[tomtom]

Our field course (with 30 odd students) to Tenerife was cancelled earlier today. I was due to go on it in ten days time.

Tbh I’m glad. It’s non essential - and all our risk assessments and plans for dealing with medical issues/emergencies would not cover the risk of multiple illness and/or quarantine.

[Will Hunt]

How does that impact the students, TT? I'm not questioning your decision but could it be tricky to award them credits if much of the work was due to happen in the field? We had a New Zealand fieldclass that I did and a significant portion of the mark was based on the quality of your fieldwork planning and the field notebook you kept. Also on the quality of the research you did based on data collected in the field. No fieldwork would have effectively meant no module.

[tomtom]

Not my decision - PVC level.

I’m personally glad - not for my own health but for not having the uncertainty and possible responsibility of being in loco parentis for 30 students. Also childcare if I’m stuck overseas for 3 weeks...

The skills and learning outcomes can be delivered perfectly well elsewhere. The context will of course be very different.

However the 4-5 weeks of background lectures and 40k’s worth of flights and hotel bookings go down the swanny.

It’s happening across the sector - heard from friends at other universities who are having trips cancelled.

Tbh whilst overseas fieldwork is ace and is exposure to very new and different landscapes- I think it’s days are numbered in a carbon counting world.

[Paul B]

I have my chartered professional review coming up in a few weeks and it's looking less and less likely by the day.

I keep getting emails updating their Covid-19 guidance/information and it's just changed to say they're now not accepting candidates or reviewers that have traveled through certain countries within 14 days (Mallorca isn't on the list). No hand shaking is allowed on the day and the interview booths are being disinfected between use  . Anyone with signs of flu/cold are being told to defer.

One of the engineers who is my sponsor and is also a reviewer (at a different location) has dropped out. Many of the candidates are from Hong Kong and they're also dropping out (I don't think many will have planned for 14-day isolation prior toe their date!).

[nik at work]

I guess we will know who is being rude here by this time next week.

Calling someone daft is rude, a week will make no difference to that.

Your link is to a Guardian article where NHS staff are saying that the NHS is under-prepares for a mass outbreak. I’m sure all the people who form my Anne dot always evidence would agree with that, as would I. In fact I imagine TTT’s wife (a nurse did you say TTT?) would also agree, not that I am in any way trying to speak for her. That’s a different issue to deciding what is and isn’t a sensible strategy to slow (or prevent if we are lucky) the spread.

I agree populations don’t tend to do sensible, this can manifest as both an under or an over reaction I’d say...

And of course this is serious, I don’t think anyone is suggesting it isn’t. I’m certainly not.

[nik at work]

Fucking auto correct bollocks.... grrr

[Oldmanmatt]

This is an interesting read:

https://www.vox.com/2020/3/2/21161067/coronavirus-covid19-china?utm_campaign=vox.social&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_content=ezraklein

[nik at work]

Also appear to have confused sister in law for wife... doh. Sorry

[tomtom]

Summary (redit) of what has been learned from the Chinese outbreak.

https://www.reddit.com/r/China_Flu/comments/fbt49e/the_who_sent_25_international_experts_to_china/

[Oldmanmatt]

Summary (redit) of what has been learned from the Chinese outbreak.

https://www.reddit.com/r/China_Flu/comments/fbt49e/the_who_sent_25_international_experts_to_china/

The numbers to go with the interview on Vox that I linked to above.

Aylward seems confident that this is not “the big one” in the interview.

[tommytwotone]

Also appear to have confused sister in law for wife... doh. Sorry

Ha ha - no worries. Was indeed my sister-in-law who's the nurse.

No offence taken Offwidth, understand your point of view.

I guess I'm trying (as a pretty decent germ-phobe / hypochondriac myself!) to keep myself in check and exercise a bit of perspective.

[Offwidth]

https://mobile.twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1235207174407802880

This is madness... the best way to generate panic is to hide information. Do the government seriously expect the population to believe providing location information is so difficult, now we have 30+ new cases every day, that it needs a IT solution (as a health minister said on BBC news at 7.40am) or it is so difficult that a weekly consolidation is the best solution. This is either incompetence or an outright lie on a major public health issue.

[mrjonathanr]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1235264960172871680

Someone who actually speaks some sense.

[tomtom]

Off width- is that the bullshit about not giving daily updates? If so. Agree. Nuts decision.

[Offwidth]

Yes ... a petition has started on the subject..... click and see

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/300322/moderation-info

[mrjonathanr]

Of a piece with No.10 trying to split journalists into sheep and goats, boycotting Today, hiding from scrutiny.

Appropriate that the petition is not allowed as yet, still being scrutinised...

[petejh]

https://mobile.twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1235207174407802880

This is madness... the best way to generate panic is to hide information. Do the government seriously expect the population to believe providing location information is so difficult, now we have 30+ new cases every day, that it needs a IT solution (as a health minister said on BBC news at 7.40am) or it is so difficult that a weekly consolidation is the best solution. This is either incompetence or an outright lie on a major public health issue.

Or expectation management and not wanting to cause panic behaviour. Some of the comments on that DHSC twitter are borderline hysterical.

We're hardly lacking information - if you turn on the freely available bbc parliament right now on your media device of choice you can watch 3 hours of live coverage of the Chief Medical Officer answering questions about coronavirus from a committee of MPs. China we aren't.
 
Interesting info about the global mortality rate actually being 1% - reported mortality rate figures are currently skewed upwards by dividing fatalities by reported cases, when in fact there are a huge number of unreported cases and asymptomatic cases which won't be picked up. Roughly 8% mortality for over 80-year-olds, declining with age to less than 1% for the youngest generations.

[spidermonkey09]

Somewhat unusually, I agree with Pete! Drip feeding daily updates and the location of each new infection is pointless and counter productive. It encourages people to panic; there was a case in Ilkley last week on the comments from the ill informed/idiotic on the local FB page were nothing short of disgraceful.

Its pretty clear we're going to have a widespread rate of infection; we don't need to know whether theres one in our town or not. Its like news by the minute; it just gives people something to worry about.

Anything people want to know can be found in about 30 seconds online or by turning on the TV. Constant American style updates are pointless.

[tomtom]

Its pretty clear we're going to have a widespread rate of infection; we don't need to know whether theres one in our town or not. Its like news by the minute; it just gives people something to worry about.

I think thats pretty important - more important than numbers is where. Making the local population more aware (and more into handwashing etc..) where there is an issue is important...

I do a chunk of work to do with flooding. 10-15 years ago there was the idea - don't bother people with lots of information about flood levels - it'll only worry people - blight areas etc.. etc.. Thats now completely turned around. Let people have CORRECT information (e.g. from a government rather than gossip) and allow them to make informed decisions. There is always the lowest common denominator effect - but most people are quite rational and sensible.

Unless you are panic buying toilet roll in Sydney. Then you're bonkers :D

[dunnyg]

Publishing info where available seems like the right way to go. I imagine not publishing provides space for speculation, which never seems wise if the information is available. Having the information available aids in decision making. I'm sure for many people life will carry on as normal whatever happens, but for those with decisions to make, increased information can't be a bad thing.

I think they language used in reporting on this should be very precise and measured, but until I get my dictatorship I doubt that will happen.


The people who regularly comment on local news sections on facebook hopefully dont represent a large proportion of the UK population (or we are all fucked anyway).

[spidermonkey09]

The people who regularly comment on local news sections on facebook hopefully dont represent a large proportion of the UK population (or we are all fucked anyway).

Hmm...

Fair points both. I suppose I suspect that people are so apt to interpret information the wrong way or use it to start spreading gossip that Glenda next door has got the plague that theres a part of me that thinks its better to not distribute the information in the first place. Must be my authoritarian streak coming out!

[dunnyg]

I did hear Glenda coughing in the night through the wall. Daubed a big red X on her door though, so the postman should be ok.

[mrjonathanr]

I think misinformation will fill the gaps between updates, stoking anxiety and speculation more than informing the public in a prompt and sober fashion.

[Offwidth]

Or expectation management and not wanting to cause panic behaviour. Some of the comments on that DHSC twitter are borderline hysterical.

We're hardly lacking information - if you turn on the freely available bbc parliament right now on your media device of choice you can watch 3 hours of live coverage of the Chief Medical Officer answering questions about coronavirus from a committee of MPs. China we aren't.
 
Interesting info about the global mortality rate actually being 1% - reported mortality rate figures are currently skewed upwards by dividing fatalities by reported cases, when in fact there are a huge number of unreported cases and asymptomatic cases which won't be picked up. Roughly 8% mortality for over 80-year-olds, declining with age to less than 1% for the youngest generations.

I'd rather compare the UK with Singapore, who provide excellent information,  than China.

On comparative mortality figures we don't know how many infected with flu are not counted either. A link upthread from the WHO expert, if you read between the lines, indicates massive under-reporting on flu infection,  as there are much faster infection rates in flu ....in any case you can only count deaths against reported cases. The WHO expert also said recruiting the population and utilising information are vital in mitigating against the outbreak, which is why I'm concerned almost the only UK message so far is don't panic and wash your hands.

An even more worrying information failure is in the US: from their 11 deaths you would expect over 1000 infections.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/04/coronavirus-new-york-family

Anyhow it looks like the DHSC are backpeddling now.  See the 9.22am  post

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/mar/05/coronavirus-live-updates-italy-germany-pandemic-europe-uk-us-australia-india-update-latest-news?page=with:block-5e60c2ea8f08c2df6d2739d9#block-5e60c2ea8f08c2df6d2739d9

[Offwidth]

Some quotes from the WHO report (from the link above)

"China’s bold approach to contain the rapid spread of this new respiratory pathogen has changed the course of a rapidly escalating and deadly epidemic. In the face of a previously unknown virus, China has rolled out perhaps the most ambitious, agile and aggressive disease containment effort in history. China’s uncompromising and rigorous use of non-pharmaceutical measures to contain transmission of the COVID-19 virus in multiple settings provides vital lessons for the global response. This rather unique and unprecedented public health response in China reversed the escalating cases in both Hubei, where there has been widespread community transmission, and in the importation provinces, where family clusters appear to have driven the outbreak."

"Much of the global community is not yet ready, in mindset and materially, to implement the measures that have been employed to contain COVID-19 in China. These are the only measures that are currently proven to interrupt or minimize transmission chains in humans. Fundamental to these measures is extremely proactive surveillance to immediately detect cases, very rapid diagnosis and immediate case isolation, rigorous tracking and quarantine of close contacts, and an exceptionally high degree of population understanding and acceptance of these measures."

"COVID-19 is spreading with astonishing speed; COVID-19 outbreaks in any setting have very serious consequences; and there is now strong evidence that non-pharmaceutical interventions can reduce and even interrupt transmission. Concerningly, global and national preparedness planning is often ambivalent about such interventions. However, to reduce COVID-19 illness and death, near-term readiness planning must embrace the large-scale implementation of high-quality, non-pharmaceutical public health measures. These measures must fully incorporate immediate case detection and isolation, rigorous close contact tracing and monitoring/quarantine, and direct population/community engagement."


.... and some of the summary points quite a few of which I don't see as well known in the UK public despite Pete's clain we are well informed

"When a cluster of several infected people occurred in China, it was most often (78-85%) caused by an infection within the family by droplets and other carriers of infection in close contact with an infected person. Transmission by fine aerosols in the air over long distances is not one of the main causes of spread. Most of the 2,055 infected hospital workers were either infected at home or in the early phase of the outbreak in Wuhan when hospital safeguards were not raised yet."

"5% of people who are diagnosed with Covid require artificial respiration. Another 15% need to breathe in highly concentrated oxygen - and not just for a few days. The duration from the beginning of the disease until recovery is 3 to 6 weeks on average for these severe and critical patients (compared to only 2 weeks for the mildly ill). The mass and duration of the treatments overburdened the existing health care system in Wuhan many times over. The province of Hubei, whose capital is Wuhan, had 65,596 infected persons so far. A total of 40,000 employees were sent to Hubei from other provinces to help fight the epidemic. 45 hospitals in Wuhan are caring for Covid patients, 6 of which are for patients in critical condition and 39 are caring for seriously ill patients and for infected people over the age of 65. Two makeshift hospitals with 2,600 beds were built within a short time. 80% of the infected have mild disease, ten temporary hospitals were set up in gymnasiums and exhibition halls for those".......  think on how well the NHS is set to match this need if the outbreak grows fast here.

"China can now produce 1.6 million test kits for the novel coronavirus per week. The test delivers a result on the same day. Across the country, anyone who goes to the doctor with a fever is screened for the virus: In Guangdong province, far from Wuhan, 320,000 people have been tested, and 0.14% of those were positive for the virus." ...again compare to the liklihood of response in the UK.

"The vast majority of those infected sooner or later develop symptoms. Cases of people in whom the virus has been detected and who do not have symptoms at that time are rare - and most of them fall ill in the next few days."... so mortality rates wont be a massive overestimate

"The most common symptoms are fever (88%) and dry cough (68%). Exhaustion (38%), expectoration of mucus when coughing (33%), shortness of breath (18%), sore throat (14%), headaches (14%), muscle aches (14%), chills (11%) are also common. Less frequent are nausea and vomiting (5%), stuffy nose (5%) and diarrhoea (4%). Running nose is not a symptom of Covid."

"An examination of 44,672 infected people in China showed a fatality rate of 3.4%. Fatality is strongly influenced by age, pre-existing conditions, gender, and especially the response of the health care system. All fatality figures reflect the state of affairs in China up to 17 February, and everything could be quite different in the future elsewhere."...... poor countries with shit health care will be much higher.

"Healthcare system: 20% of infected people in China needed hospital treatment for weeks. China has hospital beds to treat 0.4% of the population at the same time - other developed countries have between 0.1% and 1.3% and most of these beds are already occupied with people who have other diseases. The most important thing is firstly to aggressively contain the spread of the virus in order to keep the number of seriously ill Covid patients low and secondly to increase the number of beds (including material and personnel) until there is enough for the seriously ill. China also tested various treatment methods for the unknown disease and the most successful ones were implemented nationwide. Thanks to this response, the fatality rate in China is now lower than a month ago.".... again think on NHS resources

"Pre-existing conditions: The fatality rate for those infected with pre-existing cardiovascular disease in China was 13.2%. It was 9.2% for those infected with high blood sugar levels (uncontrolled diabetes), 8.4% for high blood pressure, 8% for chronic respiratory diseases and 7.6% for cancer. Infected persons without a relevant previous illness died in 1.4% of cases."