The PM deserves credit for his full support of the CMO and his communication in todays press conference. It was very good.
Blair, Brown, Cameron and May would have been equally good and equally commanding at such an event.
These events aren't difficult for a politician - sound authoritative, defer to the experts as often as possible and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Dominic Cummings.
Admittedly, he ain’t too strong on the old credibility aspect...
The government seem to think we are 3 weeks behind Italy. That seems a huge call, I pray they have it right.
Can I just say that I really do believe our medical experts and I am not in any position to distrust them, they could have my life in their hands and if I am content and fairly relaxed but will self isolate and follow public health advice
My biggest concern is the ditching of the idea we are going to follow South Korea and mass test. There was talk of doing 10k tests a day, now they are only going to test those in hospital and have pretty much said if you are ill, just sort it out at home on your own unless it gets bad. And there will be no geographical info for the public.
In addition of the loony cult, the 2 strand mass testing in SK has enabled them to quickly rule out those with just a cold and funnel those who probably have to it the more rigorous test. From this, they have then been able to take local measures if an outbreak has popped up.
The problem with mass testing is it will ramp up the numbers of reported cases and may lead to additional pressure to make suboptimal decisions. I wish more publicity was made of hospitalised and ICU cases, than overall positive tests.
ICU utlilisation is the key indicator when it goes beyond 110% I think there will be problems.
Yes - a decline in that today in Italy - let's hope that continues.
The PM deserves credit for his full support of the CMO and his communication in todays press conference. It was very good.
Blair, Brown, Cameron and May would have been equally good and equally commanding at such an event.
These events aren't difficult for a politician - sound authoritative, defer to the experts as often as possible and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Where I would give Boris credit is that he doesn't try and hog the limelight, he gives the intro and is as well pitched as possible in this scenario and lets the two egg-heads do the talking.
I have a fear Tony would try and do it all and probably Cameron too.
The PM deserves credit for his full support of the CMO and his communication in todays press conference. It was very good.
Blair, Brown, Cameron and May would have been equally good and equally commanding at such an event.
These events aren't difficult for a politician - sound authoritative, defer to the experts as often as possible and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Blair would have been best. Cameron and Johnson close. Not convinced by Brown or May in such a scenario personally. For most of us it would not be easy to tell people lots of them will die. I agree those desperate to be PM will be more suited!
"It's true that the estimate of the fatality rate depends on what percentage of the cases were detected in China. But remember that for China as a whole the raw figure is more like 4%. It's 0.9% for China outside Hubei. That seems likely to be closer to the truth, but we don't know for sure.
Unfortunately, in Western Europe the overall fatality rate is likely to be at least twice as high as in China simply because we have an older population. And then you have to take account of the fact that there will be no intensive care - or probably even basic medical care - available to most patients during this "peak" the government is [?]planning for.
As you say, it is all very hypothetical in the absence of firm data. Probably serological testing in China will give us firmer data. But at the moment the planning is essentially based on guesswork."
----------------
There are other factors working in the opposite direction. Less smokers, less pollution than China, many extra weeks of treatment where doctors can learn and share best practice and find which drugs might help.
It would not be surprising if the fatality rate drops each month as treatment improves.
Unfortunately, the Case Fatality Ratio - resolved cases of Covid-19 - has actually risen again. It was down at 6% it's not back up to 7%.
This is pretty chilling if the Merkels of this world are right, and 60-70% of us will get it. Makes this much much worse than Spanish flu. An historic cull of the human population.
Merkel did not predict that. She said that was an estimate of a worst case scenario. Similar to the UK govts 80%. These are numbers that would happen if we carried on as we were in January. We have already significantly changed behaviour, and clearly will take further action beyond that. There is no reason to expect those numbers.
Your spin is slightly optimistic, but of course I hope you are right.
""We have to understand that many people will be infected,” Merkel said. “The consensus among experts is that 60 to 70% of the population will be infected as long as this remains the situation.”
Merkel’s estimates were probably a worst-case scenario, though not wildly out of line with those of experts outside Germany."
Where I would give Boris credit is that he doesn't try and hog the limelight, he gives the intro and is as well pitched as possible in this scenario and lets the two egg-heads do the talking.
I have a fear Tony would try and do it all and probably Cameron too.
With respect, I'm going to disagree.
My dim recollection of foot and mouth was that at press events Blair deferred to the veterinarian experts. Cameron didn't face anything of this or even that nature as I recall but I don't see him as you describe.
I wonder how Thatcher would have handled a press conference like today's.
Macron closing the education system down in France.
Didn’t I just read on here that France was one of those countries with the best scientists? Have they now joined the not so good scientists of Ireland, Denmark, Turkey etc,, now?
France is at a different stage of the epidemic.
It may be the case that in a weeks time, the scientific advice here is to close all the schools.
I understand these are anxious times for teachers who fall into the vulnerable category, but I am sure the advice of the scientists will have been given so as to ensure as many people as possible pull through the epidemic.
Suggests that 3000 or so, is a figure that triggers that sort of thing. For myself, I’ve had a persistent cough for a few days and a low grade fever. I catch everything going so unlikely to be the big one. Do the government want me to risk spreading it? I’m not sure.
The current government advice is that you should stay home for at least a week with your symptoms. That was very clear from today's announcement.
I have students finishing important assessments next week. I’m the only staff member with the knowledge and experience to make that happen. Can I dip in, sort that out over a couple of hours and dip out again? I really don’t know what is being suggested.
Can you not meet the students via Skype/zoom? Do you need to have face-to-face meetings?
It’s non examined assessment that needs me to oversee it. Then there’s another exam just before Easter and, if I miss their lessons next week, they won’t be ready. This is GCSE, they need a bomb behind them at the best of times. I fear that if I’m not there and the exam goes ahead, they’ll end up below expectations.
Can I suggest a compromise that has worked for my school in the past? You Skype into the lesson while another colleague is on the spot physically overseeing things.
Maybe. I’ll ask about that. There’s an open morning on Saturday too (independent school, these things are important).
It’s only really been noticeable with sixth form. Smaller class and lots of conversation, so saying ‘sorry, cough, cough’ every five minutes is probably what I’ve been doing in other classes. Is once every five minutes persistent or is it just a regular cough? Is there a medical definition?
As we discussed this morning the key to the government approach is the belief that the spread of this virus cannot be stopped. If it can't everything they are doing to smooth the curve and delay the peak until summer makes perfect sense.
But if the east Asia countries show that belief is wrong we are facing an unnecessary tragedy. Their worst case scenario is 520k dead (65m x 0.8 x 1%). I mean, fuck.
China is currently just over 3k deaths. Are they really saying on the same basis that ultimately 9.6m Chinese may die of this despite all their efforts? It's mindblowing and not supported by the current evidence.
Its a massive call. But the scientists are impressive and measured, there is no denying that. If they are right then China's numbers are likely to start increasing again at some point as they try to return to anything like normal. We shall see.
It's indeed really a tough call - I don't envy them, but do trust that the scientists who are in charge of this are extremely smart and well briefed (Whitty is indeed an expert in this area). Doesn't mean they might not be wrong of course but they are very qualified and smart people advising the government through this.
One other point that does factor into your calculation re number of deaths is the number of asymptomatic cases. Remember they said that they think children do indeed catch the disease but do not really present symptoms - that's already >20% of the population of the UK off the bat. I think these asymptomatic cases will all reduce the death rate somewhat (I think the CMO said 1% or less, right?) The confidence interval from Roy Anderson was 0.3-1% so consistent with this, and potentially suggesting it might be on the lower end as TimT also suggested earlier.
I have no idea either. But i'm struck by the markedly different approaches being taken in britain and most Continental countries. Our view seems to be that we'll all (95%) get it, and indeed need to get it so as to develop immunity, so the focus should be on avoiding us all getting it at once. The Continentals may agree, but they evidently think that banning large gatherings, closing schools, etc. is helpful in flattening the curve.
I thought Johnson and the advisors were impressively serious and focused. But that doesn't mean they are necessarily right and all the other European countries are wrong.
They`ll no doubt be concerned about the impact of lockdowns on the economy and the public from an economic perspective. How on earth can folk be expected to stay at home on statutory sick pay and even remotely have a chance of covering their bills? In time there may prove to be a big competitive advantage in taking the approach that they are, and I support the way the UK government is handling this.
The level of SSP is a disgrace. Cant think of a good reason it shouldnt be minimum wage. And paid for in full by employers for up to 1 month.
Many employers do pay company sick pay at full rate for a month or more.
"The worst public health crisis in a generation", so we plan to do nothing. For 4 weeks.
We plan to mitigate the worst, plan for a long term robust population with a high level of imunity in the future, protect the old and spread the load for the NHS within the confines of no more than 20% of the workforce effected at one time.
Are you asking the same questions of the Chinese? Or the South Koreans?
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
China and South Korea are at different stages in their outbreaks. We may be behind Italy, but I don't believe we are far away from Ireland, Norway and France.
The variety of quality is the key point.
It's possible every other country got it wrong, and our guys are uniquely brilliant.
As we discussed this morning the key to the government approach is the belief that the spread of this virus cannot be stopped. If it can't everything they are doing to smooth the curve and delay the peak until summer makes perfect sense.
But if the east Asia countries show that belief is wrong we are facing an unnecessary tragedy. Their worst case scenario is 520k dead (65m x 0.8 x 1%). I mean, fuck.
China is currently just over 3k deaths. Are they really saying on the same basis that ultimately 9.6m Chinese may die of this despite all their efforts? It's mindblowing and not supported by the current evidence.
Its a massive call. But the scientists are impressive and measured, there is no denying that. If they are right then China's numbers are likely to start increasing again at some point as they try to return to anything like normal. We shall see.
It's indeed really a tough call - I don't envy them, but do trust that the scientists who are in charge of this are extremely smart and well briefed (Whitty is indeed an expert in this area). Doesn't mean they might not be wrong of course but they are very qualified and smart people advising the government through this.
One other point that does factor into your calculation re number of deaths is the number of asymptomatic cases. Remember they said that they think children do indeed catch the disease but do not really present symptoms - that's already >20% of the population of the UK off the bat. I think these asymptomatic cases will all reduce the death rate somewhat (I think the CMO said 1% or less, right?) The confidence interval from Roy Anderson was 0.3-1% so consistent with this, and potentially suggesting it might be on the lower end as TimT also suggested earlier.
I have no idea either. But i'm struck by the markedly different approaches being taken in britain and most Continental countries. Our view seems to be that we'll all (95%) get it, and indeed need to get it so as to develop immunity, so the focus should be on avoiding us all getting it at once. The Continentals may agree, but they evidently think that banning large gatherings, closing schools, etc. is helpful in flattening the curve.
I thought Johnson and the advisors were impressively serious and focused. But that doesn't mean they are necessarily right and all the other European countries are wrong.
They`ll no doubt be concerned about the impact of lockdowns on the economy and the public from an economic perspective. How on earth can folk be expected to stay at home on statutory sick pay and even remotely have a chance of covering their bills? In time there may prove to be a big competitive advantage in taking the approach that they are, and I support the way the UK government is handling this.
The level of SSP is a disgrace. Cant think of a good reason it shouldnt be minimum wage. And paid for in full by employers for up to 1 month.
Many employers do pay company sick pay at full rate for a month or more.
Indeed, and that shows the argument that companies cant budget for this to be wrong. It is unfair generally, but additionally socially harmful through increasing coronavirus and stress, in the current scenario, to allow some companies to get away with paying just SSP.
Can I suggest a compromise that has worked for my school in the past? You Skype into the lesson while another colleague is on the spot physically overseeing things.
Maybe. I’ll ask about that. There’s an open morning on Saturday too (independent school, these things are important).
It’s only really been noticeable with sixth form. Smaller class and lots of conversation, so saying ‘sorry, cough, cough’ every five minutes is probably what I’ve been doing in other classes. Is once every five minutes persistent or is it just a regular cough? Is there a medical definition?
I would have said ‘persistent’ is more about how long it is going on for than how often you have to cough, although @Foxy would be better placed to advise.
With regard to open mornings - how do I put this? - I think somebody with a hacking cough under current circs might not be the best of selling points?
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Yes, the UK SAGE seems to be predicting a peak in 10 weeks, while in South Korea it happened much sooner than that. I reckon 3-4 weeks, as it seems do most European governments.
I guess we are about to see some science in real time.
"It's true that the estimate of the fatality rate depends on what percentage of the cases were detected in China. But remember that for China as a whole the raw figure is more like 4%. It's 0.9% for China outside Hubei. That seems likely to be closer to the truth, but we don't know for sure.
Unfortunately, in Western Europe the overall fatality rate is likely to be at least twice as high as in China simply because we have an older population. And then you have to take account of the fact that there will be no intensive care - or probably even basic medical care - available to most patients during this "peak" the government is [?]planning for.
As you say, it is all very hypothetical in the absence of firm data. Probably serological testing in China will give us firmer data. But at the moment the planning is essentially based on guesswork."
----------------
There are other factors working in the opposite direction. Less smokers, less pollution than China, many extra weeks of treatment where doctors can learn and share best practice and find which drugs might help.
It would not be surprising if the fatality rate drops each month as treatment improves.
Unfortunately, the Case Fatality Ratio - resolved cases of Covid-19 - has actually risen again. It was down at 6% it's not back up to 7%.
This is pretty chilling if the Merkels of this world are right, and 60-70% of us will get it. Makes this much much worse than Spanish flu. An historic cull of the human population.
Merkel did not predict that. She said that was an estimate of a worst case scenario. Similar to the UK govts 80%. These are numbers that would happen if we carried on as we were in January. We have already significantly changed behaviour, and clearly will take further action beyond that. There is no reason to expect those numbers.
Your spin is slightly optimistic, but of course I hope you are right.
""We have to understand that many people will be infected,” Merkel said. “The consensus among experts is that 60 to 70% of the population will be infected as long as this remains the situation.”
Merkel’s estimates were probably a worst-case scenario, though not wildly out of line with those of experts outside Germany."
That was the reasonable worst case estimate with no mitigation strategy etc. though. As mentioned by Chris downthread, really important to keep in mind.
It really is extraordinary the number of posters making points which were clearly and comprehensively addressed in the press conference. Some are genuine panickers but numbers are crazed popliticos who think it's all a politics game. Lord help us. FWIW the strongest argument against closing schools - especially for younger children is 1. It could stop many essential workers from going to work 2. It could put lots of grandparents in thposition of being childcarers at greater risk of contracting the virus.
No reason at all for universities to still be teaching.
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Are you asking the same questions of the Chinese? Or the South Koreans?
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
The mere fact that you have the UK government saying that the real number of infections is an order of magnitude greater than detected so far should mean that we treat all other countries claims with scepticism. We are saying "it's much worse than it appears", no other country is yet doing so as far as I know.
Are you asking the same questions of the Chinese? Or the South Koreans?
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
China and South Korea are at different stages in their outbreaks. We may be behind Italy, but I don't believe we are far away from Ireland, Norway and France.
The variety of quality is the key point.
It's possible every other country got it wrong, and our guys are uniquely brilliant.
I wouldn't bet on it.
Why on earth should I take your view on where we vs Ireland, Norway or France ahead of the CMOs and CSOs?
Yes, the UK SAGE seems to be predicting a peak in 10 weeks, while in South Korea it happened much sooner than that. I reckon 3-4 weeks, as it seems do most European governments.
I guess we are about to see some science in real time.
Yes, the UK SAGE seems to be predicting a peak in 10 weeks, while in South Korea it happened much sooner than that. I reckon 3-4 weeks, as it seems do most European governments.
I guess we are about to see some science in real time.
"The worst public health crisis in a generation", so we plan to do nothing. For 4 weeks.
I agree that is a problem.
The crisis is science and data-driven.
So, why on earth collect some political correspondents, know-nothing journalists and media pundits to discuss the problem from a vantage of pure ignorance in a TV studio?
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Are you asking the same questions of the Chinese? Or the South Koreans?
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
The mere fact that you have the UK government saying that the real number of infections is an order of magnitude greater than detected so far should mean that we treat all other countries claims with scepticism. We are saying "it's much worse than it appears", no other country is yet doing so as far as I know.
Although having nine times as many carriers out there unidentified and presumably with either no symptoms or a mild illness that hasn’t got them rushing down the hospital is actually good news.
"The worst public health crisis in a generation", so we plan to do nothing. For 4 weeks.
We plan to mitigate the worst, plan for a long term robust population with a high level of imunity in the future, protect the old and spread the load for the NHS within the confines of no more than 20% of the workforce effected at one time.
The people missing from that list is non-OAPs with underlying health conditions. Working age asthmatics are looking at todays announcements and wondering what the fuck are they supposed to do. The government had given them zero tools to work with.
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Are you asking the same questions of the Chinese? Or the South Koreans?
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
The mere fact that you have the UK government saying that the real number of infections is an order of magnitude greater than detected so far should mean that we treat all other countries claims with scepticism. We are saying "it's much worse than it appears", no other country is yet doing so as far as I know.
Although as they assess msny cases are unreported or diagnosed that infers they are mild, so the outlook could be better.
There are so many problems with these graphs. Countries are testing and reporting very differently so they are comparing "apples and oranges". I do agree the US trend is very bad though as has been their response so far. They possibly also had the worst starting point of any western country with their healthcare system, social security system and millions of undocumented workers.
Anyone know why sterling is doing so badly against the euro of late? Down over a cent today, and down nearly 6 cents about over the last 3 weeks.
Well we did cut interest rates by 0.5% and have just announced a massive public spending spree. But listen to somebody with an expert opinion rather than me
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Are you asking the same questions of the Chinese? Or the South Koreans?
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
The mere fact that you have the UK government saying that the real number of infections is an order of magnitude greater than detected so far should mean that we treat all other countries claims with scepticism. We are saying "it's much worse than it appears", no other country is yet doing so as far as I know.
Although having nine times as many carriers out there unidentified and presumably with either no symptoms or a mild illness that hasn’t got them rushing down the hospital is actually good news.
Not sure I would see it that way. The incubation period is quite prolonged, up to a couple of weeks. That 90% may not be clinically well for long.
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Are you asking the same questions of the Chinese? Or the South Koreans?
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
The mere fact that you have the UK government saying that the real number of infections is an order of magnitude greater than detected so far should mean that we treat all other countries claims with scepticism. We are saying "it's much worse than it appears", no other country is yet doing so as far as I know.
Although having nine times as many carriers out there unidentified and presumably with either no symptoms or a mild illness that hasn’t got them rushing down the hospital is actually good news.
Indeed, and let's hope they are underestimating the number of infected.
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Are you asking the same questions of the Chinese? Or the South Koreans?
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
The mere fact that you have the UK government saying that the real number of infections is an order of magnitude greater than detected so far should mean that we treat all other countries claims with scepticism. We are saying "it's much worse than it appears", no other country is yet doing so as far as I know.
Although having nine times as many carriers out there unidentified and presumably with either no symptoms or a mild illness that hasn’t got them rushing down the hospital is actually good news.
On the other hand, if it includes those not tested because they didn’t fit the criteria and so were not picked up, then not so good.
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Are you asking the same questions of the Chinese? Or the South Koreans?
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
The mere fact that you have the UK government saying that the real number of infections is an order of magnitude greater than detected so far should mean that we treat all other countries claims with scepticism. We are saying "it's much worse than it appears", no other country is yet doing so as far as I know.
Although having nine times as many carriers out there unidentified and presumably with either no symptoms or a mild illness that hasn’t got them rushing down the hospital is actually good news.
Not sure I would see it that way. The incubation period is quite prolonged, up to a couple of weeks. That 90% may not be clinically well for long.
Did I hear correctly earlier from the press conference that ~20 of the UK cases were in intensive care at present? That would be quite a small fraction of the total cases at present, although could increase moving forward as you point out.
Did he give a guess at how many cases Italy et al have?
No, they were asked right at the end about other countries, and didn't really lean either way on their accuracy. But it's not hard to infer from what they said in the presentation that current reporting is likely to be way off in most countries.
Are you asking the same questions of the Chinese? Or the South Koreans?
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
China and South Korea are at different stages in their outbreaks. We may be behind Italy, but I don't believe we are far away from Ireland, Norway and France.
Why don't you actually look at the per capital figures then if you really think that. Norway are being massively disproportionately hit, so your desperation to use them as either a good comparison or something to aim for is very odd.
Serious question for Scott xP. Do you think the Government should sack its chief medical and scientific officers? And try to poach from other countries?
If I heard correctly, the worse case scenario is 80% get it, with an overall mortality rate of 1%.
Yes, that's what I heard. The important bit of the message today, though expressed delicately, is that in moving from 'contain' to 'delay' it is accepted that up to 80% of the population get infected at some point; there is no purpose is avoiding transmission in itself since we are going to get it sometime, only in spreading it out over the longest possible time. hence the rationale of not closing schools, not closing down society etc. That's what you do if you want it to go away altogether. That attempt has been deemed to fail.
In truth various intelligent and mature systems in the western world are trying slightly different things. Personally I sympathise with our government/ expert approach; but it is a gigantic experiment. Those still alive at the end will have learned a lot about what works.
1% of 80% of the population of UK is 520,000. There are about 616,000 UK deaths in a normal year. We shall soon notice what is going on. Understandably none of the political or medical spokespeople I have heard are giving these sorts of figures in this sort of form.
There will be a significant overlap between those 616k expected deaths and those 520k coronavirus deaths. Maybe a few months early in many cases, but the coronavirus is fishing in the pool of those already weakened.
I am quite troubled by that as a statement. Not least because a fair few of the posters on this forum are in high risk groups, and seeming to dismiss them in such a way is completely insensitive and uncaring.
Many people, including those with hypertension, cardiac disease, and diabetes, contribute greatly to society and public life, as well as to their own families and communities in more modest and unsung ways. Many will lose a decade or more of life, and we should mourn that loss, not dismiss it.
This chart is the usual nonsense of misalligned starting points and a logarithmic scale, both designed to make the data look like it's grouping when it really doesn't seem to be. The UK's growth curve is significantly slower than Italy.
If you needed to watch a video to understand exponential growth, I now understand why you can’t grasp what the Chief Scientific Adviser is telling you...
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
There are so many problems with these graphs. Countries are testing and reporting very differently so they are comparing "apples and oranges". I do agree the US trend is very bad though as has been their response so far. They possibly also had the worst starting point of any western country with their healthcare system, social security system and millions of undocumented workers.
And the undocumented workers are often those with a direct interface to the most wealthy via a plethora of service occupations. Every way you look at the US, they are ill-equipped to handle something like this.
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Are you asking the same questions of the Chinese? Or the South Koreans?
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
The mere fact that you have the UK government saying that the real number of infections is an order of magnitude greater than detected so far should mean that we treat all other countries claims with scepticism. We are saying "it's much worse than it appears", no other country is yet doing so as far as I know.
Although having nine times as many carriers out there unidentified and presumably with either no symptoms or a mild illness that hasn’t got them rushing down the hospital is actually good news.
Not sure I would see it that way. The incubation period is quite prolonged, up to a couple of weeks. That 90% may not be clinically well for long.
Did I hear correctly earlier from the press conference that ~20 of the UK cases were in intensive care at present? That would be quite a small fraction of the total cases at present, although could increase moving forward as you point out.
"The worst public health crisis in a generation", so we plan to do nothing. For 4 weeks.
We plan to mitigate the worst, plan for a long term robust population with a high level of imunity in the future, protect the old and spread the load for the NHS within the confines of no more than 20% of the workforce effected at one time.
The people missing from that list is non-OAPs with underlying health conditions. Working age asthmatics are looking at todays announcements and wondering what the fuck are they supposed to do. The government had given them zero tools to work with.
Absolutely, this is the missing group (and it’s a not inconsiderable one). 6% of men between 45 and 54 with diabetes, alone.
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
There's a wikipedia page with famous victims of the Spanish flu pandemic, and the deaths span from 1918-1920.
This chart is the usual nonsense of misalligned starting points and a logarithmic scale, both designed to make the data look like it's grouping when it really doesn't seem to be. The UK's growth curve is significantly slower than Italy.
Three things:
1. The starting points are not misaligned. They all start on the day the 100th case is recorded. Obviously no-one starts on exactly 100 so there is variance there.
2. Only a logarithmic scale makes any sense at all, given the nature of its growth.
3. This chart is two days old, only including data up to end Tuesday, it therefore doesn't yet have the UK number moving meaningfully to the right
There is presumably an argument that massive testing was far more important in the earlier stages of the outbreak when rate of spread of the virus was far more likely to be linked to random exposure by a very small number of undetected cases. That appears to have been what caused the issues in Northern Italy. Once there are a certain level of infections in the country, randomness through isolated 'superspreaders' becomes less of a factor and the predicted spread of the disease may become far more predictable through epidemiological modelling.
The UK was massively ahead of the game on testing in the early stages (as was commented on at the time), and that early work may be why they are entering the current "delay" phase with a far greater level of confidence about what the numbers in the country are likely to be (even if not officially detected). Without the need for large ramping up of testing to confirm that.
The reason why the US, for example, are in such a bad shape is because they did no early testing. They are now playing massive catch up to try and establish the extent of the virus spread, which also leads to greater panic because inevitably this "catch up" in detection leads to the numbers escalating at horrifying levels.
That chart is extremely misleading when the Chief Scientific Advisor thinks we might really have 10,000 cases by now.
Only misleading if he thinks the numbers for all the countries are spot on.
I'd love to hear his take on how many cases in Iran. Or the US.
All countries suffer from undertesting to some degree. My back of the fag packet guess would be that we're in the top third, but not the top decile, while the US and Iran are bottom third.
There is presumably an argument that massive testing was far more important in the earlier stages of the outbreak when rate of spread of the virus was far more likely to be linked to random exposure by a very small number of undetected cases. That appears to have been what caused the issues in Northern Italy. Once there are a certain level of infections in the country, randomness through isolated 'superspreaders' becomes less of a factor and the predicted spread of the disease may become far more predictable through epidemiological modelling.
The UK was massively ahead of the game on testing in the early stages (as was commented on at the time), and that early work may be why they are entering the current "delay" phase with a far greater level of confidence about what the numbers in the country are likely to be (even if not officially detected). Without the need for large ramping up of testing to confirm that.
The reason why the US, for example, are in such a bad shape is because they did no early testing. They are now playing massive catch up to try and establish the extent of the virus spread, which also leads to greater panic because inevitably this "catch up" in detection leads to the numbers escalating at horrifying levels.
This chart is the usual nonsense of misalligned starting points and a logarithmic scale, both designed to make the data look like it's grouping when it really doesn't seem to be. The UK's growth curve is significantly slower than Italy.
Three things:
1. The starting points are not misaligned. They all start on the day the 100th case is recorded. Obviously no-one starts on exactly 100 so there is variance there.
2. Only a logarithmic scale makes any sense at all, given the nature of its growth.
3. This chart is two days old, only including data up to end Tuesday, it therefore doesn't yet have the UK number moving meaningfully to the right
1. The choice of this threshold to start is entirely arbitrary, but helps to paint the desired picture by ignoring the fact that Italy got from 0-100 extremely quickly, whilst many other countries did not.
2. You can justify the scale on the grounds of making all curves visible - but it undeniably squashes data together in a way which is misleading to the majority of people who don't fully take in what the scale is doing.
3. True, but this short time frame works hand in hand with the decision to ignore all the days before 100 cases in point 1, to help take a cut of the data for each country which appears to fit the claimed standard curve
We're clearing getting this like everyone else, but using these charts to suggest we're getting it on a growth curve extremely similar to Italy is over egging it massively, so far.
"It's true that the estimate of the fatality rate depends on what percentage of the cases were detected in China. But remember that for China as a whole the raw figure is more like 4%. It's 0.9% for China outside Hubei. That seems likely to be closer to the truth, but we don't know for sure.
Unfortunately, in Western Europe the overall fatality rate is likely to be at least twice as high as in China simply because we have an older population. And then you have to take account of the fact that there will be no intensive care - or probably even basic medical care - available to most patients during this "peak" the government is [?]planning for.
As you say, it is all very hypothetical in the absence of firm data. Probably serological testing in China will give us firmer data. But at the moment the planning is essentially based on guesswork."
----------------
There are other factors working in the opposite direction. Less smokers, less pollution than China, many extra weeks of treatment where doctors can learn and share best practice and find which drugs might help.
It would not be surprising if the fatality rate drops each month as treatment improves.
Unfortunately, the Case Fatality Ratio - resolved cases of Covid-19 - has actually risen again. It was down at 6% it's not back up to 7%.
This is pretty chilling if the Merkels of this world are right, and 60-70% of us will get it. Makes this much much worse than Spanish flu. An historic cull of the human population.
Merkel did not predict that. She said that was an estimate of a worst case scenario. Similar to the UK govts 80%. These are numbers that would happen if we carried on as we were in January. We have already significantly changed behaviour, and clearly will take further action beyond that. There is no reason to expect those numbers.
Your spin is slightly optimistic, but of course I hope you are right.
""We have to understand that many people will be infected,” Merkel said. “The consensus among experts is that 60 to 70% of the population will be infected as long as this remains the situation.”
Merkel’s estimates were probably a worst-case scenario, though not wildly out of line with those of experts outside Germany."
No it wasn't, it was (and has always been claimed) the upper bound, due to evidence there is some in the population who for whatever reason have an inbuilt immunity.
This chart is the usual nonsense of misalligned starting points and a logarithmic scale, both designed to make the data look like it's grouping when it really doesn't seem to be. The UK's growth curve is significantly slower than Italy.
If I heard correctly, the worse case scenario is 80% get it, with an overall mortality rate of 1%.
Yes, that's what I heard. The important bit of the message today, though expressed delicately, is that in moving from 'contain' to 'delay' it is accepted that up to 80% of the population get infected at some point; there is no purpose is avoiding transmission in itself since we are going to get it sometime, only in spreading it out over the longest possible time. hence the rationale of not closing schools, not closing down society etc. That's what you do if you want it to go away altogether. That attempt has been deemed to fail.
In truth various intelligent and mature systems in the western world are trying slightly different things. Personally I sympathise with our government/ expert approach; but it is a gigantic experiment. Those still alive at the end will have learned a lot about what works.
1% of 80% of the population of UK is 520,000. There are about 616,000 UK deaths in a normal year. We shall soon notice what is going on. Understandably none of the political or medical spokespeople I have heard are giving these sorts of figures in this sort of form.
There will be a significant overlap between those 616k expected deaths and those 520k coronavirus deaths. Maybe a few months early in many cases, but the coronavirus is fishing in the pool of those already weakened.
I am quite troubled by that as a statement. Not least because a fair few of the posters on this forum are in high risk groups, and seeming to dismiss them in such a way is completely insensitive and uncaring.
Many people, including those with hypertension, cardiac disease, and diabetes, contribute greatly to society and public life, as well as to their own families and communities in more modest and unsung ways. Many will lose a decade or more of life, and we should mourn that loss, not dismiss it.
This disease will clearly take some well before their time. But the deaths to date have - as far as I am aware - all involved people "with underlying health issues". It's not callous but rather reassuring to say this high toll will take many people who would have died anyway, rather than saying 520k new over-and-above the expected deaths.
This chart is the usual nonsense of misalligned starting points and a logarithmic scale, both designed to make the data look like it's grouping when it really doesn't seem to be. The UK's growth curve is significantly slower than Italy.
Three things:
1. The starting points are not misaligned. They all start on the day the 100th case is recorded. Obviously no-one starts on exactly 100 so there is variance there.
2. Only a logarithmic scale makes any sense at all, given the nature of its growth.
3. This chart is two days old, only including data up to end Tuesday, it therefore doesn't yet have the UK number moving meaningfully to the right
Is the 100th case significant, given the varying sizes (in geographical area, population density and population size of the countries involved?
and, after all, who is going to gainsay the experts with any credibility?
Michael Fucking Gove.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
Yes, the UK SAGE seems to be predicting a peak in 10 weeks, while in South Korea it happened much sooner than that. I reckon 3-4 weeks, as it seems do most European governments.
I guess we are about to see some science in real time.
The CMO seemed quite confident that we are 3 weeks behind Italy. I think that is a massive call.
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
On the BBC after the press conference their business journalist was talking almost as though it's a blip, and that the markets might recover in a few weeks or so once the worst is over. Given that the flaming press conference was talking about a peak in June or there abouts, and that's only the peak not the end, I have no idea how anyone could think we'll be back to normal even this year. As you say it will only be when an effective vaccine is available or widespread immunity has been gained by infection that it will come to an end, and even then it's going to be a persistant problem at a lower level.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
On the BBC after the press conference their business journalist was talking almost as though it's a blip, and that the markets might recover in a few weeks or so once the worst is over. Given that the flaming press conference was talking about a peak in June or there abouts, and that's only the peak not the end, I have no idea how anyone could think we'll be back to normal even this year. As you say it will only be when an effective vaccine is available or widespread immunity has been gained by infection that it will come to an end, and even then it's going to be a persistant problem at a lower level.
95% in 9 weeks and 50% in 3 weeks suggests it comes to a reasonably sharp end after those 9 weeks, and sometime in summer 2020. What the new normal looks like after then is the bigger question.
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
On the BBC after the press conference their business journalist was talking almost as though it's a blip, and that the markets might recover in a few weeks or so once the worst is over. Given that the flaming press conference was talking about a peak in June or there abouts, and that's only the peak not the end, I have no idea how anyone could think we'll be back to normal even this year. As you say it will only be when an effective vaccine is available or widespread immunity has been gained by infection that it will come to an end, and even then it's going to be a persistant problem at a lower level.
They aren't saying the peak is in June, they are saying the the end of the modelled period, the one month ramp up, 9 weeks in which 95% of those who will catch it and one month ramp down is June.
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
There's a wikipedia page with famous victims of the Spanish flu pandemic, and the deaths span from 1918-1920.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
On the BBC after the press conference their business journalist was talking almost as though it's a blip, and that the markets might recover in a few weeks or so once the worst is over. Given that the flaming press conference was talking about a peak in June or there abouts, and that's only the peak not the end, I have no idea how anyone could think we'll be back to normal even this year. As you say it will only be when an effective vaccine is available or widespread immunity has been gained by infection that it will come to an end, and even then it's going to be a persistant problem at a lower level.
They aren't saying the peak is in June, they are saying the the end of the modelled period, the one month ramp up, 9 weeks in which 95% of those who will catch it and one month ramp down is June.
They are trying to avoid saying we’ll need more than one quarantine period - although the CMO hinted as much - for people need to go into it fired up and convinced we can defeat the virus. The letdown can come later.
This chart is the usual nonsense of misalligned starting points and a logarithmic scale, both designed to make the data look like it's grouping when it really doesn't seem to be. The UK's growth curve is significantly slower than Italy.
Three things:
1. The starting points are not misaligned. They all start on the day the 100th case is recorded. Obviously no-one starts on exactly 100 so there is variance there.
2. Only a logarithmic scale makes any sense at all, given the nature of its growth.
3. This chart is two days old, only including data up to end Tuesday, it therefore doesn't yet have the UK number moving meaningfully to the right
Is the 100th case significant, given the varying sizes (in geographical area, population density and population size of the countries involved?
You have to start somewhere. I think the idea is that widespread public testing arrives at about the time of the 100th publicised case.
Now, I would expect us to be behind the 33% daily increase rate. We've done lots of the right things (although some other countries have done more). And countries that get the virus later inevitably know more about how to solve problems.
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
There's a wikipedia page with famous victims of the Spanish flu pandemic, and the deaths span from 1918-1920.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
Look at the death rate, not the detected cases/million. The latter can be reduced by not detecting cases. The former is harder to hide from.
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are (1) Late recognition of the issue (2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
To which I might add there are also large ares of Canada which are super low density as well. It's quite hard for people in the UK to get a grasp of how remote some of these areas are.
My father and I watched press conference today, he was impressed however I think it hasn't quite sunk in with the public that covid-19 is here to stay, and these extra-ordinary measures will be the norm for the next few years.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
I think this may well be another BC/AC moment in human history...
A cure is possibly years away....by that time we will have learnt how to manage it by changing our behaviour
Comments
Admittedly, he ain’t too strong on the old credibility aspect...
I have a fear Tony would try and do it all and probably Cameron too.
As Brexit revealed, we believe the experts who say the things we want to hear.
They still have not explained why the UK experts disagree with every other set of European experts
The Yooniverse is not taking it well.
https://twitter.com/Jackson_Carlaw/status/1238159547153481730?s=19
https://twitter.com/ProfTomkins/status/1238144941093728256?s=19
https://twitter.com/julieetchitv/status/1238200647335493642
"The worst public health crisis in a generation", so we plan to do nothing. For 4 weeks.
2 because you are a crazed idiot posting non-stop crap. Give it a rest.
Incidentally the quality of scientific advice around European countries, and the influence they have over politicians, is likely to vary wildly.
My dim recollection of foot and mouth was that at press events Blair deferred to the veterinarian experts. Cameron didn't face anything of this or even that nature as I recall but I don't see him as you describe.
I wonder how Thatcher would have handled a press conference like today's.
It’s only really been noticeable with sixth form. Smaller class and lots of conversation, so saying ‘sorry, cough, cough’ every five minutes is probably what I’ve been doing in other classes. Is once every five minutes persistent or is it just a regular cough? Is there a medical definition?
The variety of quality is the key point.
It's possible every other country got it wrong, and our guys are uniquely brilliant.
I wouldn't bet on it.
With regard to open mornings - how do I put this? - I think somebody with a hacking cough under current circs might not be the best of selling points?
I guess we are about to see some science in real time.
1. It could stop many essential workers from going to work
2. It could put lots of grandparents in thposition of being childcarers at greater risk of contracting the virus.
No reason at all for universities to still be teaching.
https://twitter.com/EGA65/status/1238066861243117569/photo/1
The crisis is science and data-driven.
So, why on earth collect some political correspondents, know-nothing journalists and media pundits to discuss the problem from a vantage of pure ignorance in a TV studio?
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?
Or that Canada is also under detecting ?
I'd love to hear his take on how many cases in Iran. Or the US.
Many people, including those with hypertension, cardiac disease, and diabetes, contribute greatly to society and public life, as well as to their own families and communities in more modest and unsung ways. Many will lose a decade or more of life, and we should mourn that loss, not dismiss it.
They should be normalised per capita of the population, or normalised by the total number of people tested (if the tests were random).
It is not too surprising that small city-states like HK and Singapore look good on that graph.
I think the truth is that the efficacy of testing in the countries is so varied that there is probably no really good way to compare all those lines.
Edit: Ah, I see the same point has been made by others, sorry.
We will not be talking about the covid-19 pandemic of 2020, but the covid-19 pandemic of the early 2020s.
But I can't help thinking that given the closeness of the USA and Canada that their infection rates would be reasonably similar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Spanish_flu_cases
Exponential growth and epidemics - 3Blue1Brown
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg
1. The starting points are not misaligned. They all start on the day the 100th case is recorded. Obviously no-one starts on exactly 100 so there is variance there.
2. Only a logarithmic scale makes any sense at all, given the nature of its growth.
3. This chart is two days old, only including data up to end Tuesday, it therefore doesn't yet have the UK number moving meaningfully to the right
The UK was massively ahead of the game on testing in the early stages (as was commented on at the time), and that early work may be why they are entering the current "delay" phase with a far greater level of confidence about what the numbers in the country are likely to be (even if not officially detected). Without the need for large ramping up of testing to confirm that.
The reason why the US, for example, are in such a bad shape is because they did no early testing. They are now playing massive catch up to try and establish the extent of the virus spread, which also leads to greater panic because inevitably this "catch up" in detection leads to the numbers escalating at horrifying levels.
2. You can justify the scale on the grounds of making all curves visible - but it undeniably squashes data together in a way which is misleading to the majority of people who don't fully take in what the scale is doing.
3. True, but this short time frame works hand in hand with the decision to ignore all the days before 100 cases in point 1, to help take a cut of the data for each country which appears to fit the claimed standard curve
We're clearing getting this like everyone else, but using these charts to suggest we're getting it on a growth curve extremely similar to Italy is over egging it massively, so far.
The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.
The two disadvantages are
(1) Late recognition of the issue
(2) Poor public health infrastructure
(Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
Frederick Trump, German-American businessman and patriarch of the Trump family (May 30th, 1918)
Donald's grandfather.
Now, I would expect us to be behind the 33% daily increase rate. We've done lots of the right things (although some other countries have done more). And countries that get the virus later inevitably know more about how to solve problems.
A cure is possibly years away....by that time we will have learnt how to manage it by changing our behaviour