[sdm]

Holes in that reasoning?

I think the biggest obstacle would be that the two populations are not separable.

How do you deal with parents who are supposed to be on lockdown who have children to care for? Or the countless homes with multiple generations living in them?

And probably the biggest concern would be the social and medical care that the elderly need for other conditions that is mostly provided for by the younger population.

Then there is also the issue of how to define the at risk groups. Much of the increased risk appears to be caused by underlying health issues (which become more prevalent as we age) as opposed to age itself.

With thousands of different conditions potentially affecting your risk, there is no chance of their being an exhaustive list of which conditions should lead to isolation. So it would likely fall on the individual to assess their own risks as to which group they being to.

Which then leads to a lot of grey areas regarding enforcement and potential conflict with employers or people prioritising putting food on the table over the health of themselves or others.

There are going to be major drawbacks to any measures though so these challenges may be solvable.

Because the vast majority of “senior management” and “executive” control of of economic institutions, companies and corporations (or to put it another way, the people who actually run things) are square in the at risk of serious illness categories.
They don’t even need to be hospitalised. Knock these people on their backs for 4-6 weeks and add in a “poorly” chunk of 35-50 year old middle management and a whole bunch of “sub par” reduced performance 25-35 year olds; and watch the economic drag that creates.

I don't think senior management and executive positions are much of a concern. They can nearly all do their jobs remotely anyway so a lockdown should have a relatively low impact on them.

[gme]

Everyone keeps asking why we are not shutting schools like everyone else but most contrived have not done so. France Spain Germany holland etc all have schools open. Only italy Austria Ireland and denmark have.
UK policy is not miles behind every other country as is being suggested. This thing is changing by the hour as will our policy.

[gme]

Should have said changing by the minute as Germany just announced gradual closure of schools from next week.

[Ru]

Conversely that is likely to be the sign that UK have estimated it correctly - a longer duration lasting well into mid-summer, with consistently high, but not overwhelming, hospitalisations, is the outcome we're aiming for. Whether it works or not we'll see.
I think the reality hasn't sunk in yet among the public that we're looking at 3-4 months at least of high levels of illness, not a few weeks of lock down and then come out and it's on the decline. We're on a lengthy upslope, perhaps people have been distracted by Italy thinking they've peaked but they haven't, they're still on the uptrend too. I can see the sense in the concept longer term approach and not moving too soon.

It's emerging that China had its first case in November... peaked in February.

Noticed the LSE just banned short-selling of Italian and Spanish stocks Ru 

Hoping for 60% infection rates when China has 0.02% is not just about a longer duration, it's a completely different approach. As for delay to prevent hospitals being overwhelmed, they will inevitably be overwhelmed anyway, there is almost no excess capacity. I have had a long discussion with a consultant that is part of the coronavirus management team at a large hospital. Their view is that the strategy is pointless as ICUs are already at capacity. Our discussion was mostly about the criteria that would be used to select who to treat and who to leave to die.

As a comparison, China has had approx 3,200 deaths and is down to about 8-10 a day. Its population is 20x bigger than ours. If we have a 60% infection rate, with 1% mortality, that would equate to 500,000 deaths, minimum. As outcomes go, the government is aiming at a situation that is 3,000 times worse, in terms of mortality (if I've done my sums correctly and when corrected for the population), than China seems to have achieved. Intentionally aiming at a mortality rate 3,000 times greater than has been achieved elsewhere needs some significant justification in my mind.

Short selling ban: I've just used leveraged -ve index ETFs, to hedge against losses. These use swaps to mimic a short.

[andy popp]

Report from Day 2 of Self-Quarantine: the teenager is already bored out of her mind. Not a good start.

[Johnny Brown]

I'll be surprised if it's over in China. The end of the beginning perhaps.

[Ru]

I'll be surprised if it's over in China. The end of the beginning perhaps.

Yes there's always the chance that infection rates will start increasing again once restrictions are lifted. Still, if that's what the modelling that the government is using is suggesting, I think that ought to be explained.

[Will Hunt]

We were due to go to Bristol to visit my wife's grandparents and extended family. Sightseeing during the day and then going home to spend the evening with 80-odd year olds who are never in the best shape seems too risky, so we've cancelled. It feels like a difficult decision to make as it currently seems overdramatic (and is in contravention with the government's guidance), but I suspect that we'll look back on it as the right call in a couple of weeks. Had we been visiting similarly aged people then I think we would still have gone.

Currently working from home - as is everyone else in the company who can. It's a bit of a trial to see how the remote working systems cope, but I'm expecting it to become the norm. There are more stringent measures in place for critical ops staff.

[Ally Smith]

As a comparison, China has had approx 3,200 deaths and is down to about 8-10 a day. Its population is 20x bigger than ours. If we have a 60% infection rate, with 1% mortality, that would equate to 5 million deaths, minimum. As outcomes go, the government is aiming at a situation that is 30,000 times worse, in terms of mortality (if I've done my sums correctly and when corrected for the population), than China seems to have achieved. Intentionally aiming at a mortality rate 30,000 times greater than has been achieved elsewhere needs some significant justification in my mind.

I'm obviously doing some different maths to you:

UK population: ~66million
If we go worst case scenario and have 60% infection rate: 66m x 0.6 = 39.6m infections
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ currently has 96% with "mild" symptoms (and acknowledging that this could change) and just 4% needing critical care (definition of critical care could vary massively from full on intubation etc to passive oxygen flow)
= 39.6m x 0.04 = 1.58m "hospitalisations" (which in itself is bloody scary as there aren't anywhere near that number of CC bed spaces...)

Assuming that the current 10 deaths in 562 cases is a fair indicator of UK mortality rate:
1.58m x (10/562) = ~28100 additional UK deaths due to coronavirus.

Now, don't get me wrong, this is a worrysome number, but it's 2 orders of magnitude different to your "5 million deaths"...

[gme]

I'll be surprised if it's over in China. The end of the beginning perhaps.

I love your positivity.

[abarro81]

I have different maths to both of you... Ally you multiplied mortality rate (10/562 = 1.78%) by hospitalisations, why not by 39.6m cases? That would give ~700k deaths...

[Duma]

... 1.58m "hospitalisations" (which in itself is bloody scary as there aren't anywhere near that number of CC bed spaces...)

Assuming that the current 10 deaths in 562 cases is a fair indicator of UK mortality rate:

I think the first line invalidates the assumption in the second line.

[highrepute]

Everyone keeps asking why we are not shutting schools like everyone else but most contrived have not done so. France Spain Germany holland etc all have schools open. Only italy Austria Ireland and denmark have.
UK policy is not miles behind every other country as is being suggested. This thing is changing by the hour as will our policy.

I think this is a good point. Germany, France & Spain have three to four times as many cases than here and haven't initiated complete lock downs. Are they being even more reckless that us?

I think the media way of reporting this is adding to the general panic. The media are (rightly) finding experts who offer a different point of view to that of the government. This gives the impression that the government is advising one thing while everyone else is suggesting another. Which is not true and looking at Germany, France & Spain shows that. Unless it's a conspiracy by the EU elite - oh wait!

My doctor girlfriend was baffled this morning at the repeated mentions of herd immunity in the news as there is no evidence in the public domain that infection and subsequent recovery provides immunity.

Immunity after getting a virus well documented. Corona-virus is no different we'd be seriously fucked if it were.

... 1.58m "hospitalisations" (which in itself is bloody scary as there aren't anywhere near that number of CC bed spaces...)

Assuming that the current 10 deaths in 562 cases is a fair indicator of UK mortality rate:

I think the first line invalidates the assumption in the second line.

They're not all going to be sick at the same time

[Will Hunt]

Part of the decision making around closing schools is that if you shut schools without also shutting workplaces, the kids inevitably get packed off to stay with the most vulnerable: their grandparents.

[Ally Smith]

I have different maths to both of you... Ally you multiplied mortality rate (10/562 = 1.78%) by hospitalisations, why not by 39.6m cases? That would give ~700k deaths...

Fair point, still not 5million is it

[Ru]

I was out by a factor of 10 out - trying to put figures in whist doing something else. At 1% mortality it's about 500k, 10% 5m. Current government estimate is 1% mortality but that assumes that all those that need critical care get it. Which won't happen. Critical seems to be being defined as needing ventilation, not just being on supplemental oxygen, which isn't critical. In Italy 10% are critical, with most not getting ventilated, so the mortality is much higher than 1%. Anyway, the point is it's still orders of magnitude worse than China's (current) outcomes.

[bigironhorse]

Everyone keeps asking why we are not shutting schools like everyone else but most contrived have not done so. France Spain Germany holland etc all have schools open. Only italy Austria Ireland and denmark have.
UK policy is not miles behind every other country as is being suggested. This thing is changing by the hour as will our policy.

Austria not on full lockdown of schools as of yet. They will close schools next week, but apparently the kids whose parents work in vital services/cant be looked after at home will still attend.

[spidermonkey09]

Immunity after getting a virus well documented. Corona-virus is no different we'd be seriously fucked if it were.

That was my understanding too; but as far as I can see we don't know it for certain. I'm confident my girlfriend is aware of how immunity works (you would hope so!) so I am being led by her to a certain extent; thought it was quite striking how baffled she was by the notion, but perhaps thats just an overly cautious view.

[Ru]

Immunity after getting a virus well documented. Corona-virus is no different we'd be seriously fucked if it were.

Jury seems to be out. There are reports of reinfection from Covid-19 but these might be due to false negative tests. This is from Goldman's Cecil Medicine textbook: "Previous infection does not induce high levels of protective immunity. Humans can be reinfected with respiratory coronaviruses throughout life, and human volunteers can be symptomatically reinfected with the same strain of coronavirus 1 year after the first infection."

[Andy W]

Everyone keeps asking why we are not shutting schools like everyone else but most contrived have not done so. France Spain Germany holland etc all have schools open. Only italy Austria Ireland and denmark have.
UK policy is not miles behind every other country as is being suggested. This thing is changing by the hour as will our policy.

Austria not on full lockdown of schools as of yet. They will close schools next week, but apparently the kids whose parents work in vital services/cant be looked after at home will still attend.

All French schools and Creche’s shut from Monday.

[galpinos]

Trying to model this stuff is very hard an I reckon the "experts" are probably better than a load of climbers guessing at numbers. Mortlaity rates are especially tricky. The will be a lot more cases in the general population than those document in the UK, so on the one hand that implies the mortality rate is a lot lower than just the number deaths over of known cases. However, the death rate lags behind the infection rate/case identification, i.e. you don't get it then die instantly, so the death rate today should be compared to the number of cases two-ish weeks ago. That'd give us a lot larger mortality rate. If you look at Italy, they have closed (either recovered or died) 2274 cases, 45% of which died. I'm not implying the mortality rate is 45%, but just choosing numbers to make your doesn't help. None of our guesses seem to factor in overrun ICUs meaning when you are in  car accident, there's no one to treat you at the hospital etc, nor the potential build up of some immunity in the population having made antibodies, nor the very real chance of a slight mutation rendering those antibodies useless. It's chuffing complicated.

The stats available do not have the "granularity" to draw better conclusion from. As much as Boris is shit at explaining what the plan is, PHE and the DOH seem to be doing an ok job. Epidemiologists don't seem to agree on an approach so expecting there to be "one true vision" is hopeless. I don't think the public would buy into a full on lockdown now.

To quote a ward manager, "it feels like being on one side of a hill and all you can hear is the thundering of hooves and you are waiting to be overwhelmed." My wife (Consultant Oncologist in lung cancer) and friend we had dinner with last night (Respiratory Consultant) both agreed. I guess it could end up being a load of kids with coconut shells and it was all in vain.....

[highrepute]

Immunity after getting a virus well documented. Corona-virus is no different we'd be seriously fucked if it were.

That was my understanding too; but as far as I can see we don't know it for certain. I'm confident my girlfriend is aware of how immunity works (you would hope so!) so I am being led by her to a certain extent; thought it was quite striking how baffled she was by the notion, but perhaps thats just an overly cautious view.

Well...

There haven't been any reported cases of someone getting the virus twice yet.

It's how the flu vaccine works and how a developed coronavirus vaccine would work.

However, if it mutates enough then it's possible to catch it again. But then CV-19 is just a mutation (like SARS, MARS etc). These things come along every few years. I guess a bigger risk than CV-19 mutating is some other new mutation turning up before this pandemic is over.

Immunity after getting a virus well documented. Corona-virus is no different we'd be seriously fucked if it were.

Jury seems to be out. There are reports of reinfection from Covid-19 but these might be due to false negative tests. This is from Goldman's Cecil Medicine textbook: "Previous infection does not induce high levels of protective immunity. Humans can be reinfected with respiratory coronaviruses throughout life, and human volunteers can be symptomatically reinfected with the same strain of coronavirus 1 year after the first infection."

I'd summarise that quote as - you can get flu more than once, the vaccine (or developed immunity) lasts a year so get it every year.

[highrepute]

The stats available do not have the "granularity" to draw better conclusion from. As much as Boris is shit at explaining what the plan is, PHE and the DOH seem to be doing an ok job. Epidemiologists don't seem to agree on an approach so expecting there to be "one true vision" is hopeless. I don't think the public would buy into a full on lockdown now.

I'd agree with this outlook.

[Johnny Brown]

I'll be surprised if it's over in China. The end of the beginning perhaps.

I love your positivity.

Well, they've certainly got it under control via lockdown. That can't last, and outbreaks will reoccur as people start working and travelling again. Hopefully they'll be able to control those as they happen, and we can all learn from their success. All I'm saying is the fall in new cases doesn't mean the problem has now gone away.

I guess it could end up being a load of kids with coconut shells and it was all in vain.....

Quite. The penalty for overreaction is mainly economic, and I find it very hard to believe that it could exceed the economic penalty for inaction. But then that's our approach with climate change isn't it?

My main hope is enough other countries are far enough ahead of is that we can observe a stark enough difference to guide us. It's still easy to look at the numbers dead in Italy and rationalise them as much less than the annual flu toll.

[Ru]

I'd summarise that quote as - you can get flu more than once, the vaccine (or developed immunity) lasts a year so get it every year.

I'm not sure how you get that summary. It's a quote about coronaviruses, not flu vaccines.