisition order).
"German officials on Friday were stinging in their criticism of the Trump administration after a consignment of face masks that they said was ordered and paid for by the Berlin police was diverted en route from China. But one of the officials backpedaled from his statement on Saturday.
"Andreas Geisel, Berlin’s interior minister, said the delivery made it as far as Bangkok before being “confiscated.” In a statement Friday, he said the masks had been ordered from a U.S. firm and “we are currently assuming that this is related to the U.S. government’s ban on mask exports." Berlin mayor Michael Müller also weighed in to call the action “inhumane and unacceptable.”
"But on Saturday, Geisel wrote on Twitter that he had clarified that the order was placed with a German firm, and that supply-chain issues were being “reviewed.” "German press reports said Friday the consignment was ordered from 3M. 3M later said it had “no evidence” that its products had been seized, as it had “no record of any order of respirators from China for the Berlin police.”
"The German federal government did not respond to a request to comment on Friday. The U.S. State Department declined to comment on the complaints from various countries."
It is ironic that even the Germans are using Trump's own tactics against him.
Thank you for linking the WaPo article. As I understand it, the heart of the matter is that the Berlin Police Force didn't order directly from 3M, but from a German kit wholesaler who in turn then ordered from 3M. The redirection of the delivery seems to have happened nevertheless, the masks didn't arrive as previously notified. I'm unable to find any information, though, on whether and when the delivery then actually occured.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
I considered volunteering but I am not eligible as I had a slight temperature for 3 days in late March (less than 30 days ago). You have to be willing to take the risk of a possible enhanced immune response either to the vaccine or to the virus.
Thanks. Looks like I'm not eligible because I don't live in those areas.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.
The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.
The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.
The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.
The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.
That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
Strange article.
If you don't need much of Plan B because Plan A worked, that is a sign of success, not failure.
The piece even attempts to link Nightingale to the Northwick Park "Critical Incident" in late March - which was resolved in 24 hours by a bit of cooperation with neighbouring hospitals.
And one reason they don't have the staff .. because the hospitals trying to pass the patients over have not managed to release staff who could care for them more efficiently at the Nightingale.
Attempt to create a narrative #FAIL.
To be fair to the Guardian they are trying very hard. There was that “CABINET SPLIT OVER LOCKDOWN” story this morning that revealed that there were a, er, range of general views put forward largely linked to whether ministers were in economic departments or not and, er, nobody was advocating a lifting of the lockdown at this stage.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
what the ohio sample does not say is how many prisoners who tested positive presented with symptoms.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
I just don't see how this example of a completely closed and close community can tell us about a potential iceberg in the wider world. The whole world isn't cooped up in a massive prison where we all eat in the same room, for example.
I considered volunteering but I am not eligible as I had a slight temperature for 3 days in late March (less than 30 days ago). You have to be willing to take the risk of a possible enhanced immune response either to the vaccine or to the virus.
Thanks. Looks like I'm not eligible because I don't live in those areas.
I wonder if the informed consent forms are also letting volunteers know about antibody-dependent enhancement in some coronavirus (eg SARS, MERS) vaccines.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
One could argue that thewhole of this country, and indeed much of the rest of the world, has also been in a closed environment since mid-March.
Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.
The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.
The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.
The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.
The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.
That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
One could argue that thewhole of this country, and indeed much of the rest of the world, has also been in a closed environment since mid-March.
But in separate places, we don't all go to the same room to eat, do we?
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
I just don't see how this example of a completely closed and close community can tell us about a potential iceberg in the wider world. The whole world isn't cooped up in a massive prison where we all eat in the same room, for example.
Most of the world is now cooped up in closed communities of various sizes.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
Hard to even say if they're undetected as the article doesn't mention how many had symptoms.
The US aircraft carrier, which is likely to have a lot of very fit people without underlying problems, still had 40% showing symptoms, so you'd expect a higher % in the general population. An iceberg of undetected/unnoticed cases would be fantastic, but I don't think we can assume there is one.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
I just don't see how this example of a completely closed and close community can tell us about a potential iceberg in the wider world. The whole world isn't cooped up in a massive prison where we all eat in the same room, for example.
I take your point about the difference between a closed environment, and populations with social distancing. But the more general point about testing bias and asymptomatic spread applies to all environments, not just prisons. Which is why all of the very few community antibody tests I have seen point in the same direction as this prison study, even if the levels are different.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
I just don't see how this example of a completely closed and close community can tell us about a potential iceberg in the wider world. The whole world isn't cooped up in a massive prison where we all eat in the same room, for example.
Most of the world is now cooped up in closed communities of various sizes.
See my reply to your other comment. It's a totally different scenario. In prison, if one person gets it, everyone is going to get it. The fact that hasn't happened in the outside world just goes to prove my point.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
I just don't see how this example of a completely closed and close community can tell us about a potential iceberg in the wider world. The whole world isn't cooped up in a massive prison where we all eat in the same room, for example.
I take your point about the difference between a closed environment, and populations with social distancing. But the more general point about testing bias and asymptomatic spread applies to all environments, not just prisons. Which is why all of the very few community antibody tests I have seen point in the same direction as this prison study, even if the levels are different.
Yeah, it may be that a couple of % of the population has it, not 73%. Very different!
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
I just don't see how this example of a completely closed and close community can tell us about a potential iceberg in the wider world. The whole world isn't cooped up in a massive prison where we all eat in the same room, for example.
Most of the world is now cooped up in closed communities of various sizes.
See my reply to your other comment. It's a totally different scenario. In prison, if one person gets it, everyone is going to get it. The fact that hasn't happened in the outside world just goes to prove my point.
Why is that different to a household in lockdown? if one gets it everybody will.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
I just don't see how this example of a completely closed and close community can tell us about a potential iceberg in the wider world. The whole world isn't cooped up in a massive prison where we all eat in the same room, for example.
Most of the world is now cooped up in closed communities of various sizes.
See my reply to your other comment. It's a totally different scenario. In prison, if one person gets it, everyone is going to get it. The fact that hasn't happened in the outside world just goes to prove my point.
Why is that different to a household in lockdown? if one gets it everybody will.
Then you have four people with it and it stops there. In prison, it keeps going until the entire population has it. We're talking about the population of the prison compared to the population at large.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
I just don't see how this example of a completely closed and close community can tell us about a potential iceberg in the wider world. The whole world isn't cooped up in a massive prison where we all eat in the same room, for example.
I take your point about the difference between a closed environment, and populations with social distancing. But the more general point about testing bias and asymptomatic spread applies to all environments, not just prisons. Which is why all of the very few community antibody tests I have seen point in the same direction as this prison study, even if the levels are different.
Yeah, it may be that a couple of % of the population has it, not 73%. Very different!
How do you know? still have no idea what percentage of, say, the UK population has it right now, or has had it in the past.
If the Belgians really are making an infallible antibody test, it could have some astonishing results.
Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.
We ordered material manufactured by the highest quality (and most expensive) provider. We were their earliest and largest order so had priority. We assumed that given this was a reputable company located in a close ally and a fellow EU state we would have no issues with fulfilment.
"The US has been accused of redirecting 200,000 Germany-bound masks for its own use, in a move condemned as "modern piracy". "The local government in Berlin said the shipment of US-made masks was "confiscated" in Bangkok. "The FFP2 masks, which were ordered by Berlin's police force, did not reach their destination, it said."
Sunil, I believe that story has been totally debunked, although the Germans, taking a leaf from Trump's own book, continue to peddle it regardless of it being based on false 'facts'
Excuse me, but can you direct me towards any actual source of debunking? I haven't seen any retraction by the Berlin Police Force from their public statement at the time, that the stuff was ordered, payed for, and notification of delivery received, before it was confiscated while already loaded onto the plane.
Further, could you please point out to me any instance of "the Germans peddling these 'false facts' regardless", besides, maybe, this comment of mine?
3M is the only US company with N95 production facilities in the region, and hence the only company from which the US could have 'confiscated' the order. They have no record of the so-called Berlin order. The Mayor of Berlin later admitted that the order was with a German company, (and hence not susceptible to the US requisition order).
"German officials on Friday were stinging in their criticism of the Trump administration after a consignment of face masks that they said was ordered and paid for by the Berlin police was diverted en route from China. But one of the officials backpedaled from his statement on Saturday.
"Andreas Geisel, Berlin’s interior minister, said the delivery made it as far as Bangkok before being “confiscated.” In a statement Friday, he said the masks had been ordered from a U.S. firm and “we are currently assuming that this is related to the U.S. government’s ban on mask exports." Berlin mayor Michael Müller also weighed in to call the action “inhumane and unacceptable.”
"But on Saturday, Geisel wrote on Twitter that he had clarified that the order was placed with a German firm, and that supply-chain issues were being “reviewed.” "German press reports said Friday the consignment was ordered from 3M. 3M later said it had “no evidence” that its products had been seized, as it had “no record of any order of respirators from China for the Berlin police.”
"The German federal government did not respond to a request to comment on Friday. The U.S. State Department declined to comment on the complaints from various countries."
It is ironic that even the Germans are using Trump's own tactics against him.
Thank you for linking the WaPo article. As I understand it, the heart of the matter is that the Berlin Police Force didn't order directly from 3M, but from a German kit wholesaler who in turn then ordered from 3M. The redirection of the delivery seems to have happened nevertheless, the masks didn't arrive as previously notified. I'm unable to find any information, though, on whether and when the delivery then actually occured.
And thanks for the additional information, Matt
Based on the description it sounds like the German wholesaler placed a grey market order. Most multinationals don’t really like that because it messes up pricing. In this case 3M might have stopped it under their regional pricing policy
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
I just don't see how this example of a completely closed and close community can tell us about a potential iceberg in the wider world. The whole world isn't cooped up in a massive prison where we all eat in the same room, for example.
I take your point about the difference between a closed environment, and populations with social distancing. But the more general point about testing bias and asymptomatic spread applies to all environments, not just prisons. Which is why all of the very few community antibody tests I have seen point in the same direction as this prison study, even if the levels are different.
Yeah, it may be that a couple of % of the population has it, not 73%. Very different!
How do you know? still have no idea what percentage of, say, the UK population has it right now, or has had it in the past.
If the Belgians really are making an infallible antibody test, it could have some astonishing results.
No, but I am pretty confident it is not 73%. Figures I've seen put it in the low single figures. Demonstrating quite nicely how the outside world is not like a prison.
The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.
The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.
Not this crap again. From the very start, they said the plan was for less serious cases. And was a backstop for if things got really tight for capacity, which it hasn't.
Nightingale hospital in London 'to treat less critical Covid-19 cases'
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
I just don't see how this example of a completely closed and close community can tell us about a potential iceberg in the wider world. The whole world isn't cooped up in a massive prison where we all eat in the same room, for example.
I take your point about the difference between a closed environment, and populations with social distancing. But the more general point about testing bias and asymptomatic spread applies to all environments, not just prisons. Which is why all of the very few community antibody tests I have seen point in the same direction as this prison study, even if the levels are different.
Yeah, it may be that a couple of % of the population has it, not 73%. Very different!
How do you know? still have no idea what percentage of, say, the UK population has it right now, or has had it in the past.
If the Belgians really are making an infallible antibody test, it could have some astonishing results.
No, but I am pretty confident it is not 73%. Figures I've seen put it in the low single figures. Demonstrating quite nicely how the outside world is not like a prison.
The proof is in the ONS figures. They tell us when the virus started to spread through the UK - i.e. the middle of March.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
I just don't see how this example of a completely closed and close community can tell us about a potential iceberg in the wider world. The whole world isn't cooped up in a massive prison where we all eat in the same room, for example.
It’s probably not a bad analog for the worker accommodation blocks in Singapore and the Middle East, which have been a source of infection spreading in those areas.
I think we need to hear more about government plans for making sure manufacturing capability is there for this Oxford vaccine. Hancock said if "either" of these. Does Oxford have two variants?
We don't want to be in a situation where it works and then they can't make the thing in the qualities needed for months.
I believe Gates is going to select 7 candidates and have all 7 made in volume before they are even proved to work.
Is the second really a takeaway from that? They all got infected because it was a closed environment. That doesn't mean there is an iceberg everywhere else.
No, but it is indicative of high levels of asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic spread which, given the current directives on whom to test, will not be captured in the official testing figures anywhere. It is therefore reasonable to assume that, everywhere, there has been greater exposure than captured by official numbers.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
I just don't see how this example of a completely closed and close community can tell us about a potential iceberg in the wider world. The whole world isn't cooped up in a massive prison where we all eat in the same room, for example.
It’s probably not a bad analog for the worker accommodation blocks in Singapore and the Middle East, which have been a source of infection spreading in those areas.
Or care homes...
I would hesitate to label these Ohio cases as asymptomatic, until a month has gone by. They may just be in the early phase, and be seriously ill in a few weeks.
I do rather hope that asymptomatic cases are common though.
Ok this is from China so you know, caution, but it would explain a great many things.
Scientists in China have discovered more than 30 mutations of the new coronavirus, which they say may partly explain why it has been more deadly in certain parts of the world.
Ok this is from China so you know, caution, but it would explain a great many things.
Scientists in China have discovered more than 30 mutations of the new coronavirus, which they say may partly explain why it has been more deadly in certain parts of the world.
"Ten of the 11 patients involved in the study - which included eight males and three females aged between four months and 71 years old - had "moderate or worse symptoms" of COVID-19."
I think we need to hear more about government plans for making sure manufacturing capability is there for this Oxford vaccine.
We don't want to be in a situation where it works and then they can't make the thing in the qualities needed for months.
I believe Gates is going to select 7 candidates and have all 7 made in volume before they are even proved to work.
And then logistics. How do you vaccinate 60 million people in under a year?
That shouldn't be *the* major problem, compared to the other majr problems, depending slightly on how complex the vaccine is - eg if it needs multiple jabs.
Each winter around 10 million people are given a flu jab in a small number of months through GPs; it won't be *that* much of a stretch over that. Pressure and work, but doable.
I think we need to hear more about government plans for making sure manufacturing capability is there for this Oxford vaccine.
We don't want to be in a situation where it works and then they can't make the thing in the qualities needed for months.
I believe Gates is going to select 7 candidates and have all 7 made in volume before they are even proved to work.
And then logistics. How do you vaccinate 60 million people in under a year?
That shouldn't be the major problem, depending slightly on how complex the vaccine is - eg if it needs multiple jabs.
Each winter getting on for 15 million people are given a flu jab in a small number of months through GPs; it won't be *that* much of a stretch over that.
I was surprised to find out how low flu jab take up in Germany was.
The triumph of Imperial college in this week’s final was pleasing – it’s always pleasing to see an Oxbridge college brought down a peg or two – and the breadth of knowledge displayed was incredibly impressive. But we cannot be expected to believe that there wasn’t a single female student at Imperial or Corpus Christi who could have added to those teams.
I think we need to hear more about government plans for making sure manufacturing capability is there for this Oxford vaccine.
We don't want to be in a situation where it works and then they can't make the thing in the qualities needed for months.
I believe Gates is going to select 7 candidates and have all 7 made in volume before they are even proved to work.
And then logistics. How do you vaccinate 60 million people in under a year?
That shouldn't be the major problem, depending slightly on how complex the vaccine is - eg if it needs multiple jabs.
Each winter getting on for 15 million people are given a flu jab in a small number of months through GPs; it won't be *that* much of a stretch over that.
I was surprised to find out how low flu jab take up in Germany was.
Having checked, it is more like 10 million, but it is only a scaling up rather than orders of magnitude increase needed.
I considered volunteering but I am not eligible as I had a slight temperature for 3 days in late March (less than 30 days ago). You have to be willing to take the risk of a possible enhanced immune response either to the vaccine or to the virus.
Thanks. Looks like I'm not eligible because I don't live in those areas.
I wonder if the informed consent forms are also letting volunteers know about antibody-dependent enhancement in some coronavirus (eg SARS, MERS) vaccines.
The triumph of Imperial college in this week’s final was pleasing – it’s always pleasing to see an Oxbridge college brought down a peg or two – and the breadth of knowledge displayed was incredibly impressive. But we cannot be expected to believe that there wasn’t a single female student at Imperial or Corpus Christi who could have added to those teams.
It's a vicious circle, ad revenues crater, more people are at home so comment more on websites, more comments/page view means higher serve and comment system costs.
I think we need to hear more about government plans for making sure manufacturing capability is there for this Oxford vaccine.
We don't want to be in a situation where it works and then they can't make the thing in the qualities needed for months.
I believe Gates is going to select 7 candidates and have all 7 made in volume before they are even proved to work.
And then logistics. How do you vaccinate 60 million people in under a year?
That shouldn't be *the* major problem, compared to the other majr problems, depending slightly on how complex the vaccine is - eg if it needs multiple jabs.
Each winter around 10 million people are given a flu jab in a small number of months through GPs; it won't be *that* much of a stretch over that. Pressure and work, but doable.
And they will probably prioritise people getting free flu jabs so can use the same database and maybe both vaccinations at the same time
It has to actually pass, and it needs treaty change EU institutions aren't allowed to write their own paper. It has all the same problems as the original premise and now it involves the likes of Sweden and Denmark who are going to be even more opposed than the Netherlands etc...
The triumph of Imperial college in this week’s final was pleasing – it’s always pleasing to see an Oxbridge college brought down a peg or two – and the breadth of knowledge displayed was incredibly impressive. But we cannot be expected to believe that there wasn’t a single female student at Imperial or Corpus Christi who could have added to those teams.
I dont need to click to guess... Guardian?
When I was watching the final this evening, I thought "I bet the Guardian has the article ready to go."
The Guardian begging letter is plastered everywhere across their coverage at the moment. It is as bad as bloody popups ads that used to plague browsing experience.
I think we need to hear more about government plans for making sure manufacturing capability is there for this Oxford vaccine.
We don't want to be in a situation where it works and then they can't make the thing in the qualities needed for months.
I believe Gates is going to select 7 candidates and have all 7 made in volume before they are even proved to work.
And then logistics. How do you vaccinate 60 million people in under a year?
That shouldn't be *the* major problem, compared to the other majr problems, depending slightly on how complex the vaccine is - eg if it needs multiple jabs.
Each winter around 10 million people are given a flu jab in a small number of months through GPs; it won't be *that* much of a stretch over that. Pressure and work, but doable.
In the US, where I am, it seems most people get their flu jabs either through the pharmacies in the supermarket (all the big name supermarkets have pharmacies) or the big chain pharmacies, such as Walgreen or CVS. I doubt there needs to be any capacity constraints if the UK were to permit pharmacists to administer the shots.
The Guardian begging letter is plastered everywhere across their coverage at the moment. It is as bad as bloody popups ads that used to plague browsing experience.
It's even more frustrating when you've donated to the Guardian and you still get those bloody pop ups.
The triumph of Imperial college in this week’s final was pleasing – it’s always pleasing to see an Oxbridge college brought down a peg or two – and the breadth of knowledge displayed was incredibly impressive. But we cannot be expected to believe that there wasn’t a single female student at Imperial or Corpus Christi who could have added to those teams.
The triumph of Imperial college in this week’s final was pleasing – it’s always pleasing to see an Oxbridge college brought down a peg or two – and the breadth of knowledge displayed was incredibly impressive. But we cannot be expected to believe that there wasn’t a single female student at Imperial or Corpus Christi who could have added to those teams.
I dont need to click to guess... Guardian?
When I was watching the final this evening, I thought "I bet the Guardian has the article ready to go."
Imperial College London 275 Corpus Christi Cambridge 105
The triumph of Imperial college in this week’s final was pleasing – it’s always pleasing to see an Oxbridge college brought down a peg or two – and the breadth of knowledge displayed was incredibly impressive. But we cannot be expected to believe that there wasn’t a single female student at Imperial or Corpus Christi who could have added to those teams.
I dont need to click to guess... Guardian?
When I was watching the final this evening, I thought "I bet the Guardian has the article ready to go."
Imperial College London 275 Corpus Christi Cambridge 105
The questions in the final are always that little bit harder than the quarters/semis. I think Imperial had just a bit more knowledge and Wang was unable to guess as much as he had been.
I think we need to hear more about government plans for making sure manufacturing capability is there for this Oxford vaccine.
We don't want to be in a situation where it works and then they can't make the thing in the qualities needed for months.
I believe Gates is going to select 7 candidates and have all 7 made in volume before they are even proved to work.
And then logistics. How do you vaccinate 60 million people in under a year?
That shouldn't be *the* major problem, compared to the other majr problems, depending slightly on how complex the vaccine is - eg if it needs multiple jabs.
Each winter around 10 million people are given a flu jab in a small number of months through GPs; it won't be *that* much of a stretch over that. Pressure and work, but doable.
And they will probably prioritise people getting free flu jabs so can use the same database and maybe both vaccinations at the same time
It would more likely be an extension of an effective track and trace program initially, as vaccine supplies will be constrained to start with. The ideal would be to ring vaccinate around outbreaks as they were detected. By then, we really ought to have an effective tracking system in place, as well have had the best part of a year to develop it.
I think we need to hear more about government plans for making sure manufacturing capability is there for this Oxford vaccine.
We don't want to be in a situation where it works and then they can't make the thing in the qualities needed for months.
I believe Gates is going to select 7 candidates and have all 7 made in volume before they are even proved to work.
And then logistics. How do you vaccinate 60 million people in under a year?
That shouldn't be *the* major problem, compared to the other majr problems, depending slightly on how complex the vaccine is - eg if it needs multiple jabs.
Each winter around 10 million people are given a flu jab in a small number of months through GPs; it won't be *that* much of a stretch over that. Pressure and work, but doable.
And they will probably prioritise people getting free flu jabs so can use the same database and maybe both vaccinations at the same time
It would more likely be an extension of an effective track and trace program initially, as vaccine supplies will be constrained to start with. The ideal would be to ring vaccinate around outbreaks as they were detected. By then, we really ought to have an effective tracking system in place, as well have had the best part of a year to develop it.
Yeah, it'll be targeted first, as well as front-line staff. The plebs will have to wait.
The triumph of Imperial college in this week’s final was pleasing – it’s always pleasing to see an Oxbridge college brought down a peg or two – and the breadth of knowledge displayed was incredibly impressive. But we cannot be expected to believe that there wasn’t a single female student at Imperial or Corpus Christi who could have added to those teams.
I dont need to click to guess... Guardian?
When I was watching the final this evening, I thought "I bet the Guardian has the article ready to go."
Imperial College London 275 Corpus Christi Cambridge 105
Imperial will take anyone, even girls occasionally.
The triumph of Imperial college in this week’s final was pleasing – it’s always pleasing to see an Oxbridge college brought down a peg or two – and the breadth of knowledge displayed was incredibly impressive. But we cannot be expected to believe that there wasn’t a single female student at Imperial or Corpus Christi who could have added to those teams.
I dont need to click to guess... Guardian?
It's not just the G, it's Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett.
If there were equal chance of representation on the teams then the odds against this would be 511:1, wouldn't they? So doesn't she have a point?
I think we need to hear more about government plans for making sure manufacturing capability is there for this Oxford vaccine.
We don't want to be in a situation where it works and then they can't make the thing in the qualities needed for months.
I believe Gates is going to select 7 candidates and have all 7 made in volume before they are even proved to work.
And then logistics. How do you vaccinate 60 million people in under a year?
That shouldn't be *the* major problem, compared to the other majr problems, depending slightly on how complex the vaccine is - eg if it needs multiple jabs.
Each winter around 10 million people are given a flu jab in a small number of months through GPs; it won't be *that* much of a stretch over that. Pressure and work, but doable.
In the US, where I am, it seems most people get their flu jabs either through the pharmacies in the supermarket (all the big name supermarkets have pharmacies) or the big chain pharmacies, such as Walgreen or CVS. I doubt there needs to be any capacity constraints if the UK were to permit pharmacists to administer the shots.
It's also an easy one to do - subcutaneous or intramuscular. I did my insulin injections that way for 15 years myself.
There is a fascinating bit of info in that Bloomberg story.
The proposal for the relief fund of a mere EUR1tln is that the Commission will raise the money and administer the cash via a credit line system which takes account of the fact some need money more than others.
All fine and Dandy, until you find out who is backing the fund. The member states of the EU and...er.....the EU BUDGET.
All of which makes for an incredibly fascinating discussion about EU budget contributions in the future
Unless of course you have left the EU - and you don;t owe a bean
Ok this is from China so you know, caution, but it would explain a great many things.
Scientists in China have discovered more than 30 mutations of the new coronavirus, which they say may partly explain why it has been more deadly in certain parts of the world.
"Ten of the 11 patients involved in the study - which included eight males and three females aged between four months and 71 years old - had "moderate or worse symptoms" of COVID-19."
It’s a badly written article, which seems to conflate two different things. Is there a link to the Chinese paper ?
It has to actually pass, and it needs treaty change EU institutions aren't allowed to write their own paper. It has all the same problems as the original premise and now it involves the likes of Sweden and Denmark who are going to be even more opposed than the Netherlands etc...
It is proposed by the EU Commision though, so does have widespread support.
We issued Perpetual bonds from the Napoleonic period onwards, but I think they were all paid off by Osborne as I recall.
I think we need to hear more about government plans for making sure manufacturing capability is there for this Oxford vaccine.
We don't want to be in a situation where it works and then they can't make the thing in the qualities needed for months.
I believe Gates is going to select 7 candidates and have all 7 made in volume before they are even proved to work.
And then logistics. How do you vaccinate 60 million people in under a year?
That shouldn't be *the* major problem, compared to the other majr problems, depending slightly on how complex the vaccine is - eg if it needs multiple jabs.
Each winter around 10 million people are given a flu jab in a small number of months through GPs; it won't be *that* much of a stretch over that. Pressure and work, but doable.
In the US, where I am, it seems most people get their flu jabs either through the pharmacies in the supermarket (all the big name supermarkets have pharmacies) or the big chain pharmacies, such as Walgreen or CVS. I doubt there needs to be any capacity constraints if the UK were to permit pharmacists to administer the shots.
It's also an easy one to do - subcutaneous or intramuscular. I did my insulin injections that way for 15 years myself.
Pharmacists in UK DO administer the vaccine; might not be England-wide..... depends on the CCG. Certainly do in Mid Essex CCG. Usually get mine from the surgery, but I suspect that's habit. Pharmacy is more convenient!
Comments
Checks notes.
Blames auto-correct noisy children distracting me.
I considered volunteering but I am not eligible as I had a slight temperature for 3 days in late March (less than 30 days ago). You have to be willing to take the risk of a possible enhanced immune response either to the vaccine or to the virus.
If you don't need much of Plan B because Plan A worked, that is a sign of success, not failure.
The piece even attempts to link Nightingale to the Northwick Park "Critical Incident" in late March - which was resolved in 24 hours by a bit of cooperation with neighbouring hospitals.
And one reason they don't have the staff .. because the hospitals trying to pass the patients over have not managed to release staff who could care for them more efficiently at the Nightingale.
Attempt to create a narrative #FAIL.
For all the faults in the Stanford study, both that study and a similar, more scientific, study in LA point to overall exposure in those two cities in the order of 2-6%, or 50 to 100 times greater than the number captured by official testing.
Edit. I believe a similar study in Scotland last week came to similar conclusions.
https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1252664721028898817
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6178114/
The US aircraft carrier, which is likely to have a lot of very fit people without underlying problems, still had 40% showing symptoms, so you'd expect a higher % in the general population. An iceberg of undetected/unnoticed cases would be fantastic, but I don't think we can assume there is one.
If the Belgians really are making an infallible antibody test, it could have some astonishing results.
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1250896921050386434?s=09
Rather bizarrely, the sending hospital is supposed to send the staff too as well as the patient:
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1250896912678617089?s=09
And the exclusion criteria cut out many transfers:
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1250896928776257536?s=09
Personally, I would use them for all cases, and make admission compulsory when diagnosed, for testing, monitoring and preventing onward transmission.
We don't want to be in a situation where it works and then they can't make the thing in the qualities needed for months.
I believe Gates is going to select 7 candidates and have all 7 made in volume before they are even proved to work.
I would hesitate to label these Ohio cases as asymptomatic, until a month has gone by. They may just be in the early phase, and be seriously ill in a few weeks.
I do rather hope that asymptomatic cases are common though.
It’s now up to Germany, Austria and the Netherlands to decide which *of those two* options is preferable.
They cannot do what Sunak is doing
There'll be a priority list for those who think pineapple doesn't belong on pizza.
Scientists in China have discovered more than 30 mutations of the new coronavirus, which they say may partly explain why it has been more deadly in certain parts of the world.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-has-mutated-into-more-than-30-strains-say-scientists-in-china-11976380
"Ten of the 11 patients involved in the study - which included eight males and three females aged between four months and 71 years old - had "moderate or worse symptoms" of COVID-19."
Each winter around 10 million people are given a flu jab in a small number of months through GPs; it won't be *that* much of a stretch over that. Pressure and work, but doable.
https://twitter.com/economics/status/1252667231516987393?s=19
The triumph of Imperial college in this week’s final was pleasing – it’s always pleasing to see an Oxbridge college brought down a peg or two – and the breadth of knowledge displayed was incredibly impressive. But we cannot be expected to believe that there wasn’t a single female student at Imperial or Corpus Christi who could have added to those teams.
Mumsnet launches subscription plea in 'squeaky-bum time'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52366610
The risk ought to be pretty low, though.
I'm assuming the person who did thought that Brenda being the Yanks' favourite royal was worth highlighting.
Corpus Christi Cambridge 105
The ideal would be to ring vaccinate around outbreaks as they were detected. By then, we really ought to have an effective tracking system in place, as well have had the best part of a year to develop it.
The proposal for the relief fund of a mere EUR1tln is that the Commission will raise the money and administer the cash via a credit line system which takes account of the fact some need money more than others.
All fine and Dandy, until you find out who is backing the fund. The member states of the EU and...er.....the EU BUDGET.
All of which makes for an incredibly fascinating discussion about EU budget contributions in the future
Unless of course you have left the EU - and you don;t owe a bean
Is there a link to the Chinese paper ?
We issued Perpetual bonds from the Napoleonic period onwards, but I think they were all paid off by Osborne as I recall.
Eleanor Roosevelt