politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Latest England “day of death” data suggests the peak was a wee

Black_Rook said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Cookie said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Cookie said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Although Germany is allowing some small shops to reopen shortly and kids to do their exams in school. They have already announced no large gatherings until at least end of August. Thats no places of worship, no music venues, etc and slightly ambiguous from the bbc report, no bars, restaurants, cinemas or cafes.

And this is Germany, who are doing well. We ain't going nowhere near returning to normal life all summer.

I fear you may be right and of course no football unless they suspend safe distancing

I guess sport, if it does resume, will be played behind closed doors....the country cricket scene won't notice much difference.

I still can't believe that Florida has deemed the old fake wrestling as an essential service. And the cage fighting lot, they plan to hire out an island and run them from there.

Maybe but football nd rugby are contact sports and not to forget the drain on the NHS and emergency services even if played behind closed doors

At the top level, i would suggest supremely fit 20 somethings risk from suffering seriously from CV is so low it isn't really a genuine concern and they can afford to test all players and staff privately.

Wasn't there some Irish top-flight footballer who ended up on a ventilator? While there is a greater chance of fighting the thing off if you're young, I think there are still a lot of factors beyond youth and fitness.

There is, but that combined with regular testing of all players and coaches, i think we are talking very risk activity. They would be much more likely to get it from daily life than kicking a ball around with 20 odd other tested people.

Sorry, I'd missed the second half of your post about these sports having the resources to test.
God I miss sport.

I actually think the bigger issue is it looks like one rule for the plebs and one for the billion dollar football industry. The actual risk to players and staff can be made so minimal they are at more risk of having their career screwed by dropping an iron on their foot.

Your first sentence sums up why I cannot see it happening

Are kick abouts going to be allowed in parks and a relaxation on numbers of people allowed to gather together

The football authorities should declare the season over and award the premiership to Liverpool

I think this is the biggest stumbling block. I was just thinking though, if it really is going to be until September that you can't go out for any entertainment or social events, are people going to get very bored once they have binged watched the Netflix catalogue.

That being the case, spare a thought for all those who can't afford luxuries like Netflix in the first place.

Cookie said:

IshmaelZ said:

nichomar said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

glw said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Andrew said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Of the strategy, strand #1, #2, #4, have increased ventilator capacity in the NHS. Strand #3 has increased the number of CPAP masks exponentially, and that is what we appear to need.

We definitely rolled a six on that front. If we'd needed a lot more ventilators as originally anticipated .... yikes.

I think that is a bit of a circular argument. The Strand #3 designs haven't been approved, because CV doesn't react the way normal pneumonia does. If it did, they would have more than likely been approved the machines, because a) they would have been effective and b) we would need them.

But it isn't, it doesn't seem we are desperately sort of them and CPAP masks are better.

The reason for the multiple strands was to order more than was forecast to be required. On the basis that some approaches might not work...

"Waste everything except time"....

The same approach as Bill Gates wants to take with vaccines, build all the plants that are potentially needed and most of them will never start production. That is the complete opposite of a failure, as is the ventilator procurement.

I may well survive the virus, *touch wood*, but I fear I will end up popping my clogs due to intense rage provoked by all the smart alecs who will be wrting aticles about "why did we waste money/time on X" over the next few months.

Already starting to see comments and articles claiming "doubts" why did build / plan all these NHS Nightingale places....

They will be the same people who claimed the Y2K problems was a hoax with no understanding of what was actually done

I am not a Y2K hoax theorist. I am however struck by the *universal* success of the avoidance measures. If it was such a universal and intractable problem one would have expected a couple of third world countries to lose their banking or telephone systems, say, or a software-driven Chernobyl, or just something to show the rest of us what we'd so narrowly avoided?

It wasn't intractable. Most of it was quite simple to fix. Comparatively junior programmers like me, at the time, did a lot of it. Most of it was just changing two-digit date processing to four-digit. It was just an awful lot of work going through every single line of operational code.

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/DougChapmanSNP/status/1250349046373298179?s=20

Or is it something else, or too soon to say?

MarqueeMark said:

Nigelb said:

Indoor transmission of SARS-CoV-2
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.04.20053058v1
Case reports were extracted from the local Municipal Health Commissions of 320 prefectural cities (municipalities) in China, not including Hubei province, between 4 January and 11 February 2020. We identified all outbreaks involving three or more cases and reviewed the major characteristics of the enclosed spaces in which the outbreaks were reported and associated indoor environmental issues. Results: Three hundred and eighteen outbreaks with three or more cases were identified, involving 1245 confirmed cases in 120 prefectural cities. We divided the venues in which the outbreaks occurred into six categories: homes, transport, food, entertainment, shopping, and miscellaneous. Among the identified outbreaks, 53.8% involved three cases, 26.4% involved four cases, and only 1.6% involved ten or more cases. Home outbreaks were the dominant category (254 of 318 outbreaks; 79.9%), followed by transport (108; 34.0%; note that many outbreaks involved more than one venue category). Most home outbreaks involved three to five cases. We identified only a single outbreak in an outdoor environment, which involved two cases. Conclusions: All identified outbreaks of three or more cases occurred in an indoor environment, which confirms that sharing indoor space is a major SARS-CoV-2 infection risk....

Cinemas, theatres, nightclubs, concerts - buggered.....

IshmaelZ said:

nichomar said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

glw said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Andrew said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Of the strategy, strand #1, #2, #4, have increased ventilator capacity in the NHS. Strand #3 has increased the number of CPAP masks exponentially, and that is what we appear to need.

We definitely rolled a six on that front. If we'd needed a lot more ventilators as originally anticipated .... yikes.

I think that is a bit of a circular argument. The Strand #3 designs haven't been approved, because CV doesn't react the way normal pneumonia does. If it did, they would have more than likely been approved the machines, because a) they would have been effective and b) we would need them.

But it isn't, it doesn't seem we are desperately sort of them and CPAP masks are better.

The reason for the multiple strands was to order more than was forecast to be required. On the basis that some approaches might not work...

"Waste everything except time"....

The same approach as Bill Gates wants to take with vaccines, build all the plants that are potentially needed and most of them will never start production. That is the complete opposite of a failure, as is the ventilator procurement.

I may well survive the virus, *touch wood*, but I fear I will end up popping my clogs due to intense rage provoked by all the smart alecs who will be wrting aticles about "why did we waste money/time on X" over the next few months.

Already starting to see comments and articles claiming "doubts" why did build / plan all these NHS Nightingale places....

They will be the same people who claimed the Y2K problems was a hoax with no understanding of what was actually done

I am not a Y2K hoax theorist. I am however struck by the *universal* success of the avoidance measures. If it was such a universal and intractable problem one would have expected a couple of third world countries to lose their banking or telephone systems, say, or a software-driven Chernobyl, or just something to show the rest of us what we'd so narrowly avoided?

Alistair said:

IshmaelZ said:

nichomar said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

glw said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Andrew said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Of the strategy, strand #1, #2, #4, have increased ventilator capacity in the NHS. Strand #3 has increased the number of CPAP masks exponentially, and that is what we appear to need.

We definitely rolled a six on that front. If we'd needed a lot more ventilators as originally anticipated .... yikes.

I think that is a bit of a circular argument. The Strand #3 designs haven't been approved, because CV doesn't react the way normal pneumonia does. If it did, they would have more than likely been approved the machines, because a) they would have been effective and b) we would need them.

But it isn't, it doesn't seem we are desperately sort of them and CPAP masks are better.

The reason for the multiple strands was to order more than was forecast to be required. On the basis that some approaches might not work...

"Waste everything except time"....

The same approach as Bill Gates wants to take with vaccines, build all the plants that are potentially needed and most of them will never start production. That is the complete opposite of a failure, as is the ventilator procurement.

I may well survive the virus, *touch wood*, but I fear I will end up popping my clogs due to intense rage provoked by all the smart alecs who will be wrting aticles about "why did we waste money/time on X" over the next few months.

Already starting to see comments and articles claiming "doubts" why did build / plan all these NHS Nightingale places....

They will be the same people who claimed the Y2K problems was a hoax with no understanding of what was actually done

I am not a Y2K hoax theorist. I am however struck by the *universal* success of the avoidance measures. If it was such a universal and intractable problem one would have expected a couple of third world countries to lose their banking or telephone systems, say, or a software-driven Chernobyl, or just something to show the rest of us what we'd so narrowly avoided?

There were lots of failures. Absolutely masses. When the clocks rolled over Water pumping stations across Australia failed. Nuclear reactors shut down. Banking systems crashed.

But people were ready and poised for the problems and had run books to follow to safely restart and reboot.

But imagine of the preparation wasn't there and everyone was just having a massive piss up when all the problems happened?

Also loads of millennium bug problems had happened and been fixed in the years leading up. Supermarket stock taking systems failed (rejecting in-date goods as they thought they were from the turn of the 20tg century), one of the earliest failures was mortgage systems in the 80s who started failing to be able to process mortgage applications going I to the new millennium etc.

There was just huge amounts of problems spread over decades.

FrancisUrquhart said:

I think we could have guessed indoor locations with good density of people are great for transmission....look at a lot of the non-chinese big initial outbreaks, cruise ships, apres ski bars, conferences and religious venues.

Theuniondivvie said:

Alistair said:

Nothing is as reliable as Charles's kneejerk defence of privileged wealth.

It's actually a bit of a reassuring anchor in these buffeting and uncertain times.

Nigelb said:

MarqueeMark said:

Nigelb said:

Indoor transmission of SARS-CoV-2
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.04.20053058v1
Case reports were extracted from the local Municipal Health Commissions of 320 prefectural cities (municipalities) in China, not including Hubei province, between 4 January and 11 February 2020. We identified all outbreaks involving three or more cases and reviewed the major characteristics of the enclosed spaces in which the outbreaks were reported and associated indoor environmental issues. Results: Three hundred and eighteen outbreaks with three or more cases were identified, involving 1245 confirmed cases in 120 prefectural cities. We divided the venues in which the outbreaks occurred into six categories: homes, transport, food, entertainment, shopping, and miscellaneous. Among the identified outbreaks, 53.8% involved three cases, 26.4% involved four cases, and only 1.6% involved ten or more cases. Home outbreaks were the dominant category (254 of 318 outbreaks; 79.9%), followed by transport (108; 34.0%; note that many outbreaks involved more than one venue category). Most home outbreaks involved three to five cases. We identified only a single outbreak in an outdoor environment, which involved two cases. Conclusions: All identified outbreaks of three or more cases occurred in an indoor environment, which confirms that sharing indoor space is a major SARS-CoV-2 infection risk....

Cinemas, theatres, nightclubs, concerts - buggered.....

Unless we have mass testing (especially accurate antibody testing), and track, trace, selectively quarantine.

williamglenn said:

Theuniondivvie said:

I could imagine some of the more strident end-the-lockdowners on here being in this crowd.

https://twitter.com/futurecanon/status/1250502000640512000?s=20

It’s interesting how this cuts across the previous dividing lines.
https://twitter.com/nadinedorries/status/1250494730451836928?s=21

Charles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Alistair said:

Nothing is as reliable as Charles's kneejerk defence of privileged wealth.

It's actually a bit of a reassuring anchor in these buffeting and uncertain times.

I simply find it disappointing that some people’s reaction to a wealthy person donating £10m is to criticise them for not giving more.

@bigjohnowls had it right

Hugh’s donation is commendable.

Alistair said:

Charles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Alistair said:

Nothing is as reliable as Charles's kneejerk defence of privileged wealth.

It's actually a bit of a reassuring anchor in these buffeting and uncertain times.

I simply find it disappointing that some people’s reaction to a wealthy person donating £10m is to criticise them for not giving more.

@bigjohnowls had it right

Hugh’s donation is commendable.

They didn't actually criticise.