Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why it could be politically challenging prioritising the econo
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why it could be politically challenging prioritising the economy over people’s health
By far the biggest decision ministers will have to take over the coronavirus pandemic is when to ease the restrictions in order to to boost the economy once again. This is becoming increasingly urgent because of the sheer cost of so many being placed effectively on the government payroll
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/05/13/rel5c.-.2020.pdf
Also has VP approval ratings:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/13/sunlight-fresh-air-can-protect-against-coronavirus-sage-adviser/
https://twitter.com/mcpli/status/1260698195677663238
The quarter-or-so of the workforce that is currently subsisting on wages paid by Government, mortgage holidays and protection from eviction won't be quite so keen on sitting at home when they're trying to feed the kids on Universal Credit and being threatened with being thrown out into the street.
However long the Government attempts to string these schemes out for, the supply of money isn't infinite. Logically, at some point, they will have to stop - and what are the chances that we will develop a silver bullet vaccine and distribute it throughout the population before that happens? Not great, one would assume.
On topic, I'm starting to have some concerns about SAGE; how independent of government is it. Really.
I don't wish to suggest anything, but I'm just getting a bit concerned.
Another concern is the daily Covid-19 Press Conference. Do we really need all the detailed figures, especially when we now have cause to doubt their accuracy to the last digit? And do we really need daily ritual obeisance to the 'heroes' of the NHS. Especially when many of them are being charged significant sums as insurance against them or their families having to use the services they are providing.
However, it would seem that the cumulative effects of non-Covid patients being thrown out of hospitals in haste and people with acute symptoms not presenting for treatment has already done a huge amount of damage.
This was a sensible emergency response; it cannot carry on indefinitely. Sunak has bought himself a couple of months - let’s hope he uses it well (and better than the lockdown months were used in getting together test/track/trace).
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1260802211187167232?s=19
Whether the protections against rental evictions and the mortgage holidays will last even that long, who can say?
This seems dangerous enough that "let it rip" strategies can't possibly work. The public will vote with their feet and stay home, leaving us in an economic depression until a comprehensive solution is found.
This means that we need a vaccine, which itself has to be safe, tested, and manufactured at enormous scale, which could feasibly be 18 months away. Or we need an extremely efficient testing and tracing system that can hold the number of active cases down to a very low level, enough that people feel safe to resume a semblance of normality.
On the one hand, these are tremendous undertakings. The institutions and cultural practices we'd need to maintain very low levels of infection without a vaccine would need to be put in place. In short, we'd need to learn how to do what Taiwan and South Korea are doing, and fast. On the other hand, the cost of *not* doing these things can be measured in the tens, if not hundreds, of billions of pounds.
I think the header presents a false choice, because the government can't easily force the public to run the gauntlet of the virus. There is no choice that saves the economy at the cost of 1.5% infection fatality rate. Polling shows overwhelming support for the lockdowns. The choice is between serious efforts to control the virus, effective enough that the public can put their trust in them, or economic depression until we get a vaccine, and we don't know when that will be.
This isn't really a party political question. I don't get the sense that the opposition has grappled hard with this either. However, one of the strands of thought in Cummings-Johnsonism is that the British state has become weak and ineffective, incapable of pursuing ambitious projects, stuck with "managed decline" as a doctrine. We have been presented with a crisis that calls for an ambitious response, not "managed die-offs" where we allow everyone to succumb to a virus, just slowly enough that we don't run out of hospital beds or have to dig mass graves. If they're serious about building state capacity to tackle 21st-century challenges, this would be one way to show it.
I suspect that the vast majority will be unrecognised Covid-19. We increasingly see Covid-19 presenting as vascular disease etc.
As I have pointed out a number of times
and @Cyclefree did in her header, the stay away message from 111 may well be part of the problem.
There will be others, of course like @dixiedean father, and I do worry about some of my patients with long term conditions in lockdown.
Or is serology in a post mortem possible. Also if the dieees are very old that won't take place I think ?
Correlation with existing 'rona cases might be the best guide perhaps ?
We can only estimate numbers.
Why? The top priorities of the NHS are to stop its staff from being overwhelmed and to protect its monopoly, even above saving lives it appears. There are now questions being asked as to why COVID patients were discharged into care homes while being potentially infectious. Later we can expect questions about why the NHS was shut down for months, leading to a huge increase in mortality from causes other than COVID. NHS managers need to be held to account for their actions being in the public interest rather than just being in the NHS's interest.
This "stay away" message sounds very dangerous to me.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52654956
Also, the slogan on the govt's pedestal was not "Stay Safe. Save Lives. Protect the NHS". Everyday for weeks, millions could see that saving lives was third on the list,
There is also quite a lot of post viral fatigue symptoms even after apparently mild cases.
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1259415801666449408?s=09
As soon as it does and they realise it will quickly shoot to the top of the list.
The fall out will be colossal.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/13/public-health-england-approves-roche-test-for-coronavirus-antibodies
As for dentists....
All Dentists are closed. I am just swilling Chlorhexidine several times a day and hoping it does not get infected.
The message that came out was "make sure your healthcare system doesn't get overwhelmed". It does appear that the UK take on this has been somewhat perverse: people can't die because of treatment being unavailable in overwhelmed hospitals if you don't even attempt to treat them in hospital! "Protect the NHS" seems to have taken precedence over "treat the people who are sick", with the result that they are encouraged to take their chances at home or in a care home, with predictable results. There seems to have been spare capacity in the NHS that could have been used to treat people, but wasn't, which does raise the question of what the ventilator challenge and Nightingale hospitals were actually for.
Yes, he's not Hillary. But he could lose for very different reasons to Hillary.
Whilst the point of the COVID lockdown is to limit spread and protect the elderly and limit the impact on the NHS that is not the reason many people support it. It is because they are scared of it personally. But whilst everything says there is a large chance they might get it, for the non-elderly the subsequent danger is very small. Not nonexistent - but not incomparable with many other risks that people don’t give a second thought about.
Take construction workers. And very dangerous profession. One that people do despite the dangers. Relative to the risk from COVID?
Unions are saying that teachers should refuse to work unless their safety can be “guaranteed”. Of course it can’t be guaranteed. Reasonable measures can be taken to minimise the risk, but at some point a line must be drawn. That is what risk management and mitigation is all about. And in normal times we live with it every day.
Certainly my diabetes review patients need their long term care looking after. It is though an entirely rational decision for them to not come into our non socially distanced outpatients at the present Covid rich time.
There is going to be both a massive backlog, and reduced throughput (enhanced cleaning, social distancing in the waiting area etc) when we do restart.
At the moment though the problem is not us cancelling appointments, it is the patients not being willing to come.
Yes, he's not Hillary. But he could lose for very different reasons to Hillary.
If Trump develops Convid-19.........?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52648557
p.s. good morning all x
All the viable candidates spent 12 months shooting one another to pieces and the only one left standing can only do so with a stick.
Brexit will mean checks on goods crossing Irish Sea, government admits
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/13/brexit-will-mean-checks-on-goods-crossing-irish-sea-government-admits?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
I think the PM is showing signs of the post viral syndrome. He looks tired and washed out, has visibly lost weight, seems unable to concentrate for long etc.
I have never thought much of his skills other than after dinner entertainment, but his recent illness hasn't enhanced them. Then there is the new baby too. I hope he has a good nanny helping.
If my Auntie had bollocks she'd be my Uncle.
Democrats can try all this wishful thinking all the way to November, or they could fight to win?
He will simply drag him down to his level and then beat him in the swing states.
Condolences to @dixiedean for your father. A mercy it was not in hospital.
Mr. B2, I wonder if the vitamin D factor could be the, or a, factor behind seemingly different rates of death for people of differing race.
The use of falsehoods is quite an interesting means to get Starmer off guard. Starmer is so well briefed he knows
the answer Boris should give to any question, and has his rebuttals lined up. When Boris hands him a crock of absolute ordure, Starmer is momentarily blown off course. It is a simple but effective ploy
Hope Starmer shoves Butler off the front bench.
Early studies showed only a very small effect of increasing temperature on suppressing rates of viral transmission, but obviously wouldn't account for differences in seasonal Vit.D levels.
Also we don't know yet whether capacity will be needed - Wave 2 et al. In Spanish Flu, Wave 2 was far more deadly than wave 1.
I agree that the NHS religion was (and is) a problem, and the skewed power of lobby groups demanding kit for the NHS keeping it away from care homes.
i don't see how it could have been different, however.
Its the same issue as yesterday. A Prime Minister so disinterested in the detail is a danger to this country at the best of times never mind during this crisis. What makes it worse are the people willing to excuse this gross incompetence and disinterest - several of them on here - for partisan reasons.
Yes, and that party is the Conservative and Unionist Party. Unionist. As in protect the Union. Not incompetently shat on the union then lie about it.
The fault for lack of PPE stocks, decision to stop Test and Trace, Stay Away policy, and discharges to care homes are command level failures, not the fault of the poor bloody infantry. Worth noting that many of the same issues arose in other health systems.
The #Hospital specials on Monday and Tuesday give some feel of how it was at its height. I don’t entirely blame the decision makers. Mistakes will be made in fast evolving, unprecedented situations.
What I don't see, though, is public acknowledgment of those mistakes. And how much has been learned at the command level from those mistakes is an open question.