At what point do they start allowing in folks with a doctors note that they have had it and now tested negative?
Although I'd worry
a) fake papers
b) a resentment starts building to those people able to swan around the globe whilst the rest of us wistfully look at old photos of fun we had in Benidorm.
Some have gone further - no tourists at all into India or Vietnam, no flights at all into Kuwait or Saudi.
I think they're hoping it will go away.....
It might for a bit. Then it will come back. And you can’t seal a border forever. That’s why - in the abstract at least - the UK approach makes sense to me.
En cuanto a los casos confirmados, la Comunidad de Madrid acumula el mayor número de contagios con 2.659. Le siguen Cataluña (509), País Vasco (417), Andalucía (269), La Rioja (259) y Castilla-La Mancha (194). Se han identificado 169 en Castilla y León, 148 en la Comunidad Valenciana, 130 en Navarra, 112 en Galicia, 80 casos en Aragón, 73 en Asturias, 70 casos en las Islas Canarias, 42 en Extremadura, 39 en Murcia -uno de ellos un bebé de cinco meses-, 30 en Baleares, 29 en Cantabria y tres en Melilla. Ceuta no tienen casos de momento.
Current distribution of cases
The figure for Andalusia is surprisingly low.
Suspect a lot of returning Brits will be bringing the virus with them over the coming week or so, to add to those who have already.
It is quite possible to be better prepared for a second wave, in terms of vaccines, treatments, or even mundane things like adequate stores of protective equipment, training and ICU capacity.
How feasible and practical is a vaccine?
Is the Government preparing for herd immunity because it thinks it will take too long, or won't work, or because they think they won't get enough of it? Or do you always do both to be prudent?
Which?
SARS 2003
No SARS vaccine yet.
The best explanation i have been given, which i simply don't believe, is that people weren't really looking hard enough. So counting on a vaccine is like budgeting on the assumption of a lottery win. My impression is that scientists are saying we can't count on one for 18 months because they dare not say anything more pessimistic and people are interpreting this as meaning we'll have one in 2 years nailed on. Note that scientists also tend to say "this may become annual" rather than "we could get two whole years of this".
Warmer countries seem to have less of a problem, so the arrival of summer could actually help.
It is quite possible to be better prepared for a second wave, in terms of vaccines, treatments, or even mundane things like adequate stores of protective equipment, training and ICU capacity.
How feasible and practical is a vaccine?
Is the Government preparing for herd immunity because it thinks it will take too long, or won't work, or because they think they won't get enough of it? Or do you always do both to be prudent?
Which?
1) Will "herd immunity" be futile with a shift in virus antigenicity?
2) Will a second wave occur at all? Equally the virus could mutate to a less virulent form.
3) Will there be no effective treatment or vaccine by the time a second wave arrives that renders "herd immunity" pointless?
The government strategy, such as it is*, fails if any of these three is true.
* people are self isolating to the point that we may well not get "herd immunity" at all.
As I am fairly nailed on to get it in the first wave, I have a certain amount of skin in this game. Protective equipment stocks will last just days as far as I can see. Unless there is a massive shipment coming our way.
Fair points.
Hope you get everything you need Foxy.
I topped up my life insurance a month ago. They have stopped selling travel insurance, I expect that next!
After that it is a 50/1 shot that I will meet my maker before Christmas. Fingers crossed, off to start ward round.
It is quite possible to be better prepared for a second wave, in terms of vaccines, treatments, or even mundane things like adequate stores of protective equipment, training and ICU capacity.
Exactly , any sensible person would be stopping it as best as possible and building up facilities , stock pile equipment etc for any second wave. Tories will be more interested in saving their bankbooks than your granny.
I think Boris is pursuing the correct tactics. Bring in the experts and listen to them. They might be wrong but it is defensible. If he did anything else, it would give the armchair 'experts' an extra stick to beat him with.
There is still a political element to some of the criticisms, but there always will be. If he took notice of the assorted thickos jostling to shout loudest, they'd still criticise him for pandering to ignorance.
So the question is how long are you willing to close your society to fight this thing?
As long as it takes to perfect cures and/or a vaccine.
The bubonic plague was incurable once. Now a few pills fix it.
Any thoughts on Spain taking "decisive action" to close schools and universities - and creating an explosion in the wider country? It should be noted that some of the Govt's thoughts on proposed measures aren't actually being rejected on the "herd immunity" basis. But because they will actually make things worse - or particularly for those most vulnerable.
There's a presumed nuance to herd immunity - which is not simply "have loads of people get it". It's have loads of people get it who can safely get it but keep them away from the more high risk cases.
As for all this talk about how "we've blown it where (EU) countries haven't". Try looking at 1) what EU countries are doing (it's hardly uniform - some are basically the same as us - and there are very few whose numbers are currently better than ours)
It's also important to remember, before cheering on a radical lockdown approach to attempt to stamp on and wipe out this disease, that it rests at least as much as the British approach on assumptions that may turn out to be false - in particular, the notion that a devastated economy can keep people watered, powered, fed and medicated for long enough for it to work, and that the effort to save more lives is worth the long-term economic dislocation to be suffered by the entire populace as the price for so doing.
We can't be sure that the British approach of allowing the disease to spread in a controlled manner will work, for reasons well rehearsed by other posters - notably the fear that the virus will mutate so people don't maintain their immunity to it, and that containment measures to protect vulnerable groups will fail and result in unbearable strain on the NHS. However, by the same token, what if radical lockdown leads to repeated waves of infection and numerous cycles of lockdown, outbreak, lockdown, outbreak - and what if the economic cost of maintaining this discipline becomes unbearable for the societies concerned?
The great advantage of the more nuanced approach of the UK is that it tries to make life as normal as possible for as many people as possible, which gives us a much better chance of getting through this with the economy more-or-less intact. That's vital. As I suggested last night, there's no point in people getting on their high horses and bleating that this puts profit before lives without pausing to consider that (a) you can't save everyone with truly radical measures if you've no money left with which to sustain them, and (b) Government makes decisions that attach a price tag to human lives all the time. There is mass carnage on the roads every year which could be almost entirely eliminated by banning everything with wheels and making people walk everywhere, but precisely no-one is willing to pay the societal price of giving up trucks, cars and bikes in order to save all of those lives - and rightly so.
Governments around the world are all having to make tough decisions about what they are and aren't willing to do to fight this disease, and those measures run along a spectrum. Some will turn out to have made a better set of decisions than others when it is all over, but I'm not sure it necessarily helps to scream about the idiocy of any one approach if all of those which one is comparing and contrasting are evidence-based and represent genuine efforts to make the best of a very bad situation to which there are no easy responses.
I tend towards the opinion that the British approach is correct, but just because of that you won't find me accusing the Italians of being reckless and stupid. Their situation is extremely difficult, it's not identical to ours, and absent a time machine we've no certain way of knowing which will be more effective in the long run.
It is quite possible to be better prepared for a second wave, in terms of vaccines, treatments, or even mundane things like adequate stores of protective equipment, training and ICU capacity.
How feasible and practical is a vaccine?
Is the Government preparing for herd immunity because it thinks it will take too long, or won't work, or because they think they won't get enough of it? Or do you always do both to be prudent?
Which?
1) Will "herd immunity" be futile with a shift in virus antigenicity?
2) Will a second wave occur at all? Equally the virus could mutate to a less virulent form.
3) Will there be no effective treatment or vaccine by the time a second wave arrives that renders "herd immunity" pointless?
The government strategy, such as it is*, fails if any of these three is true.
* people are self isolating to the point that we may well not get "herd immunity" at all.
As I am fairly nailed on to get it in the first wave, I have a certain amount of skin in this game. Protective equipment stocks will last just days as far as I can see. Unless there is a massive shipment coming our way.
Fair points.
Hope you get everything you need Foxy.
I topped up my life insurance a month ago. They have stopped selling travel insurance, I expect that next!
After that it is a 50/1 shot that I will meet my maker before Christmas. Fingers crossed, off to start ward round.
To Edmund. You know I have been critical of the speed that we have moved at. However, I think the key point here between contain and delay is being missed by people. It actually takes a few days to mentally process.
Delay means it's done. The pandemic is out there it is never going away. You can read those words but it takes time to process them. It is out there and it is never going away.
So the question is how long are you willing to close your society to fight this thing?
If you kill the curve flat in your country but it is out there in the rest of the world you have to stop all interactions with the outside world. So rather than smoothing the curve you flatten it out 5 years or more where at every point along those five years you are living in fear.
Do you want to live in fear or in hope?
I'm in Japan, it seems to be contained (OK, early days, we'll see) and WE ARE NOT CLOSED.
Life is going fine, with a few changes, some of which are beneficial, like working from home. Shops are open, restaurants are open, trains are running, people who need to go to work are going to work. On nicer, less crowded trains. If we had to carry on like this for 3 years waiting for a vaccine then that's not ideal but also not terrible. I'd definitely take a year of this over a week of full-on lockdown.
The only exception is school closures, which can't really go on forever, but it's not really clear how much of a useful role they're playing now, and even if reopening them is damaging there's a bit of time to work on ways to mitigate it.
Apart from school closures how different is that from where the UK is? We're seeing companies move to home working without compulsion.
Maybe this nudge stuff isn't so rubbish after all...
There's no compulsion in Japan either. The only difference is *leadership*.
This is what's so frustrating about the whole thing. The UK is basically heading to take the same measures as Japan, but slower so you kill a bunch more people in the meantime, more confusing and chaotic, people with shitty employers have to carry on communing and making the problem worse for stupid, dumb-boss-related reasons, and potentially it spirals out of control and you need a full-on lockdown. You end up with all the downside and less upside, and that's the *best* case.
"Please work from home if practical. Please consider cancelling events that bring a lot of people in close proximity." A few sentences out of Boris Johnson's mouth a couple of weeks ago could have made the whole thing smoother and safer.
But anyway, as pointed out above, if Japan is "containing it" then they are not in delay phase. If rest of World is in delay phase then Japan will have to keep itself cut off for ever more.
Whoa, you might be onto something, maybe the world splits into two disconnected zones, China + South Korea + Hong Kong + Taiwan + Japan + Singapore
Singapore - 13 new cases yesterday.
PM Lee didn't sound as if he thought they could contain it.
What a disappointment. With no Premier League football today I thought the next best thing was to be part of the panic buyers at my local Waitrose. Well there were only 3/4 other shoppers and almost all the shelves were full. What's happening to this country?
It is quite possible to be better prepared for a second wave, in terms of vaccines, treatments, or even mundane things like adequate stores of protective equipment, training and ICU capacity.
How feasible and practical is a vaccine?
Is the Government preparing for herd immunity because it thinks it will take too long, or won't work, or because they think they won't get enough of it? Or do you always do both to be prudent?
Which?
SARS 2003
No SARS vaccine yet.
The best explanation i have been given, which i simply don't believe, is that people weren't really looking hard enough. So counting on a vaccine is like budgeting on the assumption of a lottery win. My impression is that scientists are saying we can't count on one for 18 months because they dare not say anything more pessimistic and people are interpreting this as meaning we'll have one in 2 years nailed on. Note that scientists also tend to say "this may become annual" rather than "we could get two whole years of this".
Warmer countries seem to have less of a problem, so the arrival of summer could actually help.
Warmer countries like Italy and Spain?!
Yes and Scotland will not get much above their winter temperatures in a good year
Ait is a very good article, which sets out the issues with this government’s policy fairly and dispassionately.
Generally good article, with a few conclusions that look overwrought:
- Seems to portray movements to the next stage of the Govt strategy as desperate u-turns.
- "The strategy amounts to a blunt admission by the British government that stopping the coronavirus here was now impossible, and replicating the success of places like Hong Kong that have encouraged more extreme social distancing a futile hope."
We can't judge that Hong Kong is a "success" yet - as the next couple of waves are still to come.
I think Boris is pursuing the correct tactics. Bring in the experts and listen to them. They might be wrong but it is defensible. If he did anything else, it would give the armchair 'experts' an extra stick to beat him with.
There is still a political element to some of the criticisms, but there always will be. If he took notice of the assorted thickos jostling to shout loudest, they'd still criticise him for pandering to ignorance.
Boris has taken serious political risks to follow expert advice. He deserves respect for that.
Meanwhile someone somewhere needs to be testing the assumptions behind the models that drive the advice.
Some have gone further - no tourists at all into India or Vietnam, no flights at all into Kuwait or Saudi.
I think they're hoping it will go away.....
It might for a bit. Then it will come back. And you can’t seal a border forever. That’s why - in the abstract at least - the UK approach makes sense to me.
Always better to delay as long as possible , always chance it dies out like SARS , you get cure , vaccine etc. Only idiots would take it on the chin and kill off as many as possible as soon as possible. The only possible benefit from that is economic and hence why it is Tories choice.
I think Boris is pursuing the correct tactics. Bring in the experts and listen to them. They might be wrong but it is defensible. If he did anything else, it would give the armchair 'experts' an extra stick to beat him with.
There is still a political element to some of the criticisms, but there always will be. If he took notice of the assorted thickos jostling to shout loudest, they'd still criticise him for pandering to ignorance.
Boris has taken serious political risks to follow expert advice. He deserves respect for that.
Meanwhile someone somewhere needs to be testing the assumptions behind the models that drive the advice.
All models are flawed.
This is nothing to do with him taking a bold decision. He dithers. If you don't realise that, think back to when he was deciding whether to be a Remainer or a Leaver.
He has very little real leadership skills. Which is what you need in a crisis.
To Edmund. You know I have been critical of the speed that we have moved at. However, I think the key point here between contain and delay is being missed by people. It actually takes a few days to mentally process.
Delay means it's done. The pandemic is out there it is never going away. You can read those words but it takes time to process them. It is out there and it is never going away.
So the question is how long are you willing to close your society to fight this thing?
If you kill the curve flat in your country but it is out there in the rest of the world you have to stop all interactions with the outside world. So rather than smoothing the curve you flatten it out 5 years or more where at every point along those five years you are living in fear.
Do you want to live in fear or in hope?
I'm in Japan, it seems to be contained (OK, early days, we'll see) and WE ARE NOT CLOSED.
Life is going fine, with a few changes, some of which are beneficial, like working from home. Shops are open, restaurants are open, trains are running, people who need to go to work are going to work. On nicer, less crowded trains. If we had to carry on like this for 3 years waiting for a vaccine then that's not ideal but also not terrible. I'd definitely take a year of this over a week of full-on lockdown.
The only exception is school closures, which can't really go on forever, but it's not really clear how much of a useful role they're playing now, and even if reopening them is damaging there's a bit of time to work on ways to mitigate it.
Apart from school closures how different is that from where the UK is? We're seeing companies move to home working without compulsion.
Maybe this nudge stuff isn't so rubbish after all...
There's no compulsion in Japan either. The only difference is *leadership*.
This is what's so frustrating about the whole thing. The UK is basically heading to take the same measures as Japan, but slower so you kill a bunch more people in the meantime, more confusing and chaotic, people with shitty employers have to carry on communing and making the problem worse for stupid, dumb-boss-related reasons, and potentially it spirals out of control and you need a full-on lockdown. You end up with all the downside and less upside, and that's the *best* case.
"Please work from home if practical. Please consider cancelling events that bring a lot of people in close proximity." A few sentences out of Boris Johnson's mouth a couple of weeks ago could have made the whole thing smoother and safer.
Out of interest what are Japanese hospitalisation/ICU usage figures like?
There is another aspect to differing countries approaches of course - population demographics.
But anyway, as pointed out above, if Japan is "containing it" then they are not in delay phase. If rest of World is in delay phase then Japan will have to keep itself cut off for ever more.
Whoa, you might be onto something, maybe the world splits into two disconnected zones, China + South Korea + Hong Kong + Taiwan + Japan + Singapore
Singapore - 13 new cases yesterday.
PM Lee didn't sound as if he thought they could contain it.
Pushing this back for as long as possible into the northern hemisphere summer buys time for a) better cures b) better facilities and c) vaccine progress ahead of next winter
Some have gone further - no tourists at all into India or Vietnam, no flights at all into Kuwait or Saudi.
I think they're hoping it will go away.....
It might for a bit. Then it will come back. And you can’t seal a border forever. That’s why - in the abstract at least - the UK approach makes sense to me.
Well for the next year it would make sense for everyone else to seal off their borders to anyone from the UK...
Some have gone further - no tourists at all into India or Vietnam, no flights at all into Kuwait or Saudi.
I think they're hoping it will go away.....
It might for a bit. Then it will come back. And you can’t seal a border forever. That’s why - in the abstract at least - the UK approach makes sense to me.
Always better to delay as long as possible , always chance it dies out like SARS , you get cure , vaccine etc. Only idiots would take it on the chin and kill off as many as possible as soon as possible. The only possible benefit from that is economic and hence why it is Tories choice.
You can't compare with SARS because SARS never got remotely close to the progress that this has. It basically was too deadly for its own good. On the other hand, Swine flu probably infected 20% of the world's population - but was relatively harmless. This is in the sweet spot. The experts are clear that you can't just wish it away. And acting on the "hope" of a vaccine or better treatment is a massive gamble in itself.
It is quite possible to be better prepared for a second wave, in terms of vaccines, treatments, or even mundane things like adequate stores of protective equipment, training and ICU capacity.
How feasible and practical is a vaccine?
Is the Government preparing for herd immunity because it thinks it will take too long, or won't work, or because they think they won't get enough of it? Or do you always do both to be prudent?
Which?
1) Will "herd immunity" be futile with a shift in virus antigenicity?
2) Will a second wave occur at all? Equally the virus could mutate to a less virulent form.
3) Will there be no effective treatment or vaccine by the time a second wave arrives that renders "herd immunity" pointless?
The government strategy, such as it is*, fails if any of these three is true.
* people are self isolating to the point that we may well not get "herd immunity" at all.
As I am fairly nailed on to get it in the first wave, I have a certain amount of skin in this game. Protective equipment stocks will last just days as far as I can see. Unless there is a massive shipment coming our way.
Fair points.
Hope you get everything you need Foxy.
I topped up my life insurance a month ago. They have stopped selling travel insurance, I expect that next!
After that it is a 50/1 shot that I will meet my maker before Christmas. Fingers crossed, off to start ward round.
Stay safe people!
OGH likes to trumpet how his 50/1 came in....
Hopefully, you not so much!
You and your colleagues are doing one hell of a job.
Some have gone further - no tourists at all into India or Vietnam, no flights at all into Kuwait or Saudi.
I think they're hoping it will go away.....
It might for a bit. Then it will come back. And you can’t seal a border forever. That’s why - in the abstract at least - the UK approach makes sense to me.
Well for the next year it would make sense for everyone else to seal off their borders to anyone from the UK...
It is quite possible to be better prepared for a second wave, in terms of vaccines, treatments, or even mundane things like adequate stores of protective equipment, training and ICU capacity.
How feasible and practical is a vaccine?
Is the Government preparing for herd immunity because it thinks it will take too long, or won't work, or because they think they won't get enough of it? Or do you always do both to be prudent?
Which?
1) Will "herd immunity" be futile with a shift in virus antigenicity?
2) Will a second wave occur at all? Equally the virus could mutate to a less virulent form.
3) Will there be no effective treatment or vaccine by the time a second wave arrives that renders "herd immunity" pointless?
The government strategy, such as it is*, fails if any of these three is true.
* people are self isolating to the point that we may well not get "herd immunity" at all.
As I am fairly nailed on to get it in the first wave, I have a certain amount of skin in this game. Protective equipment stocks will last just days as far as I can see. Unless there is a massive shipment coming our way.
This is what I don’t understand about the government’s strategy: if the idea is for the less vulnerable to get it and build up “herd” immunity, isn’t that counteracted by all the advice to wash hands etc which is designed to stop us getting it?
Anyway, Dr Foxy I hope you get the supplies you need.
If it is true that this was in Italy and the U.K. well before February I do now wonder if I caught it in early January. One of my Italian cousins came to stay with me for a few days. Everyone was fine and then when I went back up North I had another bout of illness - cough/lost voice/ shivers etc. I assumed it was just a consequence of the different illness I had had over Xmas. But who knows?
Anyway irrelevant because I am still going to take all reasonable precautions.
So far, UK deaths seem not to be proportionately higher than those elsewhere. At what point would we expect that to change if the government’s approach is so different to all the other ones elsewhere?
Some have gone further - no tourists at all into India or Vietnam, no flights at all into Kuwait or Saudi.
I think they're hoping it will go away.....
It might for a bit. Then it will come back. And you can’t seal a border forever. That’s why - in the abstract at least - the UK approach makes sense to me.
Well for the next year it would make sense for everyone else to seal off their borders to anyone from the UK...
Wise. We have spent far too much of our nation's wealth on foreign holidays anyway.
Some have gone further - no tourists at all into India or Vietnam, no flights at all into Kuwait or Saudi.
I think they're hoping it will go away.....
It might for a bit. Then it will come back. And you can’t seal a border forever. That’s why - in the abstract at least - the UK approach makes sense to me.
Always better to delay as long as possible , always chance it dies out like SARS , you get cure , vaccine etc. Only idiots would take it on the chin and kill off as many as possible as soon as possible. The only possible benefit from that is economic and hence why it is Tories choice.
You can't compare with SARS because SARS never got remotely close to the progress that this has. It basically was too deadly for its own good. On the other hand, Swine flu probably infected 20% of the world's population - but was relatively harmless. This is in the sweet spot. The experts are clear that you can't just wish it away. And acting on the "hope" of a vaccine or better treatment is a massive gamble in itself.
Surely better than taking the no hope option and getting as many killed as early as possible option
En cuanto a los casos confirmados, la Comunidad de Madrid acumula el mayor número de contagios con 2.659. Le siguen Cataluña (509), País Vasco (417), Andalucía (269), La Rioja (259) y Castilla-La Mancha (194). Se han identificado 169 en Castilla y León, 148 en la Comunidad Valenciana, 130 en Navarra, 112 en Galicia, 80 casos en Aragón, 73 en Asturias, 70 casos en las Islas Canarias, 42 en Extremadura, 39 en Murcia -uno de ellos un bebé de cinco meses-, 30 en Baleares, 29 en Cantabria y tres en Melilla. Ceuta no tienen casos de momento.
Current distribution of cases
The figure for Andalusia is surprisingly low.
Suspect a lot of returning Brits will be bringing the virus with them over the coming week or so, to add to those who have already.
It is and we are all now in lockdown with reports that flights are being stopped. I'm not sure that people will be allowed to come - except maybe with the self-isolation requirement. But things are moving quickly her. There is huge resentment against the 'madrileños´ who appeared just after they closed the schools-universities ' treating it as a holiday. Unintended consequence perhaps but shows how some of these big headline measures can be counter'productive. With its history there are plenty of older Spaniards at least who approve of quite strict measures.
But anyway, as pointed out above, if Japan is "containing it" then they are not in delay phase. If rest of World is in delay phase then Japan will have to keep itself cut off for ever more.
Whoa, you might be onto something, maybe the world splits into two disconnected zones, China + South Korea + Hong Kong + Taiwan + Japan + Singapore
Singapore - 13 new cases yesterday.
PM Lee didn't sound as if he thought they could contain it.
Pushing this back for as long as possible into the northern hemisphere summer buys time for a) better cures b) better facilities and c) vaccine progress ahead of next winter
This is the humanity saving approach.
Johnson has gone for a mass cull
You are constantly in Black Death, this will kill 30% of the population mode. It's obvious that the Govt will be ramping up capacity for next winter. But they also will want to utilise any spare capacity they have in the summer. Most people who get it will not die. But death rates will be far higher if the health system does not have the capacity to cope with the level of infection. Exponential growth will overwhelm any health system however well resourced. So we'd rather not pin our hopes on improvements by next winter to be combatting it. By which time there almost certainly won't be a vaccine. So chucking it in as a reason for your theory is just gambling at long odds.
Herd immunity isn't going to happen - too many people are going to think fuck this for a game of soldiers and avoid unnecessary social contact like the plague.
My 73-year old dad's view: "If you're going to get it, you're going to get it. And if it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you."
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
This is what I don’t understand about the government’s strategy: if the idea is for the less vulnerable to get it and build up “herd” immunity, isn’t that counteracted by all the advice to wash hands etc which is designed to stop us getting it?
I assume that's directly related to the delay/flatten the curve aim. They want people to get it, just not too many or too quickly.
But anyway, as pointed out above, if Japan is "containing it" then they are not in delay phase. If rest of World is in delay phase then Japan will have to keep itself cut off for ever more.
Whoa, you might be onto something, maybe the world splits into two disconnected zones, China + South Korea + Hong Kong + Taiwan + Japan + Singapore
Singapore - 13 new cases yesterday.
PM Lee didn't sound as if he thought they could contain it.
Pushing this back for as long as possible into the northern hemisphere summer buys time for a) better cures b) better facilities and c) vaccine progress ahead of next winter
You’re two summers away from all of that at least.
Pushing it back to the first summer is the UK govt approach - to give the NHS as much time and resources to prepare as possible.
En cuanto a los casos confirmados, la Comunidad de Madrid acumula el mayor número de contagios con 2.659. Le siguen Cataluña (509), País Vasco (417), Andalucía (269), La Rioja (259) y Castilla-La Mancha (194). Se han identificado 169 en Castilla y León, 148 en la Comunidad Valenciana, 130 en Navarra, 112 en Galicia, 80 casos en Aragón, 73 en Asturias, 70 casos en las Islas Canarias, 42 en Extremadura, 39 en Murcia -uno de ellos un bebé de cinco meses-, 30 en Baleares, 29 en Cantabria y tres en Melilla. Ceuta no tienen casos de momento.
Current distribution of cases
The figure for Andalusia is surprisingly low.
Suspect a lot of returning Brits will be bringing the virus with them over the coming week or so, to add to those who have already.
It is and we are all now in lockdown with reports that flights are being stopped. I'm not sure that people will be allowed to come - except maybe with the self-isolation requirement. But things are moving quickly her. There is huge resentment against the 'madrileños´ who appeared just after they closed the schools-universities ' treating it as a holiday. Unintended consequence perhaps but shows how some of these big headline measures can be counter'productive. With its history there are plenty of older Spaniards at least who approve of quite strict measures.
My sister is out in Orgiva currently. She has a small cortijo there. She’s due to be flying back on Tuesday. I am eondering whether she’ll be able to. I can think of a lot worse places to be stuck, though.
But anyway, as pointed out above, if Japan is "containing it" then they are not in delay phase. If rest of World is in delay phase then Japan will have to keep itself cut off for ever more.
Whoa, you might be onto something, maybe the world splits into two disconnected zones, China + South Korea + Hong Kong + Taiwan + Japan + Singapore
Singapore - 13 new cases yesterday.
PM Lee didn't sound as if he thought they could contain it.
Pushing this back for as long as possible into the northern hemisphere summer buys time for a) better cures b) better facilities and c) vaccine progress ahead of next winter
You’re two summers away from all of that at least.
Pushing it back to the first summer is the UK govt approach - to give the NHS as much time and resources to prepare as possible.
LOL, believe that when I see it, they are experts at stripping facilities out , usually just hot air on improving them. We just had foxy state that they have a few days supplies yet these turkeys have had two months at least to get stuff in yet seem to have done nothing..
Some have gone further - no tourists at all into India or Vietnam, no flights at all into Kuwait or Saudi.
I think they're hoping it will go away.....
It might for a bit. Then it will come back. And you can’t seal a border forever. That’s why - in the abstract at least - the UK approach makes sense to me.
Always better to delay as long as possible , always chance it dies out like SARS , you get cure , vaccine etc. Only idiots would take it on the chin and kill off as many as possible as soon as possible. The only possible benefit from that is economic and hence why it is Tories choice.
You can't compare with SARS because SARS never got remotely close to the progress that this has. It basically was too deadly for its own good. On the other hand, Swine flu probably infected 20% of the world's population - but was relatively harmless. This is in the sweet spot. The experts are clear that you can't just wish it away. And acting on the "hope" of a vaccine or better treatment is a massive gamble in itself.
Surely better than taking the no hope option and getting as many killed as early as possible option
That's not the approach but since you refuse to even attempt to understand it (even if you disagree with it) then there's no hope on many levels. We can spend all the money we like on preparation but the biggest influence on whether you die from this virus is going to be basic ability on the health service to cope. Not on vaccines, not on miracle cures, but basic health service capacity. And that means trying to avoid a peak in winter. Because we can do much better in summer.
It is quite possible to be better prepared for a second wave, in terms of vaccines, treatments, or even mundane things like adequate stores of protective equipment, training and ICU capacity.
How feasible and practical is a vaccine?
Is the Government preparing for herd immunity because it thinks it will take too long, or won't work, or because they think they won't get enough of it? Or do you always do both to be prudent?
Which?
1) Will "herd immunity" be futile with a shift in virus antigenicity?
2) Will a second wave occur at all? Equally the virus could mutate to a less virulent form.
3) Will there be no effective treatment or vaccine by the time a second wave arrives that renders "herd immunity" pointless?
The government strategy, such as it is*, fails if any of these three is true.
* people are self isolating to the point that we may well not get "herd immunity" at all.
As I am fairly nailed on to get it in the first wave, I have a certain amount of skin in this game. Protective equipment stocks will last just days as far as I can see. Unless there is a massive shipment coming our way.
This is what I don’t understand about the government’s strategy: if the idea is for the less vulnerable to get it and build up “herd” immunity, isn’t that counteracted by all the advice to wash hands etc which is designed to stop us getting it?
Anyway, Dr Foxy I hope you get the supplies you need.
If it is true that this was in Italy and the U.K. well before February I do now wonder if I caught it in early January. One of my Italian cousins came to stay with me for a few days. Everyone was fine and then when I went back up North I had another bout of illness - cough/lost voice/ shivers etc. I assumed it was just a consequence of the different illness I had had over Xmas. But who knows?
Anyway irrelevant because I am still going to take all reasonable precautions.
Much of it is people hearing selectively what has been said by the experts. They were very clear that they want to prevent the vulnerable from getting it now while accepting many others will get it inevitably and build up the herd immunity. This myth that they want to kill vulnerable people off is the worst kind of fake news. I speak as someone in my mid60s with high blood pressure so I´ve watched and listened with care! For some their key agenda is driven by dislike of Johnson ' I get that but this is neither the time nor the place.
Some have gone further - no tourists at all into India or Vietnam, no flights at all into Kuwait or Saudi.
I think they're hoping it will go away.....
It might for a bit. Then it will come back. And you can’t seal a border forever. That’s why - in the abstract at least - the UK approach makes sense to me.
Always better to delay as long as possible , always chance it dies out like SARS , you get cure , vaccine etc. Only idiots would take it on the chin and kill off as many as possible as soon as possible. The only possible benefit from that is economic and hence why it is Tories choice.
You can't compare with SARS because SARS never got remotely close to the progress that this has. It basically was too deadly for its own good. On the other hand, Swine flu probably infected 20% of the world's population - but was relatively harmless. This is in the sweet spot. The experts are clear that you can't just wish it away. And acting on the "hope" of a vaccine or better treatment is a massive gamble in itself.
Surely better than taking the no hope option and getting as many killed as early as possible option
That's not the approach but since you refuse to even attempt to understand it (even if you disagree with it) then there's no hope on many levels. We can spend all the money we like on preparation but the biggest influence on whether you die from this virus is going to be basic ability on the health service to cope. Not on vaccines, not on miracle cures, but basic health service capacity. And that means trying to avoid a peak in winter. Because we can do much better in summer.
So not trying to avoid anything and hoping we all get it before winter is the great plan
Herd immunity isn't going to happen - too many people are going to think fuck this for a game of soldiers and avoid unnecessary social contact like the plague.
My 73-year old dad's view: "If you're going to get it, you're going to get it. And if it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you."
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
The depth of the recession and the speed of the recovery are unknowable, though FWIW I think the UK Government's approach so far has been designed to try to mitigate economic damage insofar as is possible.
In the short term, the panic buying may be a more pressing problem. If it abates after another few days and the supermarket shelves gradually replenish then all will be well. But if the activity of the existing panic buyers encourages/forces everyone else to try to hoard because they're afraid they'll run out of basic supplies then some mechanism of rationing will need to be introduced.
It is quite possible to be better prepared for a second wave, in terms of vaccines, treatments, or even mundane things like adequate stores of protective equipment, training and ICU capacity.
How feasible and practical is a vaccine?
Is the Government preparing for herd immunity because it thinks it will take too long, or won't work, or because they think they won't get enough of it? Or do you always do both to be prudent?
Which?
1) Will "herd immunity" be futile with a shift in virus antigenicity?
2) Will a second wave occur at all? Equally the virus could mutate to a less virulent form.
3) Will there be no effective treatment or vaccine by the time a second wave arrives that renders "herd immunity" pointless?
The government strategy, such as it is*, fails if any of these three is true.
* people are self isolating to the point that we may well not get "herd immunity" at all.
As I am fairly nailed on to get it in the first wave, I have a certain amount of skin in this game. Protective equipment stocks will last just days as far as I can see. Unless there is a massive shipment coming our way.
This is what I don’t understand about the government’s strategy: if the idea is for the less vulnerable to get it and build up “herd” immunity, isn’t that counteracted by all the advice to wash hands etc which is designed to stop us getting it?
Anyway, Dr Foxy I hope you get the supplies you need.
If it is true that this was in Italy and the U.K. well before February I do now wonder if I caught it in early January. One of my Italian cousins came to stay with me for a few days. Everyone was fine and then when I went back up North I had another bout of illness - cough/lost voice/ shivers etc. I assumed it was just a consequence of the different illness I had had over Xmas. But who knows?
Anyway irrelevant because I am still going to take all reasonable precautions.
Much of it is people hearing selectively what has been said by the experts. They were very clear that they want to prevent the vulnerable from getting it now while accepting many others will get it inevitably and build up the herd immunity. This myth that they want to kill vulnerable people off is the worst kind of fake news. I speak as someone in my mid60s with high blood pressure so I´ve watched and listened with care! For some their key agenda is driven by dislike of Johnson ' I get that but this is neither the time nor the place.
What he said. The whole point of herd immunity is that those who can survive get it and those who might not don’t. But as you write, wilful misunderstanding on some parts.
This is what I don’t understand about the government’s strategy: if the idea is for the less vulnerable to get it and build up “herd” immunity, isn’t that counteracted by all the advice to wash hands etc which is designed to stop us getting it?
I assume that's directly related to the delay/flatten the curve aim. They want people to get it, just not too many or too quickly.
Thanks.
The other question I have is how will the government know if people have had it and, therefore, theoretically have immunity if they are not testing people outside of hospital?
En cuanto a los casos confirmados, la Comunidad de Madrid acumula el mayor número de contagios con 2.659. Le siguen Cataluña (509), País Vasco (417), Andalucía (269), La Rioja (259) y Castilla-La Mancha (194). Se han identificado 169 en Castilla y León, 148 en la Comunidad Valenciana, 130 en Navarra, 112 en Galicia, 80 casos en Aragón, 73 en Asturias, 70 casos en las Islas Canarias, 42 en Extremadura, 39 en Murcia -uno de ellos un bebé de cinco meses-, 30 en Baleares, 29 en Cantabria y tres en Melilla. Ceuta no tienen casos de momento.
Current distribution of cases
The figure for Andalusia is surprisingly low.
Suspect a lot of returning Brits will be bringing the virus with them over the coming week or so, to add to those who have already.
It is and we are all now in lockdown with reports that flights are being stopped. I'm not sure that people will be allowed to come - except maybe with the self-isolation requirement. But things are moving quickly her. There is huge resentment against the 'madrileños´ who appeared just after they closed the schools-universities ' treating it as a holiday. Unintended consequence perhaps but shows how some of these big headline measures can be counter'productive. With its history there are plenty of older Spaniards at least who approve of quite strict measures.
My sister is out in Orgiva currently. She has a small cortijo there. She’s due to be flying back on Tuesday. I am eondering whether she’ll be able to. I can think of a lot worse places to be stuck, though.
Don´t know where Orgiva is. We're in a tiny barriada close to Mojacar but we can easily avoid much of the dangers. It's sunny and very quiet and we're used to it. Staying in is a bit of a pain but the views are great and internet TV is a godsend,
This is what I don’t understand about the government’s strategy: if the idea is for the less vulnerable to get it and build up “herd” immunity, isn’t that counteracted by all the advice to wash hands etc which is designed to stop us getting it?
I assume that's directly related to the delay/flatten the curve aim. They want people to get it, just not too many or too quickly.
Thanks.
The other question I have is how will the government know if people have had it and, therefore, theoretically have immunity if they are not testing people outside of hospital?
They won't. Nor will they need to. If you have immunity you won't get infected and won't be contagious and transmission will drop.
Herd immunity isn't going to happen - too many people are going to think fuck this for a game of soldiers and avoid unnecessary social contact like the plague.
My 73-year old dad's view: "If you're going to get it, you're going to get it. And if it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you."
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
The depth of the recession and the speed of the recovery are unknowable, though FWIW I think the UK Government's approach so far has been designed to try to mitigate economic damage insofar as is possible.
In the short term, the panic buying may be a more pressing problem. If it abates after another few days and the supermarket shelves gradually replenish then all will be well. But if the activity of the existing panic buyers encourages/forces everyone else to try to hoard because they're afraid they'll run out of basic supplies then some mechanism of rationing will need to be introduced.
It's obvious that there has been a fair amount of stocking up, but I think people can see that excessive hoarding is pointless when in reality the shop shelves get replenished in short order. Apart from face-masks and hand sanitisers that is.
Just kill them all off early on rather than try to delay it and have chance you will have vaccine , medicine to help etc, utter bollox.
When did a working vaccine for the other common coronavirus (we know it as the common cold) arrive?
A contain plan works if you can identify a working vaccine, otherwise it's delaying the inevitable to a time when the current measures will fail to work. People will do what they are told the first and possibly second time around. The story of the boy who screamed wolf will tell you everything you need to know about what is likely to happen.
Boris (and the UK) is definitely taking a gamble but I think the other options makes a set of assumptions (a vaccine will be found, people will self-isolate a 3rd / 10th time) that aren't valid.
This is what I don’t understand about the government’s strategy: if the idea is for the less vulnerable to get it and build up “herd” immunity, isn’t that counteracted by all the advice to wash hands etc which is designed to stop us getting it?
I assume that's directly related to the delay/flatten the curve aim. They want people to get it, just not too many or too quickly.
Thanks.
The other question I have is how will the government know if people have had it and, therefore, theoretically have immunity if they are not testing people outside of hospital?
Currently the most widely used test only identifies those currently infected. Singapore developed a serological test that could identify those that HAD been infected- it was how they filled in a missing link between two clusters - but it’s not available at scale - yet.
I have no view on which strategy is right but I know of no one out here who is against the lockdown. It might just stop widespread infection in a community where, at the moment, is 60%+ over 65 with many octogenarians. it’s going to be hard on the businesses and looking around my nearest neighbors seems to have worked in that no one has arrived from Murcia or Madrid. Will see what new measures come out of this mornings cabinet meeting.
Herd immunity isn't going to happen - too many people are going to think fuck this for a game of soldiers and avoid unnecessary social contact like the plague.
My 73-year old dad's view: "If you're going to get it, you're going to get it. And if it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you."
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
London is definitely getting quieter day by day. Similar to the period between Xmas and New Year at the moment, people around, might seem busy to those who visit infrequently, but significantly down on normal.
Herd immunity isn't going to happen - too many people are going to think fuck this for a game of soldiers and avoid unnecessary social contact like the plague.
My 73-year old dad's view: "If you're going to get it, you're going to get it. And if it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you."
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
The depth of the recession and the speed of the recovery are unknowable, though FWIW I think the UK Government's approach so far has been designed to try to mitigate economic damage insofar as is possible.
In the short term, the panic buying may be a more pressing problem. If it abates after another few days and the supermarket shelves gradually replenish then all will be well. But if the activity of the existing panic buyers encourages/forces everyone else to try to hoard because they're afraid they'll run out of basic supplies then some mechanism of rationing will need to be introduced.
Depending on how badly this year’s growing season is affected by farmer downtime, it may be sometime before the full range of products we’re use to seeing at the prices we’re used to paying returns.
This is what I don’t understand about the government’s strategy: if the idea is for the less vulnerable to get it and build up “herd” immunity, isn’t that counteracted by all the advice to wash hands etc which is designed to stop us getting it?
I assume that's directly related to the delay/flatten the curve aim. They want people to get it, just not too many or too quickly.
Thanks.
The other question I have is how will the government know if people have had it and, therefore, theoretically have immunity if they are not testing people outside of hospital?
I am a lay person so please feel free to take this with a hefty pinch of salt, but one assumes that they have statistical models which will give them a reasonable idea of how many mild cases have occurred based on the rate of hospitalisations. The population won't simply consist of the very ill and those who've not even contracted the condition: for each hospital case there must be X-number of mild and asymptomatic cases out in the community that aren't presenting at medical facilities for treatment. Those models, in turn, will presumably be based on data already collected about Covid and similar past infections, notably the information gathered by the Chinese authorities.
That will provide a reasonable estimate of the proportion of the population that has already contracted the illness though not, obviously, knowledge of whether each and every specific individual has had it. In an ideal world there would be a cheap and widely available testing regime with the capacity to screen everybody for the illness on demand and however often they wanted to, but insofar as I'm aware that isn't possible at the moment.
Herd immunity isn't going to happen - too many people are going to think fuck this for a game of soldiers and avoid unnecessary social contact like the plague.
My 73-year old dad's view: "If you're going to get it, you're going to get it. And if it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you."
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
The depth of the recession and the speed of the recovery are unknowable, though FWIW I think the UK Government's approach so far has been designed to try to mitigate economic damage insofar as is possible.
In the short term, the panic buying may be a more pressing problem. If it abates after another few days and the supermarket shelves gradually replenish then all will be well. But if the activity of the existing panic buyers encourages/forces everyone else to try to hoard because they're afraid they'll run out of basic supplies then some mechanism of rationing will need to be introduced.
Panic buying is self-limiting, as people run out of storage space and (highly relevantly) ready cash.
I haven't been able to stand it anymore and have laid her another big one.
You've heard the reports that Hillary is self-isolating in the woods in New York state until November I presume?
As was pointed out yesterday, there might be some decent odds on various members of the Senate for next President, if you can get them listed. On the basis that if the US November elections don't happen then the next President will be drawn from the rump senate still in post. It's not like the UK where the current President just carries on. I'm not sure also if members of the Cabinet come into the mix.
The most hardline thing to do from a long-term economic management viewpoint would be to let it rip. You'd have a massive and immediate health bonus from a million or two not requiring long-term care. Your NHS could then cope with pretty much any subsequent pandemic that got thrown at it. You'll get tourism back up and running in months. Domestic consumption some way ahead of that. Think of all those wakes! A massively redistributive event as all that money gets moved down a generation. A freeing up of the housing market and a welcome amount of house price deflation at all that oversupply coming on the market in a big lump.
However, we are going with the "washing your hands" message and nudged self-isolation. No doubt that will save many older people, whilst slowing the acquisition of "herd immunity". A compromise we are presumably happy to make though?
The young are no doubt going to get pissed off that this is a world that revolves around protecting the lives and the interests of old people. Sorry kids, Granny ain't checking out just yet....
If you go back in time by 600-700 years most people then would have killed to have the problems that we have now. We have coronavirus, HIV, ebola and zika to worry about. They had bubonic plague, smallpox, tuberculosis, leprosy, cholera, rabies, scarlet fever, diphtheria, anthrax, syphilis and infections of wounds to name a few. They also had lower life expectancy and a much lower standard of living.
The COVID epidemic may now run through the population and burn itself out, but there has been an enormous reaction of fear from the public and due to self-imposed social isolation the peak of the epidemic may now be postponed for many months or years. How long will it take for this virus to be eradicated in every country in the world? Years, probably. Especially in Europe governments do not seem to be in control. It is the public who are leading the response. Whole sectors of the economy that rely on gatherings of people, large or small, have been shut down. People are asking for governments to pick up the cost and support society during this shutdown, but if society stops working where do governments find the money? I think that self-isolation may cause the epidemic to stall in Europe prolonging the shutdown. It may be a very long time before the public is willing to come out of isolation, but it will not be many weeks before there will be a massive wave of business failures, from childcare businesses to shops, cafes, and airlines. The reduction in air pollutions levels that has been noticed in Italy and China also mean a reduction in manufacturing output. People, businesses and governments will run out of money while many members of the public, often financially better off, will still be self-isolating and economically inactive in this possible scenario. I am sure that the society of the 14th century, during one of the great plague epidemics, would hardly have noticed an epidemic of coronavirus and they would have carried on business as usual. They knew that they did not have a choice.
I have no view on which strategy is right but I know of no one out here who is against the lockdown. It might just stop widespread infection in a community where, at the moment, is 60%+ over 65 with many octogenarians. it’s going to be hard on the businesses and looking around my nearest neighbors seems to have worked in that no one has arrived from Murcia or Madrid. Will see what new measures come out of this mornings cabinet meeting.
He’s not an expert. He’s a man in his bedroom who was a nurse teacher and had found a new hobby. DW interviewed him as he’s a YouTube sensation. I looked at one of his videos a few days ago. It’s not exactly insight, it’s webscraping with a veneer.
Herd immunity isn't going to happen - too many people are going to think fuck this for a game of soldiers and avoid unnecessary social contact like the plague.
My 73-year old dad's view: "If you're going to get it, you're going to get it. And if it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you."
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
The depth of the recession and the speed of the recovery are unknowable, though FWIW I think the UK Government's approach so far has been designed to try to mitigate economic damage insofar as is possible.
In the short term, the panic buying may be a more pressing problem. If it abates after another few days and the supermarket shelves gradually replenish then all will be well. But if the activity of the existing panic buyers encourages/forces everyone else to try to hoard because they're afraid they'll run out of basic supplies then some mechanism of rationing will need to be introduced.
Depending on how badly this year’s growing season is affected by farmer downtime, it may be sometime before the full range of products we’re use to seeing at the prices we’re used to paying returns.
Price gouging has already started of course, and that's not limited to the cost of hand sanitisers and digital thermometers on Amazon. I was discussing with my Mum, who's now in her more mature years and therefore likely to be told to start self-isolating soon, the practicalities of online grocery delivery (which, despite being in possession of the required basic computer skills, she's not felt any need to use before.) One of her friends has told her that, whilst the service in their area is busy, slots are still available within a reasonable timeframe - but that the supermarket has ramped up its delivery charges. One does wonder how long it will be before that kind of inflation begins to be seen in the price of various scarce commodities?
The irony of that is that the idiot panic buyers may end up looking rather clever, if bog roll appreciates in value by 200%.
I haven't been able to stand it anymore and have laid her another big one.
You've heard the reports that Hillary is self-isolating in the woods in New York state until November I presume?
As was pointed out yesterday, there might be some decent odds on various members of the Senate for next President, if you can get them listed. On the basis that if the US November elections don't happen then the next President will be drawn from the rump senate still in post. It's not like the UK where the current President just carries on. I'm not sure also if members of the Cabinet come into the mix.
This is what I don’t understand about the government’s strategy: if the idea is for the less vulnerable to get it and build up “herd” immunity, isn’t that counteracted by all the advice to wash hands etc which is designed to stop us getting it?
I assume that's directly related to the delay/flatten the curve aim. They want people to get it, just not too many or too quickly.
Thanks.
The other question I have is how will the government know if people have had it and, therefore, theoretically have immunity if they are not testing people outside of hospital?
I am a lay person so please feel free to take this with a hefty pinch of salt, but one assumes that they have statistical models which will give them a reasonable idea of how many mild cases have occurred based on the rate of hospitalisations. The population won't simply consist of the very ill and those who've not even contracted the condition: for each hospital case there must be X-number of mild and asymptomatic cases out in the community that aren't presenting at medical facilities for treatment. Those models, in turn, will presumably be based on data already collected about Covid and similar past infections, notably the information gathered by the Chinese authorities.
That will provide a reasonable estimate of the proportion of the population that has already contracted the illness though not, obviously, knowledge of whether each and every specific individual has had it. In an ideal world there would be a cheap and widely available testing regime with the capacity to screen everybody for the illness on demand and however often they wanted to, but insofar as I'm aware that isn't possible at the moment.
Thanks for the response.
Off to do other stuff now. Walk the dog along the beach, that sort of thing.
Yesterday was quite glorious - there were hosts of daffodils everywhere and it really felt spring-like. A bit duller today but the sea breeze is very welcome, as is the walk.
This is what I don’t understand about the government’s strategy: if the idea is for the less vulnerable to get it and build up “herd” immunity, isn’t that counteracted by all the advice to wash hands etc which is designed to stop us getting it?
I assume that's directly related to the delay/flatten the curve aim. They want people to get it, just not too many or too quickly.
Thanks.
The other question I have is how will the government know if people have had it and, therefore, theoretically have immunity if they are not testing people outside of hospital?
I am a lay person so please feel free to take this with a hefty pinch of salt, but one assumes that they have statistical models which will give them a reasonable idea of how many mild cases have occurred based on the rate of hospitalisations. The population won't simply consist of the very ill and those who've not even contracted the condition: for each hospital case there must be X-number of mild and asymptomatic cases out in the community that aren't presenting at medical facilities for treatment. Those models, in turn, will presumably be based on data already collected about Covid and similar past infections, notably the information gathered by the Chinese authorities.
That will provide a reasonable estimate of the proportion of the population that has already contracted the illness though not, obviously, knowledge of whether each and every specific individual has had it. In an ideal world there would be a cheap and widely available testing regime with the capacity to screen everybody for the illness on demand and however often they wanted to, but insofar as I'm aware that isn't possible at the moment.
Thanks for the response.
Off to do other stuff now. Walk the dog along the beach, that sort of thing.
Yesterday was quite glorious - there were hosts of daffodils everywhere and it really felt spring-like. A bit duller today but the sea breeze is very welcome, as is the walk.
Have a good day all.
Walks by the sea are a great way to lift the spirits and impose a degree of pre-virus normality to life, for those lucky enough to be near the sea.
Herd immunity isn't going to happen - too many people are going to think fuck this for a game of soldiers and avoid unnecessary social contact like the plague.
My 73-year old dad's view: "If you're going to get it, you're going to get it. And if it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you."
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
The depth of the recession and the speed of the recovery are unknowable, though FWIW I think the UK Government's approach so far has been designed to try to mitigate economic damage insofar as is possible.
In the short term, the panic buying may be a more pressing problem. If it abates after another few days and the supermarket shelves gradually replenish then all will be well. But if the activity of the existing panic buyers encourages/forces everyone else to try to hoard because they're afraid they'll run out of basic supplies then some mechanism of rationing will need to be introduced.
Panic buying is self-limiting, as people run out of storage space and (highly relevantly) ready cash.
Depends on the extent of the domino effect: is wave 1 of the panic buyers simply going to beget wave 2, once the previously unconcerned start to worry about a bog roll shortage and grab armfuls of the stuff as and when they see it on the shelves?
There may be no material problem driving shortages but, once you get above a certain threshold of people believing that they will occur, there must be some risk of a self-fulfilling prophecy coming to pass?
I have taken time to come to terms with this. I have raised questions and expressed reservations based on the evidence of what other countries were doing. It seemed to me at times that the government’s policy was a counsel of despair resulting in the deaths of at least tens of thousands of our citizens. I do not accept that asking such questions and expressing such doubts is setting myself up as some form of “expert” or armchair general. We all have a stake in this. We are all going to lose family and friends.
With considerable reluctance and no little trepidation I have come to the view that the government’s policy is the best we can do on the known facts. Those facts may still change, especially if there is a breakthrough in treatment or vaccine but we cannot count on that. In the absence of such a breakthrough all we can do is get through this and take the pain.
I have no view on which strategy is right but I know of no one out here who is against the lockdown. It might just stop widespread infection in a community where, at the moment, is 60%+ over 65 with many octogenarians. it’s going to be hard on the businesses and looking around my nearest neighbors seems to have worked in that no one has arrived from Murcia or Madrid. Will see what new measures come out of this mornings cabinet meeting.
How long do you expect to be locked down?
It’s initially fo 15 days but my guess is it will stay like this for a month at least. If the government bring in internal travel restrictions then it could be shorter. There are worse places to have nothing to do, I just pray the hospitals keep functioning as normally As possible.
I have no view on which strategy is right but I know of no one out here who is against the lockdown. It might just stop widespread infection in a community where, at the moment, is 60%+ over 65 with many octogenarians. it’s going to be hard on the businesses and looking around my nearest neighbors seems to have worked in that no one has arrived from Murcia or Madrid. Will see what new measures come out of this mornings cabinet meeting.
How long do you expect to be locked down?
The current lockdown is 2 weeks and I´d be surprised if it is not extended. Easter is a bust I reckon.
This is what I don’t understand about the government’s strategy: if the idea is for the less vulnerable to get it and build up “herd” immunity, isn’t that counteracted by all the advice to wash hands etc which is designed to stop us getting it?
I assume that's directly related to the delay/flatten the curve aim. They want people to get it, just not too many or too quickly.
Thanks.
The other question I have is how will the government know if people have had it and, therefore, theoretically have immunity if they are not testing people outside of hospital?
I am a lay person so please feel free to take this with a hefty pinch of salt, but one assumes that they have statistical models which will give them a reasonable idea of how many mild cases have occurred based on the rate of hospitalisations. The population won't simply consist of the very ill and those who've not even contracted the condition: for each hospital case there must be X-number of mild and asymptomatic cases out in the community that aren't presenting at medical facilities for treatment. Those models, in turn, will presumably be based on data already collected about Covid and similar past infections, notably the information gathered by the Chinese authorities.
That will provide a reasonable estimate of the proportion of the population that has already contracted the illness though not, obviously, knowledge of whether each and every specific individual has had it. In an ideal world there would be a cheap and widely available testing regime with the capacity to screen everybody for the illness on demand and however often they wanted to, but insofar as I'm aware that isn't possible at the moment.
Thanks for the response.
Off to do other stuff now. Walk the dog along the beach, that sort of thing.
Yesterday was quite glorious - there were hosts of daffodils everywhere and it really felt spring-like. A bit duller today but the sea breeze is very welcome, as is the walk.
Herd immunity isn't going to happen - too many people are going to think fuck this for a game of soldiers and avoid unnecessary social contact like the plague.
My 73-year old dad's view: "If you're going to get it, you're going to get it. And if it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you."
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
The depth of the recession and the speed of the recovery are unknowable, though FWIW I think the UK Government's approach so far has been designed to try to mitigate economic damage insofar as is possible.
In the short term, the panic buying may be a more pressing problem. If it abates after another few days and the supermarket shelves gradually replenish then all will be well. But if the activity of the existing panic buyers encourages/forces everyone else to try to hoard because they're afraid they'll run out of basic supplies then some mechanism of rationing will need to be introduced.
It's obvious that there has been a fair amount of stocking up, but I think people can see that excessive hoarding is pointless when in reality the shop shelves get replenished in short order. Apart from face-masks and hand sanitisers that is.
I visited Sainsbury's at midday every day for the past week in order to buy the Racing Post and Irish Independent newspapers. Never any toilet rolls, and latterly no kitchen towels either. Coca-cola very limited as previously remarked. I did not see evidence of daily re-stocking. Maybe today will be different.
I have taken time to come to terms with this. I have raised questions and expressed reservations based on the evidence of what other countries were doing. It seemed to me at times that the government’s policy was a counsel of despair resulting in the deaths of at least tens of thousands of our citizens. I do not accept that asking such questions and expressing such doubts is setting myself up as some form of “expert” or armchair general. We all have a stake in this. We are all going to lose family and friends.
With considerable reluctance and no little trepidation I have come to the view that the government’s policy is the best we can do on the known facts. Those facts may still change, especially if there is a breakthrough in treatment or vaccine but we cannot count on that. In the absence of such a breakthrough all we can do is get through this and take the pain.
We can discuss and second-guess the decisions in the pub (or at home).
It is quite possible to be better prepared for a second wave, in terms of vaccines, treatments, or even mundane things like adequate stores of protective equipment, training and ICU capacity.
How feasible and practical is a vaccine?
Is the Government preparing for herd immunity because it thinks it will take too long, or won't work, or because they think they won't get enough of it? Or do you always do both to be prudent?
Which?
1) Will "herd immunity" be futile with a shift in virus antigenicity?
2) Will a second wave occur at all? Equally the virus could mutate to a less virulent form.
3) Will there be no effective treatment or vaccine by the time a second wave arrives that renders "herd immunity" pointless?
The government strategy, such as it is*, fails if any of these three is true.
* people are self isolating to the point that we may well not get "herd immunity" at all.
As I am fairly nailed on to get it in the first wave, I have a certain amount of skin in this game. Protective equipment stocks will last just days as far as I can see. Unless there is a massive shipment coming our way.
This is what I don’t understand about the government’s strategy: if the idea is for the less vulnerable to get it and build up “herd” immunity, isn’t that counteracted by all the advice to wash hands etc which is designed to stop us getting it?
Anyway, Dr Foxy I hope you get the supplies you need.
If it is true that this was in Italy and the U.K. well before February I do now wonder if I caught it in early January. One of my Italian cousins came to stay with me for a few days. Everyone was fine and then when I went back up North I had another bout of illness - cough/lost voice/ shivers etc. I assumed it was just a consequence of the different illness I had had over Xmas. But who knows?
Anyway irrelevant because I am still going to take all reasonable precautions.
As he says, our policy is “risky and rests on assumptions”, but when I noted this yesterday morning you went all “you think you know better than the PM of Singapore”?
I think this is my only actual problem with the British strategy (for all my over the top posts about it).
The overall long term strategy is utterly opaque. Although they may have a strategy there is no appearance of strategy.
There may be good reasons for this, they may think the public will act badly if they have all the info but at the moment without their plan and projected numbers I cannot see how they achieve a single summer peak and avoid a double hump.
Herd immunity isn't going to happen - too many people are going to think fuck this for a game of soldiers and avoid unnecessary social contact like the plague.
My 73-year old dad's view: "If you're going to get it, you're going to get it. And if it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you."
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
The depth of the recession and the speed of the recovery are unknowable, though FWIW I think the UK Government's approach so far has been designed to try to mitigate economic damage insofar as is possible.
In the short term, the panic buying may be a more pressing problem. If it abates after another few days and the supermarket shelves gradually replenish then all will be well. But if the activity of the existing panic buyers encourages/forces everyone else to try to hoard because they're afraid they'll run out of basic supplies then some mechanism of rationing will need to be introduced.
Depending on how badly this year’s growing season is affected by farmer downtime, it may be sometime before the full range of products we’re use to seeing at the prices we’re used to paying returns.
Price gouging has already started of course, and that's not limited to the cost of hand sanitisers and digital thermometers on Amazon. I was discussing with my Mum, who's now in her more mature years and therefore likely to be told to start self-isolating soon, the practicalities of online grocery delivery (which, despite being in possession of the required basic computer skills, she's not felt any need to use before.) One of her friends has told her that, whilst the service in their area is busy, slots are still available within a reasonable timeframe - but that the supermarket has ramped up its delivery charges. One does wonder how long it will be before that kind of inflation begins to be seen in the price of various scarce commodities?
The irony of that is that the idiot panic buyers may end up looking rather clever, if bog roll appreciates in value by 200%.
Price gouging is of course the most effective curb of panic buying. I loathe the "whatever the market does is right" school of thought, but it is doing what it is meant to do - efficiently regulating the distribution of resources - here. If digital thermometers are £1.99, why not buy half a dozen to be on the safe side?
I have no view on which strategy is right but I know of no one out here who is against the lockdown. It might just stop widespread infection in a community where, at the moment, is 60%+ over 65 with many octogenarians. it’s going to be hard on the businesses and looking around my nearest neighbors seems to have worked in that no one has arrived from Murcia or Madrid. Will see what new measures come out of this mornings cabinet meeting.
How long do you expect to be locked down?
It’s initially fo 15 days but my guess is it will stay like this for a month at least. If the government bring in internal travel restrictions then it could be shorter. There are worse places to have nothing to do, I just pray the hospitals keep functioning as normally As possible.
How do people get food? What about those who need care at home?
Morning all, this was what I posted on Facebook on Thursday:
Well sorry my Republican supporting friends and cousins in the USA but Donald Trump has just made a complete ARSE of himself over Covid-19. Calling it a "foreign disease" and claiming it is less serious than seasonal flu is going to come back to haunt him as the body count across the USA starts to rocket. Last night he banned citizens of mainland EU countries from visiting the USA over the next month but not US citizens. Does he not think US citizens in Europe cannot contract the virus and bring it home with them! In addition for a President who has staked his reputation on the rise of the stock market, due in part to his cras remarks (this morning world markets fell by around 5%) the US main stock market fell into bear territory yesterday (defined as a 20+% fall from its peak close) and everybody expects it to be quite "bloody" when the US markets open at 2.30pm UK time this afternoon. IF he loses to Joe Biden in November, this week may be the week things turned against him!!
November is a long way away so I'm taking this with a pinch of salt. All sorts of things could happen before then, not least of which could be the worst of the infection passes over America and then Trump passes an emergency stimulus and lifts restrictions just in time.
Also, we had a Herdson article just a few weeks ago tipping buying Sanders when he was odds on - and we know what happened next.
Things that look inevitable one week can look very different the next.
Much as most of us want to see the back of Trump I think you are right. Too early to call. Large numbers of Trump fans are low-information voters (aka thick as mince) and believe what the orange one tells them. They dismiss any facts or information to the contrary and parrot their leader calling it all lies and fake news.
Question about care homes - hearing reports that many are sensibly banning visitors. But are they taking in new people? Could we rapidly have a care crisis on our hands as people who need close personal care are not able to access it for risk of infecting the desanitised care home environments. Or will this be mitigated by the huge availability of new home carers with nothing else to do?
Morning all, this was what I posted on Facebook on Thursday:
Well sorry my Republican supporting friends and cousins in the USA but Donald Trump has just made a complete ARSE of himself over Covid-19. Calling it a "foreign disease" and claiming it is less serious than seasonal flu is going to come back to haunt him as the body count across the USA starts to rocket. Last night he banned citizens of mainland EU countries from visiting the USA over the next month but not US citizens. Does he not think US citizens in Europe cannot contract the virus and bring it home with them! In addition for a President who has staked his reputation on the rise of the stock market, due in part to his cras remarks (this morning world markets fell by around 5%) the US main stock market fell into bear territory yesterday (defined as a 20+% fall from its peak close) and everybody expects it to be quite "bloody" when the US markets open at 2.30pm UK time this afternoon. IF he loses to Joe Biden in November, this week may be the week things turned against him!!
Did you get any response from your Republican-supporting friends and cousins in the USA?
This is causing huge anger in the costas and shows how panicking governments can do more harm than good.
COVID-19: MADRID RESIDENTS FLEE TO SPAIN’S COSTA DEL SOL, VALENCIA, ALMERIA AND MURCIA DESPITE GOVERNMENT ADVICE TO REMAIN AT HOME OVER CORONAVIRUS FEARS – INCLUDING EX PM JOSE AZNAR
MADRID residents are fleeing to Spain’s costas in a bid to escape the effective lockdown in the central region. And according to ABC news, among them is the ex-prime minister Jose Aznar, who has reportedly been spotted arriving to his home in Guadalmina Baja, Marbella. He arrived to his luxury villa in the exclusive San Pedro neighbourhood with his wife and former Madrid mayor Ana Botello yesterday afternoon. The couple, who have brought their security team, are expected to stay until Easter. They are not alone in fleeing Madrid, which announced today the closure of all bars, restaurants, nightclubs and gyms after declaring more than 2,000 coronavirus cases. The motorways leaving Madrid this afternoon have seen four kilometres of traffic jams on the A-4, heading towards Andalucia. The M-40 headed towards Valencia and the Costa Blanca also saw tailbacks of at least two kilometres, according to the General Directorate of Traffic (DGT). Many so-called Madrilenos have homes on the costas which they usually retreat to when the summer heat becomes unbearable. In Murcia, towns have now been cut off to specifically bar people from Madrid entering.
On a lighter note, just looked in a couple of cupboards and turns out I've been stockpiling loo roll for months. Didn't even realise it was happening. Got about six months supply!
Herd immunity isn't going to happen - too many people are going to think fuck this for a game of soldiers and avoid unnecessary social contact like the plague.
My 73-year old dad's view: "If you're going to get it, you're going to get it. And if it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you."
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
The depth of the recession and the speed of the recovery are unknowable, though FWIW I think the UK Government's approach so far has been designed to try to mitigate economic damage insofar as is possible.
In the short term, the panic buying may be a more pressing problem. If it abates after another few days and the supermarket shelves gradually replenish then all will be well. But if the activity of the existing panic buyers encourages/forces everyone else to try to hoard because they're afraid they'll run out of basic supplies then some mechanism of rationing will need to be introduced.
It's obvious that there has been a fair amount of stocking up, but I think people can see that excessive hoarding is pointless when in reality the shop shelves get replenished in short order. Apart from face-masks and hand sanitisers that is.
I visited Sainsbury's at midday every day for the past week in order to buy the Racing Post and Irish Independent newspapers. Never any toilet rolls, and latterly no kitchen towels either. Coca-cola very limited as previously remarked. I did not see evidence of daily re-stocking. Maybe today will be different.
I had a brief conversation with a checkout woman last night and she was saying that the replenishments for hand sanitiser came in over night and were gone by mid morning. We’re currently a bar-soap household but she said to be there for opening for my best chance to get some if I wanted it.
Herd immunity isn't going to happen - too many people are going to think fuck this for a game of soldiers and avoid unnecessary social contact like the plague.
My 73-year old dad's view: "If you're going to get it, you're going to get it. And if it's going to kill you, it's going to kill you."
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
The depth of the recession and the speed of the recovery are unknowable, though FWIW I think the UK Government's approach so far has been designed to try to mitigate economic damage insofar as is possible.
In the short term, the panic buying may be a more pressing problem. If it abates after another few days and the supermarket shelves gradually replenish then all will be well. But if the activity of the existing panic buyers encourages/forces everyone else to try to hoard because they're afraid they'll run out of basic supplies then some mechanism of rationing will need to be introduced.
It's obvious that there has been a fair amount of stocking up, but I think people can see that excessive hoarding is pointless when in reality the shop shelves get replenished in short order. Apart from face-masks and hand sanitisers that is.
I visited Sainsbury's at midday every day for the past week in order to buy the Racing Post and Irish Independent newspapers. Never any toilet rolls, and latterly no kitchen towels either. Coca-cola very limited as previously remarked. I did not see evidence of daily re-stocking. Maybe today will be different.
I haven't been able to stand it anymore and have laid her another big one.
You've heard the reports that Hillary is self-isolating in the woods in New York state until November I presume?
As was pointed out yesterday, there might be some decent odds on various members of the Senate for next President, if you can get them listed. On the basis that if the US November elections don't happen then the next President will be drawn from the rump senate still in post. It's not like the UK where the current President just carries on. I'm not sure also if members of the Cabinet come into the mix.
Carefully read the market rules of whichever bookmaker you bet with. On Betfair for instance, the "next president" market is on the winner of the 2020 election, not on whoever becomes president (eta if for instance Trump were to be incapacitated tomorrow). If the election is cancelled or postponed to next year then Betfair will void the market.
There might be value in predicting who would replace Biden or Trump as candidate were they to withdraw in the next few months but read the rules carefully and build in a margin for Betfair, Ladbrokes or whoever to settle the market differently from how you expect.
I haven't been able to stand it anymore and have laid her another big one.
Perhaps we need to consider what currently unimaginable political outcomes might arise if the US is, by the autumn, overwhelmed by a significant peak of its projected million plus deaths coming at once?
Comments
Although I'd worry
a) fake papers
b) a resentment starts building to those people able to swan around the globe whilst the rest of us wistfully look at old photos of fun we had in Benidorm.
Suspect a lot of returning Brits will be bringing the virus with them over the coming week or so, to add to those who have already.
After that it is a 50/1 shot that I will meet my maker before Christmas. Fingers crossed, off to start ward round.
Stay safe people!
There is still a political element to some of the criticisms, but there always will be. If he took notice of the assorted thickos jostling to shout loudest, they'd still criticise him for pandering to ignorance.
We can't be sure that the British approach of allowing the disease to spread in a controlled manner will work, for reasons well rehearsed by other posters - notably the fear that the virus will mutate so people don't maintain their immunity to it, and that containment measures to protect vulnerable groups will fail and result in unbearable strain on the NHS. However, by the same token, what if radical lockdown leads to repeated waves of infection and numerous cycles of lockdown, outbreak, lockdown, outbreak - and what if the economic cost of maintaining this discipline becomes unbearable for the societies concerned?
The great advantage of the more nuanced approach of the UK is that it tries to make life as normal as possible for as many people as possible, which gives us a much better chance of getting through this with the economy more-or-less intact. That's vital. As I suggested last night, there's no point in people getting on their high horses and bleating that this puts profit before lives without pausing to consider that (a) you can't save everyone with truly radical measures if you've no money left with which to sustain them, and (b) Government makes decisions that attach a price tag to human lives all the time. There is mass carnage on the roads every year which could be almost entirely eliminated by banning everything with wheels and making people walk everywhere, but precisely no-one is willing to pay the societal price of giving up trucks, cars and bikes in order to save all of those lives - and rightly so.
Governments around the world are all having to make tough decisions about what they are and aren't willing to do to fight this disease, and those measures run along a spectrum. Some will turn out to have made a better set of decisions than others when it is all over, but I'm not sure it necessarily helps to scream about the idiocy of any one approach if all of those which one is comparing and contrasting are evidence-based and represent genuine efforts to make the best of a very bad situation to which there are no easy responses.
I tend towards the opinion that the British approach is correct, but just because of that you won't find me accusing the Italians of being reckless and stupid. Their situation is extremely difficult, it's not identical to ours, and absent a time machine we've no certain way of knowing which will be more effective in the long run.
This is what's so frustrating about the whole thing. The UK is basically heading to take the same measures as Japan, but slower so you kill a bunch more people in the meantime, more confusing and chaotic, people with shitty employers have to carry on communing and making the problem worse for stupid, dumb-boss-related reasons, and potentially it spirals out of control and you need a full-on lockdown. You end up with all the downside and less upside, and that's the *best* case.
"Please work from home if practical. Please consider cancelling events that bring a lot of people in close proximity." A few sentences out of Boris Johnson's mouth a couple of weeks ago could have made the whole thing smoother and safer.
PM Lee didn't sound as if he thought they could contain it.
- Seems to portray movements to the next stage of the Govt strategy as desperate u-turns.
- "The strategy amounts to a blunt admission by the British government that stopping the coronavirus here was now impossible, and replicating the success of places like Hong Kong that have encouraged more extreme social distancing a futile hope."
We can't judge that Hong Kong is a "success" yet - as the next couple of waves are still to come.
Meanwhile someone somewhere needs to be testing the assumptions behind the models that drive the advice.
All models are flawed.
He has very little real leadership skills. Which is what you need in a crisis.
There is another aspect to differing countries approaches of course - population demographics.
This is the humanity saving approach.
Johnson has gone for a mass cull
Hopefully, you not so much!
You and your colleagues are doing one hell of a job.
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/coronavirus-which-countries-have-imposed-travel-restrictions
Anyway, Dr Foxy I hope you get the supplies you need.
If it is true that this was in Italy and the U.K. well before February I do now wonder if I caught it in early January. One of my Italian cousins came to stay with me for a few days. Everyone was fine and then when I went back up North I had another bout of illness - cough/lost voice/ shivers etc. I assumed it was just a consequence of the different illness I had had over Xmas. But who knows?
Anyway irrelevant because I am still going to take all reasonable precautions.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-8108905/SNP-chief-whip-Holyrood-offered-vote-Labour-leadership-ballot.html
Holyrood Chief whip SNP, sent associate ballot papers to vote for Labour leader.
My parents went to London yesterday - they said it was heaving.
Perhaps images of people dying will change this view, I'm not so sure.
What is changing is 1) people are panic buying - which is weird, but there you go. And 2) business (as in bigger purchases) is shutting down. Irrespective of what we do, there is going to be a huge recession.
Pushing it back to the first summer is the UK govt approach - to give the NHS as much time and resources to prepare as possible.
I haven't been able to stand it anymore and have laid her another big one.
For some their key agenda is driven by dislike of Johnson ' I get that but this is neither the time nor the place.
In the short term, the panic buying may be a more pressing problem. If it abates after another few days and the supermarket shelves gradually replenish then all will be well. But if the activity of the existing panic buyers encourages/forces everyone else to try to hoard because they're afraid they'll run out of basic supplies then some mechanism of rationing will need to be introduced.
The other question I have is how will the government know if people have had it and, therefore, theoretically have immunity if they are not testing people outside of hospital?
A contain plan works if you can identify a working vaccine, otherwise it's delaying the inevitable to a time when the current measures will fail to work. People will do what they are told the first and possibly second time around. The story of the boy who screamed wolf will tell you everything you need to know about what is likely to happen.
Boris (and the UK) is definitely taking a gamble but I think the other options makes a set of assumptions (a vaccine will be found, people will self-isolate a 3rd / 10th time) that aren't valid.
That will provide a reasonable estimate of the proportion of the population that has already contracted the illness though not, obviously, knowledge of whether each and every specific individual has had it. In an ideal world there would be a cheap and widely available testing regime with the capacity to screen everybody for the illness on demand and however often they wanted to, but insofar as I'm aware that isn't possible at the moment.
However, we are going with the "washing your hands" message and nudged self-isolation. No doubt that will save many older people, whilst slowing the acquisition of "herd immunity". A compromise we are presumably happy to make though?
The young are no doubt going to get pissed off that this is a world that revolves around protecting the lives and the interests of old people. Sorry kids, Granny ain't checking out just yet....
The COVID epidemic may now run through the population and burn itself out, but there has been an enormous reaction of fear from the public and due to self-imposed social isolation the peak of the epidemic may now be postponed for many months or years. How long will it take for this virus to be eradicated in every country in the world? Years, probably. Especially in Europe governments do not seem to be in control. It is the public who are leading the response. Whole sectors of the economy that rely on gatherings of people, large or small, have been shut down. People are asking for governments to pick up the cost and support society during this shutdown, but if society stops working where do governments find the money? I think that self-isolation may cause the epidemic to stall in Europe prolonging the shutdown. It may be a very long time before the public is willing to come out of isolation, but it will not be many weeks before there will be a massive wave of business failures, from childcare businesses to shops, cafes, and airlines. The reduction in air pollutions levels that has been noticed in Italy and China also mean a reduction in manufacturing output. People, businesses and governments will run out of money while many members of the public, often financially better off, will still be self-isolating and economically inactive in this possible scenario. I am sure that the society of the 14th century, during one of the great plague epidemics, would hardly have noticed an epidemic of coronavirus and they would have carried on business as usual. They knew that they did not have a choice.
The irony of that is that the idiot panic buyers may end up looking rather clever, if bog roll appreciates in value by 200%.
Off to do other stuff now. Walk the dog along the beach, that sort of thing.
Yesterday was quite glorious - there were hosts of daffodils everywhere and it really felt spring-like. A bit duller today but the sea breeze is very welcome, as is the walk.
Have a good day all.
Lawyers, enjoy:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/03/judge-james-dannenberg-supreme-court-bar-roberts-letter.html
There may be no material problem driving shortages but, once you get above a certain threshold of people believing that they will occur, there must be some risk of a self-fulfilling prophecy coming to pass?
With considerable reluctance and no little trepidation I have come to the view that the government’s policy is the best we can do on the known facts. Those facts may still change, especially if there is a breakthrough in treatment or vaccine but we cannot count on that. In the absence of such a breakthrough all we can do is get through this and take the pain.
The Government has to actually make them.
The overall long term strategy is utterly opaque. Although they may have a strategy there is no appearance of strategy.
There may be good reasons for this, they may think the public will act badly if they have all the info but at the moment without their plan and projected numbers I cannot see how they achieve a single summer peak and avoid a double hump.
Well sorry my Republican supporting friends and cousins in the USA but Donald Trump has just made a complete ARSE of himself over Covid-19. Calling it a "foreign disease" and claiming it is less serious than seasonal flu is going to come back to haunt him as the body count across the USA starts to rocket. Last night he banned citizens of mainland EU countries from visiting the USA over the next month but not US citizens. Does he not think US citizens in Europe cannot contract the virus and bring it home with them! In addition for a President who has staked his reputation on the rise of the stock market, due in part to his cras remarks (this morning world markets fell by around 5%) the US main stock market fell into bear territory yesterday (defined as a 20+% fall from its peak close) and everybody expects it to be quite "bloody" when the US markets open at 2.30pm UK time this afternoon. IF he loses to Joe Biden in November, this week may be the week things turned against him!!
COVID-19: MADRID RESIDENTS FLEE TO SPAIN’S COSTA DEL SOL, VALENCIA, ALMERIA AND MURCIA DESPITE GOVERNMENT ADVICE TO REMAIN AT HOME OVER CORONAVIRUS FEARS – INCLUDING EX PM JOSE AZNAR
MADRID residents are fleeing to Spain’s costas in a bid to escape the effective lockdown in the central region.
And according to ABC news, among them is the ex-prime minister Jose Aznar, who has reportedly been spotted arriving to his home in Guadalmina Baja, Marbella.
He arrived to his luxury villa in the exclusive San Pedro neighbourhood with his wife and former Madrid mayor Ana Botello yesterday afternoon.
The couple, who have brought their security team, are expected to stay until Easter.
They are not alone in fleeing Madrid, which announced today the closure of all bars, restaurants, nightclubs and gyms after declaring more than 2,000 coronavirus cases.
The motorways leaving Madrid this afternoon have seen four kilometres of traffic jams on the A-4, heading towards Andalucia.
The M-40 headed towards Valencia and the Costa Blanca also saw tailbacks of at least two kilometres, according to the General Directorate of Traffic (DGT).
Many so-called Madrilenos have homes on the costas which they usually retreat to when the summer heat becomes unbearable.
In Murcia, towns have now been cut off to specifically bar people from Madrid entering.
How many votes and delegates do you think she'd have got this year if she ran again?
Yes, I know Trump does it as well. But that's priced in.
https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/1237063401261740034?s=20
There might be value in predicting who would replace Biden or Trump as candidate were they to withdraw in the next few months but read the rules carefully and build in a margin for Betfair, Ladbrokes or whoever to settle the market differently from how you expect.